I drink Beaujolais very intermittently (literally 1 bottle in my cellar right now), though I always enjoy it. Still I was totally absorbed by William Kelley’s huge and highly engaging piece on 2019/2020 Beaujolais in this week’s Wine Advocate. It got me thinking back to a wide retrospective on the region I attended a few years back (mostly 2016 vintage).
My favorites from that day were among the better reviewed wineries in this article, so that’s a bit of consistency. But one thing that really stood out to me then was how most of the wines offered up flavors and textures in a fairly narrow range. Some were better than others of course, but the variations were less than I expected, especially in overall volume, texture, dryness. I’ve come to expect a lot more variation based on horizontal tastings of things like Sonoma Pinot, German Riesling, Burgundy, Bordeaux, etc.
I’m curious what people think. Is this narrow band of taste/smell/texture a feature of Beaujolais? Or was it the vintage? Or do I just have a Yak palate? Seems like the two competing trends in Beaujolais are a strong youth movement, and a heavy influence towards riper wines due to climate change. What do long time lovers of the region think about what’s going on? What’s new that’s awesome, and which old timers are still getting it done?
Side note: William is on a crazy tear right now in WA. In July & August he’s had a high quality article nearly every week with hundreds of reviews, plus fascinating background on wineries and wine makers. Really impressive, but how long can you keep this up sir? As a customer, I hope a long time .
Thanks, Rich! I confess, I’m a bit exhausted. 3,500 reviews so far this year… about 170,000 words by my very rough count! And with a big Champagne report to finish now.
You raise an interesting point about Beaujolais and Gamay. To an extent, I’d agree with you. I think there is an unusual homogeneity in winemaking practices in the different sectors of the region: a lot of big production, “commercial” (for want of a better word) Beaujolais is produced by thermovinification, which results in very fruit forward, jammy wines; most “natural” wine producers are working with very low sulfur and more or less strict carbonic maceration; and most more “traditional” producers are using partially crushed whole bunches and then aging in cement of old foudres. Taking a step back, it’s also significant that new oak is very rare in the Beaujolais, so most wines are more purely “varietal” (some would equally argue “terroir-driven”, I suppose, though in my view it’s not an either-or proposition) than e.g. Côte de Nuits reds—much like predominantly tank-matured Chablis is more varietal than barrel-fermented and matured Côte de Beaune whites tend to be. When people do use oak, my anecdotal impression visiting cellars is that they often buy it from Dargaud & Jaeglé in Romanèche, which again lends a certain homogeneity to oaky Beaujolais: just as if 80% of the Côte de Nuits decided overnight to use e.g. Rémond would have a homogenizing influence. Almost everyone bottles quite early. Of course, between these three camps, if it makes sense to crudely cut up a region like this, there are big differences: compare a Côte de Brouilly from Duboeuf, Château Thivin, and J-C Lapalu, for example. And happily there are plenty of exceptions who make very singular wines: compare, for example, Foillard, Lapierre and Breton as three examples of “natural”, Chauvet-inspired Morgon that are all in fact very different in style, even within the context of a similar vision, similar techniques, and the same appellation and grape variety. So I think one’s response to your question is really going to depend on what one is comparing with what and the extent to which one is prepared to generalize.
William thanks for the feedback. In essence I was right and I was wrong. As a wine lover I have no trouble embracing contradiction! I am inspired to delve into some of the comparisons you mention.
Can’t wait for Covid to be enough in the rear view mirror that broad tastings are possible again. It’s hard for we mortals to taste more than a few wines together at home.
Not to my knowledge. Though for what it’s worth, there’s more than a few Beaujolais producers that also make vin de France wines for one reason or another.
Administratively, some is part of Saône-et-Loire (e.g. Romanèche), some is part of Rhône (e.g. Morgon). In terms of the AOC system, it’s part of Burgundy, and can be declassified to “Bourgogne”, which has proven very convenient for a lot of Burgundians over the years.
Until 2011, when the cahiers des charges were updated, most cru Beaujolais, for example, could be declassified to Bourgogne Rouge. Since 2011 it’s a bit more strict as to where it comes from, but an appreciable percentage of Gamay is still permitted in Bourgogne Rouge (just as a California “Cabernet Sauvignon” can contain a bunch of other things). Now, you can declassify cru Beaujolais to Bourgogne Gamay.
As I understand it, Gamay from Beaujolais can be included in a blended AOC Bourgogne Rouge, but the Bourgogne Rouge has to be 70% Pinot Noir unless it’s labelled Bourgogne Gamay; and if the latter, it has to be minimum 85% Gamay.
The relevant passages of the cahier des charges are:
b) - Les vins rouges sont issus des cépages suivants :
cépage principal : pinot noir N ;
cépages accessoires : chardonnay B, pinot blanc B, pinot gris G et, le cépage césar N, pour le seul département de l’Yonne, > le cépage gamay N, pour les seuls vins issus des aires parcellaires délimitées des appellations d’origine contrôlées « Brouilly », « Chénas », « Chiroubles », « Côtes de Brouilly », « Fleurie », « Juliénas », « Morgon », « Moulin-à-Vent », « Régnié », « Saint-Amour »> .
a) - Assemblage des cépages
La proportion du cépage pinot gris G est inférieure ou égale à 30 % dans l’assemblage des vins blancs ; - La proportion du cépage césar N est inférieure ou égale à 49 % dans l’assemblage des vins rouges et rosés ;
Les vins rouges et rosés, produits à partir de parcelles complantées en mélange de plants, sont vinifiés par assemblage de raisins ;
**La proportion du cépage gamay N est inférieure ou égale à 30 % dans l’assemblage des vins ;
Pour les vins susceptibles de bénéficier de l’appellation d’origine contrôlée « Bourgogne » suivie obligatoirement de l’indication « gamay », la proportion du cépage gamay N est supérieure ou égale à 85 % dans l’assemblage des vins.**
The larger point is that, if it says just Bourgogne AOC (no “Gamay” on the label), it’s not going to be much like a Beaujolais because will be primarily pinot noir. At best, it might have some Beaujolais fruit blended with pinot from other parts of Burgundy, because the vineyards in Beaujolais are planted almost entirely to gamay.
But, when you consider that, on the basis if this year’s prices, 750 ml of Bourgogne Rouge from the Côte de Nuits costs 4 EUR, whereas 750 ml of Chiroubles is less than 1.50 EUR, if you are a big négociant making a generic regional wine at a competitive price, you are going to want to take advantage of the possibility of adding 30% Gamay from the Beaujolais.
Thanks for the link. So Bourgogne Rouge can be 30% of any combination of Pinot Gris, Pinot Blanc, Chardonnay, Cesar or Gamay. Explains a lot about the variability of BR.
.