I feel strangely let down

I have been introduced to many fine wines via the offices of Paul Day. He also let me know about this wine, which in previous vintages was the best Beaujolais I have ever tried. You would have thought a 2007 Beaujolais would have been a terribly flattering vintage for this style of wine, but if you ask me this is just dull.

Fleurie ‘Clos de ls Roilette’ 2007, Coudert

There is some bubblegum fruit to the nose, but also a strangely meaty character. And that, lads and lassies, is pretty much it. It is a dull as dishwater, there is just nothing here to tickle your fancy. The palate is flat, boring and even more tedious than I am capable of articulating. Boring, boring, boring. I suppose at least it is not actively unpleasant, but I am fucked if I am saying anything even vaguely positive about a wine I find so boring. BORING. Get the message. I think this is a fundamental problem with Beaujolais, buggered if it grown on limestone or not, or if they don’t use carbonic maceration, it is just a broken pencil style of wine: pointless. Yeah, let us not hold back, it is crap. I’m unhappy that I have spent my money on this tossy pile of boring shite. Piss, that is what it is.

OK, I have had good Beaujolais, including the 2005 from Coudert, but I am really not sure this is a terribly interesting style of wine. Sometimes you feel the need to drink something like this, much as sometimes you need a bottle of Bandol rosé, but when you want to open something compelling for an early Saturday night’s drink for your friends you can do so, so much better than this. My chums D&J with their huge quantities of Tim Adams drink better and more cheaply than Clos de la Roilette 2007.

  • ed tully

    the Beauj is an event wine. As in, whether you enjoy it or not depends utterly on the event. I can imagine it being the thing indeed for a late spring picnic. some roast partridge and so on. Or in a Parisian bistro with some piggy pleasure. sadly the key word in that sentence was “imagine” because the jolais has never managed to be that jolly.

  • Jeremy

    2007 was an unexciting vintage in the Beaujolais (or for that matter for a number of Burgundy wines), only inspiring in the top terroirs, where the wines do indeed have plenty of charm and interest.
    I’ve had 2 fun Beaujolais from 07, both from the Beaujolais’ top vineyard site: Morgon Côte de Py from Foillard and from Lapierre were both excellent. I don’t stray much from these two. They tend to be better than the rest.

  • Peter

    Ed’s absolutely right. Beaujolais is about the occasion, and the company. I would never drink Beaujolais with you, David, as you would hate it, and therefore I would hate it too. But on a warm spring evening, in the company of a nice woman, I’ve thoroughly enjoyed knocking the Beaujolais back.

  • Jeremy

    Peter, you are a cheap a date!

  • David Strange

    Yes, Lapierre is pretty good. As good as Beaujolais gets anyway. I’d rather drink affordable Pinot any day; Le Homme Vacheron’s Sancerre rouge is only a shade more expensive than ‘quality’ Beaujolais and provides so much more pleasure.

    And yes, as today’s trip to the boozer demonstrated, Peter is quite a cheap date.

  • Peter

    I’m feeling under pressure here. I suspect David may be trying to goad me into some reckless drinking on Friday. Perhaps that where I’ve been going wrong – the girl just didn’t like my Beaujolais. But really, does it have to be a case of either, or? Of course, I prefer Vacheron Pinot too. But that doesn’t mean I’m averse to quaffing a bottle of Beaujolais on the right occasion.

  • ed tully

    As ever the voice of reason! and quaff is such a delightful word! Let us not limit the paths to pleasure.

  • David Strange

    The voice of reason suggesting heavy drinking? Sounds good to me. I have to visit the loony doctor later on that afternoon so should probably not be *totally* newscasted by the end of lunch.