This blog is growing so from hereon I will publish it in increments keeping the title intact albeit, indicating the content with key words/producers/wines after the colon (:).
Glen, Jack and I had declined to make prior appointments before arriving in Orange. While that may seem odd, I do find it refreshing to travel at times as a tourist rather than MW, buyer, sommelier or whatever other guise I choose are am made to fit. In this way, one can gauge realities that transcend older wines, special cuvess and a free lunch that are often integral to ‘the prior appointment’.
Thus it was, that I called Bloodwood’s founder, Stephen Doyle and asked if I could pop around to see him. I apologized for calling on a Monday morning. He told me that Bloodwood was always open to those who expressed interest.
Stephen is perhaps more gregarious than the erudite throwback to another era that others, and perhaps his website, portend. He simply asked me what I wanted to know and off we went! I had replied that I wanted to understand his philosophy through his wines and hoped for the best.
After all, I thought that any man who had planted every tree on his property, as he claimed; and anybody who choose thin, meager soils of varying degrees of decomposing basalt, malleable yet barren and cold; must have energy, a vision and most importantly, a passion for discovering what his site could bring to wine.
We tasted from tank to barrel to finished wine. It was hard to keep up at times but these wines spoke of a place-gritty and architected from nothing but a marginal clime and the voice of basalt-and a wonderful character who moves within the margins as the wines take shape, throwing in his two cents’ worth when necessary to ensure that they turn out at the very least highly drinkable but, in many cases, rather magically; doing far more than that by drawing one back for another sip, provoking thought and a little gluttony; which is what good wine does. Stephen adds nothing to his wines unless disaster is nigh albeit, is a firm believer in lab analysis as a forewarning of strife. In some cases, I did not want to spit. As my brother Glen said, ‘these wines make you salivate; they make you hungry’.
Bloodwood ‘Schubert’ Chardonnay ‘08: A tight-fisted expression of Chardonnay relying on the intrigue of ambient yeast aroma, judicious lees work to give a flinty, reductive note of tangerine tang; and substantial oak that smoothes out the wine rather than overwhelming it. Malolactic fermentation is not induced although it occasionally takes off when the temperature, pH and bacteria present in the cellar meld into activity. This wine will age well for a decade. 90
Pinot Noir ’10 (barrel sample): Unforced, highly attractive expression of cola, cherry and mulch with a chewy pliancy, brisk acidity and sensitive oak in the mouth to hone the fruit ripeness into a savoury drink of line and good length. I had thought there to be some whole-clusters in this cuvee due to a chewy sappiness but there are not, Stephen told me. 87
Shiraz ’08: I adored this wine. I wanted to drink more and will once it is released in while when I hope to buy a case or two. In fact, I thought this wine to be the single finest wine tasted during the trip. Aromas of briar, white pepper, violet and peat yet absolutely nothing green about this as was, in my opinion, the case with so many wines during the ‘90’s when Australian critics mistakenly took green peppercorn notes in Shiraz as evocative of the Rhone! Bloodwood’s `08 Shiraz comes in at just 13.2% yet is à point, long, persistent and fibrous. 94-96
Shiraz ’09 (barrel sample): a similar idiom of cool climate Shiraz’s expression yet altogether warmer, more svelte, creamier and less tightly defined than the prodigious ’08. Not at all sweet, however, yet more blueberry. This too is a winner and likely to appeal to many drinkers due to its fulsome texture. The ’09 is equally as long, layered and intense as the ’08 and in a way perhaps, more majestic. However, it lacks the gritty indelible stamp of something more that enamoured me of the ’08. 92
Cabernet Sauvignon ’09 (barrel sample): cassis, cedar and mulch notes exhibit accurate varietal expression although the wine is a little too minty for my liking. The tannins are fine-grained and long however, while the finish is substantial. 85
Cabernet Franc ’06: riper perhaps than what I seek in Cabernet Franc but of course the flipside to that statement, would be that Chinons and the like that I enjoy nourishing myself with are simply too green. In any event, it is a fine line! Notes of ripe berry, some varnish and wet leaf expand on a broad, textured palate. Very long wine. 90
Cabernet Sauvignon ’05: an experimental wine that had been aged for 52 months in old hogsheads. This wine came across as very Bordelais with cedar and lots of wet undergrowth; sweet pliant fruit in the mid-palate; and a long taut-almost classically skeletal-palate of considerable concentration and length. 92
Merlot `06: berry, hint of tomato leaf yet an overall intoxicating juiciness of aroma leads to a plush, cushy palate with modestly brisk acidity and soft yet suitably noticeable tannins for spine and texture. Long and lovely wine! 91
No comments:
Post a Comment