If you’re interested in learning about wine, this will surely be a great course.
James Flewellen, one of the course organisers and tipped for great things by wine writer Jancis Robinson, writes at The Oxford Wine Blog which is also definitely worth checking out for a simple, no-nonsense approach to appreciating wine.
via Outre monde
There’s an interesting new study in the Lancet from Professor David Nutt (erstwhile chief UK drugs advisor prior to being sacked last year for disagreeing with the previous administration), which has been publicised as stating that “alcohol is more harmful than heroin”, as evidenced by the pretty-looking graph published across all the usual media outlets:
The detail behind the headline is rather more complex, and illustrates neatly how the general public and the mass media simply don’t understand how to interpret information.
The key thing to understand is how they got to the end point of this graph; what was the methodology used?
The study aims quantify the harm posed by various drug on both users and on wider society (eg through criminal behaviour to acquire funds to access the drugs), and so place each drug on the same unified scale. The methodology they used to do this is Multi-Criteria Decision Analysis, something I touched upon in a previous blog entry as being a very powerful method of problem-solving.
In order to perform MCDA, you need to have a panel of people making judgements on a series of pre-determined scenarios. The make-up of the panel therefore is the most important determinant of the results generated. In this case, the panel were the members of the government’s Independent Scientific Committee on Drugs, plus another 2 invited experts.
That makes a total of 25 culturally-homogenous scientists.
However expert these members are in the scientific literature, I would strongly question whether 25 people from a narrow professional group constitutes a broad enough panel to make decisions about overall harm of each drug on society as their definition of harm may not be that which a wider panel might use. Furthermore, since all the members of the panel work together regularly, they are likely to have all developed broadly consistent opinions with each other over time, something which will have been regularly reinforced through mutual agreement.
This “crowd convergence effect” or “groupthink” means that in effect, the panel contains far fewer than 25 different opinions, more likely only 2-3 mildly competing views at most. For all practical purposes, this study is therefore based on two or three people’s personal (if unusually well-informed) opinion. That strikes me as methodological thin ice on which to base public policy.
And that’s without the further problem of considering that the availability and stigma of each drug on the list varies wildly, which complicates ability to determine the actual underlying health and societal effects. For instance, because heroin is illegal, to acquire it automatically requires criminal activity. And because alcohol is legal, it is very easily available , multiplying its effect on society disproportionately. This means that making judgements around the harm is the very essence of a wicked problem, where cause and effect are intertwined to such as extent as to make disentanglement impossible.
In short, while the study has a useful role to play in terms of opening up the discussion for public, people should be very wary of assigning too much power to its findings.
Also in the News…
On a completely different note, below is a short collection of links to some other interesting news stories that grabbed my eye over the last few days, and that I haven’t had the time or inclination to make a full blog entry on:
The discussion in my last post about the peak experiences wine can offer has led me to think more about the contribution of sensual pleasures to a joyful life.
When my father retired, he let me rummage through his rather nice collection of pens and select a couple for myself. Being quite practical, I chose a ballpoint – a burgundy Montblanc Meisterstück Classique – thinking that a simple ballpoint would be of most daily use. But as an indulgence, I also chose a Parker 75 in its later Premier variant and finished in sterling silver ciselé, for more occasional use.
In the final analysis, I found writing with a fountain pen so much more enjoyable that I routinely choose to carry one in preference to a ballpoint. A fountain pen offers a different – and altogether more sensual – sensory experience.
Firstly, it is naturally treated with more respect in terms of the pressure applied to paper, as the nib does not require a heavy hand and in fact would rebel against one. Secondly, the slight extra friction – the “scratchiness” – of a fountain pen lends it a tactile and auditory quality that is entirely missing from the anodyne ballpoint. Third, the script is visually different to that imparted by a ballpoint: the ink is more even and saturated. Finally, even the smell of the ink in the moment it takes to dry is different, not to mention that this brief pause at the end allows for due consideration of what has been written.
Thus, writing with a fountain pen actively engages four out of five senses in a way that a ballpoint cannot. Beyond accidently chewing the end off an old biro once, I have yet to find a way to reliably integrate a gustatory experience into writing and so engage all five senses, but I live in hope!
The point is that an item that I initially considered a mere indulgence has now become an essential pleasure. I have since acquired another fountain pen, a Montblanc Meisterstück 146 in the classic black resin, but the Parker 75 Premier remains my favourite, probably because using it also reminds me that it was a nice gift from my father.
Noticing the world around you, and the many little sensory pleasures it offers, makes it a more intriguing and welcoming place. This is not indulgence; this is experience. A merely practical life can never acquire the richness of experience that an aesthetic life offers.
After my last entry lambasting the indefinite procrastination of pleasure, it is worth discussing the importance of delayed gratification. This is the deliberate postponement of satisfaction in order to maximise eventual pleasure, and can apply to many fields, although it was brought to mind today by my intent to open the pictured bottle of Chateau Soutard 1990 over dinner midweek.
