Cultural Note 1: Why you should watch I, Claudius

Just like everyone else, I watched Rome on HBO. It was good fun, like a well made popcorn movie such as the Bourne Identity. I, Claudius is something different entirely. It has very much a theatre feel to it. Very stagey. The actors are all veteran theater actors. Whereas only Ciarán Hinds as Julius and especially James Purefoy as Marc Antony really put on command performances in the HBO series, there are many in I, Claudius. I do understand that they are not exactly comparable. The historical arc of Claudius is broader and longer than Rome, but they are still of a kind and I need a contemporary comparison to put into perspective how spectacular I, Claudius really was.

I, Claudius was besotted with great performances beginning with the great classical actor Derek Jacobi as Claudius. My favorite, and a scene stealer extraordinaire, was Siân Phillips as Livia. Astonishingly brutal, perfectly poised and impossible to take your eyes off of, she is more than just a villan, she may be the savior of Rome, it is hard to tell. She is certainly convinced of it, but like the Clintons, she thinks that only she has the answers, and so eliminates everyone in her way. A sort of sociopathology that is fascinating and terrifying all at once. Then there are the young lions of the stage, John Rhys-Davies, Patrick Stewart, and a poisonous John Hurt as Caligula.

Almost every performance is pitch-perfect and true acting in the sense that doesn’t exist very much anymore. I can imagine that some folks might be initially put off by the stagey-ness, but if you give it a chance you will become completely engrossed. This will be the first time I see the show/movie and then read the book.

The only gripe is that the DVD transfer wasn’t great (Criterion Collection, please) for sound.

A piece of dramatic art presented as television. I already feel like I need to watch it again, I’m going through withdrawal. This is Fucking-A awesome and vlm approved.

Mid-week Barolo

I don’t often indulge in mid-week Barolo, but I had an urge to cook a Piedmontese pasta based upon one in Matt Kramer’s excellent Passion for Piedmont. I’m not the type to own a lot of cookbooks. What I have are Larosse Gastronomique, McGhee On Food and Cooking, Peterson Sauces, Oxford Companion to Food and then Classic Julia, Marcella, and Claiborne. That’s it, except for this. I must say, it is one of my favorite cookbooks ever. It is full of interesting anecdotes and useful recipes, almost all of which work (GASP!) and are really good with wine. Anyway, highly recommended for those that are looking for food to make with their Piedmontese wines.

The sugo di carne is a great dish where you , essentially, evaporate a meat based sauce whose only herb is rosemary. You then place the sauce on the pasta and top generously with olive oil, which becomes the sauce. It is simple (6 ingrediants) and if you use good stuff, is fabulous. It is a great use for top-notch oil. I’ve been using Gulfi and Tenuta delle Terre Nere, both from Sicily. The pasta I prefer is Latini, which I find as good or better than almost any fresh pasta I’ve had.

2001 Germano Ettore Barolo Prapò

Beautiful ruby color. I decanted this while I cooked the sugo di carne, which takes a bit over an hour. Really great Serralunga nose. Very classic, if maybe bordering on a bit, well, not roasted exactly, but warmish confiture-ish. On the palate, it really performed with fine grained, long, mouth coating tannin, that were very present, but in no way hard. In fact, given the food, I felt like the wine worked quite well at this age. The snappy bright cherry/cranberry flavors were persistent and mixed with some darker fruit and earthy tar flavors. All were washed from the palate with mineral tinged acidity. I don’t want to go overboard. Pretty for a Serralunga Barolo, but it is still Serralunga Barolo, if you know what I mean. This was very good rather than profound Barolo, but it was so delicious that I finished almost the whole bottle myself (well I guess that isn’t exactly astonishing).This is not a producer that I have tons of experience with, but everything seems to be in order and no apparent spoofilation. Should age well in the medium term and be in a perfect place in 5-7 years, but you can drink a bottle now with the proper food. I think it was around $45, but could have been a little more. Well worth that price.

