Wine Crush, Knowledge, and Beauty

October 23, 2011 by  
Filed under Featured, Wine Geeks, Wine Research, WineZag

Two favorite wine writers recently teased at the distinction between sensual wine discovery and accumulated wine knowledge. Their words fanned a flame first kindled by my earliest wine crush back in the mid eighties. Not the press and juice kind of crush. I mean the ten-year-old-kiddie-kind-of-crush; when just the thought of that special “someone” lightens heads, warms chests, shortens breaths, stirs loins, and releases imaginations in delightful ways that never seemed plausible before. This style of sensual and intellectual pleasure requires absolutely no training yet is recognizable by anyone.  So guess what? Connecting with wine at the intensity levels of a 4th grade schoolyard crush requires as little training and knowledge.

Wine Knowledge

How is it that knowledge is not a prerequisite to understanding wine?  Organizing and participating in decades of regular, blind, peer group tastings makes it obvious to me that delicious wine can be picked out of blind lineups by beginner and expert wine tasters alike. Inexperienced palates are perfectly capable of discriminating between wines of the same grape, region, and vintage if they are poured side by side. New wine tasters are at ease identifying favorite and least favorite wines using unformed personal language to describe sensory detection to themselves, but are intimidated to verbalize their descriptions to others with more wine knowledge. Actually, their preferences are as interesting as any other taster’s choice; pure and unaffected by the presumptions of technical wine knowledge. Their interpretations are unadorned with catch phrases and buzzwords used, as required, by tasters with deeper wine education and knowledge.

Wine Expert in a Week? Really?

Committing time and energy to advanced wine education almost always relies on a sequence of loving wine before knowing wine. All the knowledge filling studious winos’ ammunition bunkers only comes after being smitten by a crush on wine.  And, the raw sensory and intellectual stimulus telling someone to prefer one wine over another is not something you learn in continuing wine education programs.

An excerpt from “The Taste of Wine: The Art and Science of Wine Appreciation” by Peynaud and Blouin further illustrates this point:

The transmission of a stimulus to the senses via our nervous system, and the response that our brain relays to our consciousness or motor centers, together create a continuous network of information and interpretation which is the very token of our existence: I sense therefore I am; our consciousness functions precisely because of the host of impressions which surround it.  It is also the means by which we understand our environment.  We live because of what we see, hear, smell, taste, and touch. Chauchard reminds us of the Latin adage: “What intelligence we have has its source in our senses”

In one of his recent Forbes.com columns, Jeff Lefevre calls it wisdom and differentiates that from wine knowledge by neatly saying, “…placing wine within a bigger context of the human experience making the enjoyment of wine not something that is reliant upon deep knowledge to appreciate, but rather as a beverage that can complement a life well lived.”  

Wine Crush

In a category of its own, “love” has its certain place alongside the many more structured elements defining a life well lived. Similarly, falling in love with wine is as central and separate a proposition to sensory identification and accumulated knowledge in a well lived life of wine. Addressing a group of wine writers this summer, Eric Asimov asserted “you need to own wine and drink bottles with meals to discover your love for wine. Simply tasting and educating yourself about it won’t do it.

The bottle of 1985 Lynches Bages that I first tasted in a blind tasting was a completely different wine experience than drinking the same wine with my wife over a relaxed anniversary dinner at Mirabelle, a once (have not been there since 1990, but it still operates) romantic temple of serious french cuisine in St. James, Long Island. The Lynches Bages was more layered, delicate, nuanced, and complex with excellent food and company.  The experience also cemented my developing fascination for the ways wine feeds human connection.  The links between my love for my dinner partner and crush on the wine naturally weaved themselves into a blanket of sensory delight.

Stephanie Ortigue, assistant professor of psychology and adjunct assistant professor of neurology at Syracuse University, published an important study called “The Neuroimaging of Love,” which touches on the sensory intake that leads to love creation in intellectual areas of the brain and also the heart:

…the complex concept of love is formed by both bottom-up and top-down processes from the brain to the heart and vice versa. For instance, activation in some parts of the brain can generate stimulations to the heart, butterflies in the stomach. Some symptoms we sometimes feel as a manifestation of the heart may sometimes be coming from the brain.