Fine wine is a good case study for edification of principal difference between procrastination and delayed gratification. Good wine tends to improve in the bottle over time until it reaches a maturity capable of delivering a peak experience, before gradually fading away. Every wine will have its own moment of maximal pleasure although the exact timing and duration of this window will vary according to the wine, and according to the tastes of the drinker.
Being able to resist uncorking too soon allows one’s desire and aspirations for the first glass to rise. This heightens the pleasure of finally reaching that day, and so should add an extra layer of piquancy to the wine itself. By contrast, the procrastinator will fear to ever uncork the bottle, always wondering if another year is needed before the wine is at its best. Perhaps the bottle is never drunk at all, but even if it is, the procrastinator finds the flavour soured and the fruit long gone.
Decide when to reap the harvest of life, but then act decisively. Delay with purpose, not fear, for the maximum possible pleasure.
It may have taken a long time, but the UK has finally lost its number one position in yet another market.
China is now the world-leading buyer of Bordeaux, overtaking the UK in market value terms for the first time. The Chinese market is now over 90 million Euros, and the producers have adapted by making a number of interesting pairing suggestions for their wines (e.g. St Emilion for pigs’ feet and Margaux for duck tongues). Mind you, the intricacies of pairing may have to take second fiddle to educating the Chinese market on rather more basic issues:
Shaun Rein, head of China Market Research in Shanghai, says many Chinese people are still unfamiliar with the traditional conventions of red wine consumption. “They either put ice cubes in it, or they drink it in shots,” he says.
“I’ve seen people drink $1,000-plus bottles as shots.”
- linked ibid
The rapid growth in the Chinese market has also had a marked effect on prices. I blogged previously on my own humble mid-market en-primeur purchases this year, but at the higher end of the scale prices are soaring, and even my purchases will probably appreciate by the time I receive them.
I would suggest that this speculation is leading to an asset bubble in wine, but the growth in the Chinese market is at least partly based on their rapid structural development – with India probably not be far behind – meaning the bubble is unlikely to burst imminently.
I love eating out and I love good food and good wine. What I dislike are the vast majority of restaurant menus. They are a derogation of responsibility on the part of the restaurant. Why? Because typically they substitute choice for quality. It is a false choice because no matter what option you pick, you get served something unpalatable.
What I want when I go to a restaurant is well-prepared tasty food and a reasonably paired glass or two of wine. I want knowledgeable, courteous staff and quiet, convivial surroundings. What I do not want is a menu that runs to multiple pages, with half a dozen specials and a variety of different cuisines. This is not good food, this is the sit-down equivalent of a vending machine.
How can any kitchen possibly expect to maintain quality if they expect staff to cook that kind of menu? The answer is that the food will be heavily pre-prepared, involve little skill in cooking and will be totally lacking in any sense of pride on the part of those cooking the food. This is food by numbers and it adds up to a pretty sickening sum total.
Ideally, I don’t even want to see a menu. I want to be able to trust a restaurant’s staff enough to just be able to walk in, sit down and know I will be served a good quality tasty meal. I will be able to chat to my dining companions without having to bother dealing with the nonsense of trawling a book of random options. If there absolutely must be choice, to cater for those with unusual dietary requirements, let there be 3 choices for each of starter, main and dessert. That’s it, nothing more. Change the choices frequently to account for seasonal produce but only have 3 choices for each at any given time.
In short, don’t make me waste my energy choosing between non-options.
And for those of you thinking this post was actually just about restaurants, I recommend you go back to browsing the menu.
“… bad wine ruins the stomach”.
So say the Spanish, and I have to agree.
There’s nothing quite so enjoyable as taking an interest in something utterly superficial. I immersed myself for several hours this weekend deciding what Bordeaux 2009 to buy en primeur. For those that are unaware, en primeur offerings allow one to purchase wine before release, while it is still in barrel. The advantage of this is twofold: firstly, it may be cheaper than at the time of actual release; and secondly, some more in-demand producers may sell all their stock via their en primeur offerings so this is really the only way to access these wines as a consumer.
Some use en primeur buying as a way of investing in wine, as a good vintage from a top producer is likely to appreciate significantly in value over the years. Personally, I like wine too much to use it as an investment in this way and prefer to be able to drink up when the time comes. Of course, for some of these wines, that time may not be for a couple of decades at least, but delayed gratification is good too.
The Wine Society emailed me with details of their 2009 Bordeaux offerings and by all accounts 2009 should be an excellent vintage across the region as a result of an almost perfect climate during the growing season. As a result, prices even en primeur are higher than I would prefer, but this was pretty much inevitable. After some research, I opted to apply for a half-case of Clerc-Milon (their idiosyncratic label is pictured above) and a half-case of Haut-Batailley. Both are Fifth Growths by the 1855 Classification, and from the Pauillac AOC, many wines of which seem to have done especially well this year.
I’m also very tempted to request a half-case of Rauzan-Segla (a Second Growth) too, but it’s expensive enough that I have to think twice about that one. Perhaps I should try to persuade someone else to buy it instead, for as Diogenes the Cynic said: “I like best the wine drunk at the cost of others!”