What monkies drink in solitude, le deuxième

Since I have depleted my local retailers supply of Chidaine Bournais, I was searching for a nice white wine to have around that was a decent value. Didn’t think it would be greco, but that’s why I like to cultivate wine retailers I think have a clue, that way, I get to be surprised every now and then. BTW, I bought this at Hi-Times in Costa Mesa (link on right), not sure that it is widely distributed.

2006 Benito Ferrara Greco di Tufo

This is the big winner among wines I’ve had lately. Bizarrely, it was somewhat reminiscent of Austrian pinot blanc, if you can believe it, but leaning more tropical. There is a sort of creamy yellow fruit that I associate with pinot blanc that this shared. Most Greco leaves me a bit underwhelmed because I find they can be heavy and a bit flaccid, this was not. Driving with good mineral bite, but not particularly acidic like a Briords, but with enough to keep it very refreshing. Really made me want to sit by the sea and eat fresh octopus salad, and it says a lot that a wine can take you to a place. Lovely with food and worth every bit of the $18. Something to seek out even if you need to drink it in the near term. They also make a fancier cuvee that I haven’t tried, but will.

Eric Asimov has solid character

If you followed the debate over on Wine therapy about Asimov's 2005 Chinon article, you may have witnessed me slagging him off. In fact, it was little Thor Iverson's playground challenge (if you think it is so easy, let's see you do it) that pushed me to start this blog in the first place (I just can't resist that playground stuff, but something tells me I would have whipped Thor's ass on the playground, despite his mighty name).

So anyway, I was checking out Asimov's blog, The Pour, over on the New York Times, and he has linked to my blog. That takes an awful lot of character for someone to do that. I mean, I felt like I was measured in my criticism of his article, or at least I was right. Maybe it was some little underling (it is mis-labeled Vulgar Little Monkey's Translucency Report), but I prefer to think that it was Eric himself, who has seen my posts and blogs and sees them to be of merit and decided to let my griping about his article be water under the bridge and throw this bone to my little part of the internet from his vaunted perch.

Whatever the reasoning, it is a nice gesture towards the VLM-TR.

Nothing went well with Chinese

A last minute Tuesday night meal out with a couple of local friends. All with assorted plates of decent Chinese food. None of the wines really suited the food except the combination of the Baudry and what was, essentially, a Chinese scramble with roast pork and other goodies. Serious hangover food. I’ll have to remember that.

2005 Carl Loewen Riesling Varidor

This was quite good. I’m not sure if it is full tröcken, but there was no perceptible residual sugar. Very citric and stoney with a 2005 broadness to the palate, although this was not broad or big in the traditional sense, just in a 2005 versus a 2004 sense. Unfortunately, didn’t really seem to sing with the food.

2005 Baudry Chinon Les Grézeaux

Fucking awesome. What did you expect? Anyone who knows me knows how much I love this wine and I buy at least a case every year. I continue to be amazed at how approachable some of the 2005 Chinon and Bourgueil have been lately. What I love about Grézeaux is that it is so distinctive. There is a dark, mineral, earth quality that marks the wine every year, whether it was rain plagued like 1998, perfect like 2002, or hot like 2003, this wine always has that signature. A wine I’m certain I could pick out quintuple blind. The thing is, it is probably the third best terroir that Baudry owns (Criox Boissée and Clos Guillot have a much better exposition), albeit with the oldest vines. It is a flat parcel, near the house, with dark soil studded with softball size rocks, the grézeaux. There is also usually a purple quality to the fruit, and in certain years (like 2002 or 1996), it will have a lovely floral quality as well. Certain to age for 15-20 years, it is no crime to enjoy this exuberant Spring but I don’t think it will really hit stride for another 5-7 years.

