How Do You Define Rosé?

The New York Times

How Do You Define Rosé?

Full Article Source

is like that, for sure, and , without a doubt. But rose? Rose is a popular, beloved sort of wine, I imagined, that all would embrace. Its for lovers, not for fighters, connoting relaxation, not combat. Yet as we explored an assortment of roses in our latest unit of Wine School, I was surprised to find substantial disagreements not only on how these wines were experienced thats always a given but also on the nature of rose, how to define it and whether it has any value at all. Informed debate and discussion is the purpose of Wine School. Our aim is to promote exploration and understanding, first and foremost, as well as comfort and ease with wine. Achieving these goals, however, requires actually drinking the wines and forming opinions based on your impressions. You can never be wrong in describing how a wine makes you feel. That is a matter of taste, informed by experience. Our belief is that with increased knowledge, by which I mean trying many different sorts of wines, opinions may evolve. When it comes to wine, being open-minded means extra pleasure. As usual, I recommended three bottles. They were: Long Island Rose 2019, Cerasuolo dAbruzzo 2019 and California Rose Touriga Nacional 2019. The idea was to look at different ideas of rose, from different places, made from different grapes, using different techniques. Many people look to Provence as the spiritual center of rose production, and they would not be entirely wrong. Its the Provencal ideal of pale pink wine, combined with the idyll of pastoral tranquillity, that forms the mental picture of rose as generally conceived. Its not a wine, its a state of mind, right? And yet, rose has so much more to offer. Many roses are made with haste to be drunk young, as of New York pointed out. But not all of them. The roses of Bandol, for example, age beautifully, for many years sometimes, and over time offer more and more complexity and nuance. Many people assume that the paler the rose, the better. Yet one of our three bottles, the Tiberio, was cherry red. The great are pale, yes, but some of the worlds best roses, like in Palette, a small town in Provence, and in Irouleguy in Southwest France, are as dark as the Cerasuolo. One reader that the Tiberio was not a rose but a Cerasuolo, arguing that the darker color meant that it should not fall under the same classification as lighter, easier-drinking bottles. I understand the point. The Cerasuolo is a completely different style of wine than your basic pale Provencal rose, or, for that matter, the other two wines we tasted. I grouped them together as roses because even though their hues vary, they are in that middle ground between white and red. But maybe its time to go beyond that. My feeling is that classification as red, white or rose is so 19th century, , an English wine authority, in the same Twitter thread. She suggested relying on vinification technique rather than color. By that standard, are these three entirely different wines? If you try them all, it seems so. The Arnot-Roberts, from California, was the most conventional rose, even if its components, 80 percent touriga nacional and 20 percent tinta cao, both leading port grapes, are unusual choices for rose. After harvest, the grapes were crushed and the juice was left to macerate with the pigment-laden skins until the desired color was achieved, about 24 hours. The wine was fermented, but malolactic fermentation, in which bacteria transform malic acid into softer lactic acid, was blocked in order to maintain liveliness. It was aged briefly in steel vats. The result was a superb pale rose, fresh and energetic, with complex fruit, floral and herbal flavors and a chalky minerality. The Wolffer, from the South Fork of Long Island, was made differently. It was roughly 60 percent merlot, 33 percent chardonnay and 6 percent cabernet franc, with small amounts of a few other grapes. Its quite rare for good roses, other than sparkling wines, to be made from a blend of red and white grapes. The Wolffer winemaker, Roman Roth, told me that the merlot is harvested with plenty of color in the juice and does not require maceration with the skins. The chardonnay, he said, lightens the color of the merlot and adds texture. He, too, blocks the malolactic fermentation a step, he said, that has become more important with climate change. The wine, which had a pale salmon color like the Arnot-Roberts, was dry, lively and well rounded, with floral, peachy flavors. This is a fun wine, not as complex as the Arnot-Roberts, but just what you might want poolside or at other casual summer gatherings. The Tiberio Cerasuolo dAbruzzo is different. This dark style, made entirely from the montepulciano grape, is traditional in the Abruzzo region. Like the Arnot-Roberts, the juice is macerated with the skins until it achieves the desired cherry red color. As with the other two, the malolactic fermentation is blocked. The wine is fresh and lively, energetic and dry, with tangy, stony, floral flavors and a touch of salinity. It has complexity and character, and is simply lovely. While the other two might go best with relatively delicate dishes, this is definitely a food wine and would go well with a wide range, including lamb, as of New York suggested. Paradoxically, grouping these wines by vinification technique, as Ms. Gabay suggested, would put the Arnot-Roberts and the Tiberio together. These two very different-looking and -tasting wines both achieved their colors through maceration. The Wolffer, which resembled the Arnot-Roberts, would be in a separate category. For now, I think, Ill stick to calling them all roses. Reaction to the roses was quite mixed. of Forest, Va., made a salade nicoise and paired it with the Wolffer, which he said, joined the party like a fruit cocktail in an orange swimsuit not a compliment. of New York, on the other hand, described the Wolffer as perfectly delicious on a hot day in the city. Almost everybody who tried the Tiberio loved it. of Princeton was one of several people who pointed out that the Wolffer and the Arnot-Roberts were quite different despite their similar appearance. I had asked readers whether rose by its nature was a lesser wine. This question seemed to puzzle people. of New York compared it to asking whether a yogi was less than a boxer. I asked the question because rose has a long history of being demeaned. Houston of New York actually concluded that rose was a lesser wine because it lacked some of the hallmarks of great wines. I personally believe that every style of wine, including rose, has an occasion for which its the best choice. These three wines would require three different occasions. But several readers tried to answer this question not having tasted the three wines or possibly any good roses ever. This did not stop them from drawing conclusions. Rose is not a thing, its like Pabst Blue Ribbon in Southern France or Corona beer in Mexico, of 10K Lakes wrote. No one drinks it here or there. Ignore it and wait for the next thing. of MidSouth echoed the sentiment: There is no earthly reason to choose rose. Maybe its simply the combative times we live in. Or perhaps offering an opinion as a statement of fact reflects a deeper strain of American culture. Back in 1980, a smart man who happened to be my uncle, the author Isaac Asimov, in American life, which he said was nurtured by the false notion that democracy means that my ignorance is just as good as your knowledge. Were here at Wine School not to argue but to learn. With wine, theres only one way to do that: pour and drink.