The study establishes that it only takes 1/5th of a second to fall in love when two potential mates establish sensory exchange. Various regions of the brain begin processing past experiences alongside immediate sensory intake to either create butterflies in the stomach or an empty feeling in less than a second. Ortigue asserts her study “…reinforces the fact that love is more than a basic emotion. Love also involves cognition.”

Is this combination of sensory and intellectual processing the same with wine?  If it sounds like it is, then isn’t it entirely possible to fall in love with the right wine and have that crush launch a lifetime of wine pursuit in the very same way two loving mates organize a life of personal commitment to one another?

Beauty and Crush

Commitment is serious business and crushes evaporate as fast as they start.  As we mature in life it’s easier to see that nuance, character, presence, challenge, and intellectual stimulation are as, if not more, important to a lifetime of love than surface level physical beauty.  For this reason, my wine cellar has a certain style of wine that I bought in the 80′s and early 90′s that I won’t buy anymore.  Fifteen years into my life of wine enjoyment I found wines what teased my intellect, challenged my palate, and invigorated my food.  That style combination stole my mind and heart.  And it wasn’t the big, fat, fruit forward, sex bomb style of wine I was previously consumed with.  I guess it’s never too late to grow up.

In a recent open letter of advice to “wine newbies”, the Wine Spectator’s Matt Kramer drew a distinction between wines that can provide “life satisfaction” and those that simply offer “pleasure”.  In it, he leaned on E. E. Cummings who raised the bar by writing, “Always the beautiful answer who asks a more beautiful question,” suggesting the real trick to discovering a lifetime of wine enjoyment is to find your own “beautiful questions.” Kramer went on to explain that a life of wine satisfaction:

“…depends upon recognizing what you’re really seeking… I was in Napa Valley and was tasting a Cabernet that is, by most estimations, a lovely wine. And it was a lovely wine: dense, fragrant, irresistibly supple and oh-so pleasing. A lot of people like it…Yet I’ve never cared overly for the wine… Here we come to the “beautiful question” part. Whenever you taste a wine that goes beyond the ordinary (dull wines allow only the dullest demands), you’ve got to go beyond the usual techno-talk about tannins or acidity or oakiness. If those are your “more beautiful questions” I promise you that you’ll never really “get into” wine.

So what was my problem with this perfectly fine Napa Cabernet? It had no “edge.” Really good and, especially, great wines, for me anyway, have an “edge.” It’s a certain something that not only fascinates, but challenges. This Napa Cabernet offered no challenge. It only offered—dare I say it?—pleasure.

It’s okay, just like in life, to fall in love with the most beautiful and alluring surface characteristics that produce pleasurable gulps of wine.  It proves we don’t require knowledge for wine to produce its visceral swoons of delight and human connection.  At some point, though, finding lasting beauty requires, as Matt Kramer suggests, asking the “more beautiful questions” that eventually define lifetimes of intellectual and emotional reward through wine.  And from there, the knowledge will easily flow.

Related Posts with Thumbnails
Share
  • RichardPF

    Hey Adam:
    I agree in part with your post, that knowledge of wine is not a prerequisite of falling in love with wine. And it is that love that often sparks a search for greater knowledge of wine, though not everyone who loves wine will take that step. The question to me then becomes, does lasting love for wine require knowledge of wine. I believe there are different types and levels of love, which you touch upon in part. There are crushes and infatuation, then there is the deeper love which develops over years.

    Using the example of a couple, their love can deepen over the years, yet it deepens only because they grow to learn more about each other. It is their increased knowledge which enhances, deepens and matures their love. If they had never gained that knowledge, their love would probably not have lasted so long. Or it would have remained a shallow love, guided only by sensory pleasures. I feel wine is the same, that a long lasting love relationship with wine goes hand and hand with a deeper knowledge and understanding of wine. My own love for wine has deepened with my greater understanding.