2003 Domaine Drouhin Oregon Pinot Noir Laurène

This was kind of awful. Really limp, loose, boozy, and glommy. Not much to do with it except dump it out. I guess it did have some nice spice on the nose, but the rest was not to my taste at all, and wouldn’t be to the taste of anyone with taste. Avoid.

Recent disappontments in red

Well, you can’t get all them all right. Two recent disappointments which was surprising given that both of these wines have very good reputations around the wine-o-sphere (or whatever). Hopefully someone will chime in to tell me I’m full of shit so we can have some good heated debate on this blog. That is the real problem with blogs, there is no full throttle shit-kicking. Maybe people who read blogs are just pussies.

2004 Sella Coste della Sesia Orbello

This was a real disappointment. Seemed to lack structure and delineation. I’ve like other wines from Sella, and was hoping this could be a house red, but it was flaccid and loose on its own, didn’t improve with food and had a disturbing almond/marzipan note to it that I can’t stand (and sometimes find in Brunello). I don’t see the interest or even usefulness here.

2005 Jadot Moulin-à-Vent Château des Jacques

This was a disappointment. Very un-gamay like. It was impressive for it’s density and tannic structure, but seemed to lack snap and clarity. Did not improve over the next couple of days. I’m not sure what to make of this. Maybe it’ll be an enjoyable bottle in 10 years, maybe not, but I’m not sure that it will ever be at the level of Desvignes. I guess if you can tolerate the blockiness and are looking for a sturdier style wine this could be for you. Drinking it, I get the distinct feel of something more manufactured than I’m used to in Beaujolais Cru.

There's always next year: San Antonio post-mortem

It has taken a while for me to post this. The pain of the Final Four loss to Kansas was just too much. I will say though, that Kansas fans are true basketball fans and a class act. So very different from Duke fans, who I don’t think even like basketball, they just like Duke.

After watching my beloved Tarheels first embarrass themselves, and then come back to within 4 points, I needed some sort of consolation. After a bit of research on the internet, I stumbled across this place which was close to our hotel (note: don’t stay at a golf resort if you don’t play golf). Neat little restaurant called the Grey Moss Inn in the middle of Grey Forest, TX. There was an outdoor wood-fired grill for the steaks and other meats. If you are ever in the San Antonio area, it is worth visiting. The owners are very nice folks that like wine quite a bit and the list has some gems on it.

2005 Dönnhoff Riesling Estate

Bigger boned than past versions (well, maybe not 2001) but still delicious. I’ve been enjoying this for so long, I don’t think that I give it the attention it deserves. A much better wine than most estates can hope to put out.

1999 Girardin Chassagne 1er Ruchottes

Now, I’m not much for Giradin, not really the type of wine I generally get into (negoce, bought must, new wood), but Ruchottes is a very good vineyard and I thought I heard that the source for this fruit was top notch. Whatever. The wine was quite good with our mid-course of rockfish (even though the fish wasn’t that good, reminder, don’t eat fish in the middle of nowhere Texas).

1991 de Vogüé Musigny Vieilles Vignes

Their last bottle and an interesting one for me. I’ve never been a real big de Vogüé fan, the wines are just too blocky and Bordeaux-like for me, but I have fond memories of the 1991 from when I just began in the wine business. It was my first Musigny and was really impressive. Well, this bottle was on the downside (pristine bottle might fare better) but still had an excellent mouthfeel and inner mouth perfume, even if the nose was not explosive or particularly driving. It was a nice quiet wine, which was just fine since it was only $110 off the list.

1995 Sorrel Hermitage Le Gréal

This was the wine of the night, and by a large margin. Deep and strong with meaty black fruits as well as notes of licorice that have started to evolve toward maturity. At a perfect place to drink, IMO because it still retained enough structure to go with our big Texas steaks and still had some fruit, which I personally like. That said, I found it perfectly balanced with a beautiful nose and velvety texture, strong persistence, and the tannin were of the finer grain. Lovely stuff. I could have easily had another bottle by myself.