    Yet I still tell everyone that the best way to start learning about wine is to drink and taste it. Pure book knowledge takes you no where without the practicality of drinking and experiencing wine. Let the wines seduce you and then seek further education if you desire.

  • Anonymous

    Rich, what you say makes sense. Naturally the pull to wine will often enough beg for more education. Any by that, I think we both mean more formal education, reading and schooling beyond the bottle and glass. I am not against education, but I have been thinking that the buckets of facts that rattle around wine students heads dont mean much if they cant smell or taste the wine as well as the next guy.

  • http://twitter.com/90pluscellars 90+ Cellars

    What’s up guys? Great post, Adam. I’m a little slow to the conversation, but I couldn’t resist making a comment or two.

    In no way is knowledge of wine a prerequisite for enjoying wine, or even for enhancing the pleasure derived from it. I don’t have to know how to play the electric guitar to be entranced by the rock ‘n roll of Jimi Hendrix (air guitar will do), nor do I have to be skilled with a brush and color pallet to be blown away by the mastery of Degas (and not just the nudes). When it come to music, art, wine or other any other subject that tantalizes the senses, we are fully equipped to derive maximum pleasure by what exists naturally within us.

    In fact, may I suggest that the pursuit of knowledge may actually decrease one’s overall pleasure. The poet Thomas Gray wrote, “Where ignorance is bliss, ’tis folly to be wise.” Based on my own (albeit limited) experience studding wine, I find that it’s no longer quite as pleasurable as a tall glass of beer, something that I absolutely love but know comparatively much less. In fact, I’ve made it a point not to study beer because I want to continue to enjoy it like I do.

    However, as you both skillfully acknowledged, there is a distinction between pleasure and beauty. Pleasure can be felt by all, even animals. But, if you believe old men like Plato and Socrates, beauty can only be achieved through the pursuit of knowledge. I think this is what you both mean by the deeper love between two people that develops over many years together. This is why a photograph showing the intimacy of a 90 year-old couple celebrating their 60th wedding anniversary is a thing of beauty and not just appalling.

    The mistake that is made in the debate on whether knowledge enhances one’s pleasure is that it assumes that pleasure is the only goal when it comes to enjoying a glass of wine. Pleasure is not always enough. Sometimes we just want to know more. After all, this is part of what makes us human. We’re curious enough to want to understand the truth behind this glorious drink, and the satisfaction derived from the knowledge we gain makes us happy.

    And, if you trust the ancients, perhaps in the pursuit of knowledge we’ll discover a few truly beautiful things along the way.

    Cheers, guys.

    Brett

  • Anonymous

    Brett,

    wow…thnx for advancing the discussion with such significant thinking. I can relate to your knowledge resistance with beer thinking about how golf school ruined my love for playing golf. I got too focused on understanding, got frustrated when I didn’t, and lost the excitement for the game that I once had.

    And, invoking Plato, Socrates and 90 year old couples to support the pursuit of knowledge is spot on. As you say, sometimes we just want to know more….

  • RichardPF

    Hi Brett:
    There is much of value in what you say, though I do disagree with parts. In your 2nd paragraph, I agree with the first two lines but in the third you state “we are fully equipped to derive maximum pleasure by what exists naturally within us.” I don’t think that is true, and that without knowledge, we can only attain a certain level of pleasure, and not the maximum. You might love Jimi Hendrix, but won’t fully appreciate his mastery unless you know more about the difficulty of his guitar work. Your pleasure takes on a deeper level when you understand all that is going on, and not just an ignorant sensory experience.

    Consider a good book or movie, which you might enjoy very much, but which you will gain even more pleasure if you fully understood the book. Take Hemingway’s Old Man and the Sea, on the surface a very simple fishing story. But there is so much more involved that a surface reading fails to see. How can you obtain maximum pleasure when you are missing elements of the books? If knowledge is irrelevant to enjoying wine, then wine makers, grapes, viticulture, terroir, and more become irrelevant. But i saw knowledge of such can increase your pleasure.

    Brett, you then say in your 3rd paragraph: “In fact, may I suggest that the pursuit of knowledge may actually decrease one’s overall pleasure.” I can’t argue with you that you may feel that way, though that is not how I feel. I gain deeper levels of pleasure when I better understand wine. I may love the taste of an aged sherry, but that pleasure is intensified when I learn all the intriguing aspects of its history and production. I am definitely on the side of Plato and Socrates.

  • http://twitter.com/90pluscellars 90+ Cellars

    Hey Rich. I think the feelings you have towards wine are closer to that of love and less about pleasure. For me the two are different. Everyone can experience intense pleasure in wine (or Hendrix) regardless of their level of knowledge. However, the love you have for wine can only be explained by your dedication to understanding it. For you, wine is much more than pleasurable. As I see it, knowledge doesn’t change the way your senses interact with wine as much as it adds layers of enjoyment beyond the senses. One can experience great pleasure in wine without seeking to understand it, but he will never truly love wine the way you do.

  • RichardPF

    Hi Brett:
    I don’t think I am referring to love, but instead different levels of pleasure. You seem to be referring only to a hedonistic pleasure, yet that is not the only type of pleasure that exists. As an example, there is intellectual pleasure, an appreciation for more than just what we might taste and smell. Sure a person can enjoy music simply because they enjoy the sound, but another person can derive additional pleasure from their deeper knowledge, such as understanding the complexity of the musical piece. Everyone likes watching an expert perform or play, but not everyone gains the same pleasure from the experience cause not everyone understands the true difficulty of the task.

  • RichardPF

    I think maybe the point is about over intellectualizing wine so much that one loses the fact wine is also a sensory pleasure. It is ok just to enjoy a simple wine without analyzing it. When a person stops enjoying wine because they are over analyzing it, then there is probably a problem.

  • http://twitter.com/90pluscellars 90+ Cellars

    Anyone can experience hedonistic pleasure regardless of their level of wine knowledge. This is the sensory pleasure or the kind that is derived from our physical and emotional interaction with wine. You speak of cognitive pleasure, which is the additional pleasure you assign to interacting with wine after gaining knowledge of it. This may maximize your overall pleasure experience, but I don’t believe it is correct to say that it will maximize the pleasure experience for everyone. While gaining knowledge of wine may make more wine pleasurable for some, it may completely kill it for others. Therefore, I’m not comfortable saying that knowledge is a requirement for increasing ones pleasure of wine.

    I still think your the man, though!

  • RichardPF

    I agree that my points are not absolutes, and some people may feel quite the opposite. As I said earlier, I won’t argue that you may feel additional knowledge decreases your pleasure. Everyone is certainly different. Equally though, your points are not absolutes either, and there are plenty of people who would gain more pleasure with additional information.

    Though even the person seeking hedonistic pleasure usually still seeks at least basic info about a wine, such as region and grape.

    Take care!

  • Brettvan

    Rich I think we’ve come full circle and I couldn’t agree more. Now I’m thirsty. How about you?

  • RichardPF

    Definitely time for a few bottles of pleasurable wine.

  • http://ancientfirewineblog.blogspot.com/ Jason Phelps

    I thought about this an came back only now and wow, what a conversation! Brett beat me to it with the music analogy. For me music has always been a visceral thing and there are many bands, songs and styles that I absolutely dig, but only as a listener. I don’t play music, I don’t do research into the groups I like and how they came to be, and I don’t religiously follow anyone on tour; but I do love the music. So I do think there can be a purely feeling part to the appreciation of wine. And those feeling can be strong and difficult to put into words. Does that mean that knowledge about it and the pursuit of that knowledge won’t enhance the passion? Certainly not. It can though. I taste with the Boston Sommelier Society once or twice per month and a routinely hear folks talk in somber terms about how wine is now a job. No glass of wine is approached for fun, they are constantly evaluating. They loved it once, and now they labor over it. The pursuit of knowledge gone too far perhaps? I don’t want to go that far. I’ll take my love of wine, beer, cider and mead, and the journey making them, finding them and enjoying them just they way I’m doing it.

    Oh, and this comment thread should be called Deep Thoughts From The Passionate Foodie!

    Jason