home : wine recommendations : wine girl for hire : bio : articles : contact

The Dashe Connection
March 24, 2008

IMG_0082.JPG

So, Mike Dashe, known for his zinfandel (his riesling is pretty damned good) catches my expression, which I imagine was dazed and confused. He gets this older brother I'm-going- to-tease-the-shit-out-of-you smile, and says, "You must be a friend of Joe's," referring to the gentleman who sometimes posts here and elsewhere---SFJoe.

I like SFJoe immensely but we are not really friends, though there is no reason we're not, except that we just haven't had the chance. What we have is more like acquaintance, extended friendly family-esque, might be more like it. It clicked. SFJ had written a bit on a certain non-sulfured wine that Mike had up his sleeve.

"You want to taste Fat Boy?" he asks.

Oh gee, do I!

Word has it that a certain sommelier from San Francisco, a certain euro-wine-purist was behind this 'Fat Boy.' That person would be Mark Ellenbogen.

Ellenbogen, who has something of a guru air about him, has been under plenty of pressure to stop his embargo on California wines and let them through he border of the Slanted Door, the acclaimed pan-Asian resto whose list he rules. He suggested that Dashe, a nice guy who doesn't inoculate and is eagerly reducing his usage of new oak (but still picks really ripe) make an experiment.

Dashe found some great tasting, dry-farmed organic grapes that came in at a sane brix # he went to work, nervously.

He crushed, the ferment went on for three weeks, pressed off into 900 liter foudres (albeit new, he soaked them for six weeks to leach out as much 'new' as he could. It's low alcohol for a zin these days, 13.8. The color is something Mr.P***** would call feeble, but at this point, before the tricky bottling, it is a delicate ruby wine with transparency. cheerful and lively with great forest berry, herbal complexity. So far there's been little sulfur (SEE DASHE'S COMMENT BELOW) and there won't be any from this point on. Not even at bottling. Which is why it's risky. It also makes me a bit nervous because I feel the most successful sans soufre wines I've had sit for a longer time. On the other hand, Ellenbogen is going to sell the wine like hot dogs at a ball game, so the wine won't have too much time to funk out.

But right now? Fat Boy would definitely get a spanking from Mr. P***** for being one of those "French" wines out of California.

As I was leaving the extremely affable and extremely brave Dashe he said, "I have to hide this wine from the critics. Most of them would feel offended by the wine, like how could I have the audacity to make something like this, something that most of them would hate?"

Now, that was an interesting thought. I suppose if Didier at Clos Roche Blanche started to P******** his wine, I might indeed be offended, thinking him a sell out or perhaps going senile, but would it offend my ego, as fragile as it is? Hmm. Something to think about.


Comments

Just want to clarify, Alice, that the wine isn't completely "sans soufre,"--I had added sulfer at crushing, and a small amount when racked off of the malolactic lees. I'm just not adding additional sulfer during aging or at bottling, so it will be low-sulfer wine, not a non-sulphered wine.

Thanks for the encouragement--it's gratifying to have so many people express their support for this little experiment at Dashe...

Michael Dashe on March 24, 2008 09:52 PM

Alice, I'm happy to see you trying some wines out of your comfort zone AND keeping an open mind.

I know we all have our predilections, but there is nothing more frustrating to me than people at either end of the wine spectrum (spoofy or unspoofy) who dismiss without experience.

You're doing things in a way that has integrity. So thanks for that. It is greatly appreciated.

(And, FYI, I'm no proponent of any particular school of thought. I just like wine. Period!)

Jill on March 25, 2008 12:09 AM

You make wine making a soap opera! I mean that as a complement. This comment from Dashe is interesting as I hear this from old school guys that talk of fruit bombs and it could be Dashe is migrating to that camp. Mike who started Acacia and now makes wine for Bouchaine last year had a barrel made for wine review which was the opposite of his style but intended for ratings. What a world! I think ratings by numbers are silly do we rate art by numbers then why wine? Wine is subjective not numeric...

Mark V Marino on March 25, 2008 03:39 AM

I think The Slanted Door is very over rated. We were there last May and the food lacked zip. We had better meals at small Thai places at half the price. It is in the Ferry Building so you are paying for the view of the Bay.

Marco on March 25, 2008 02:25 PM

maybe the slanted door is over rated but mark's wine list is certainly one of the most amazing in san francisco!! now for the shameless self promotion,the FATBOY ZINFANDEL is going to be available at terroir natural wine merchant in san francisco(in a month or so?)
cheers!

guilhaume on March 25, 2008 07:05 PM

Let me wax enthusiastic for a minute.
Most people understand that there is a difference between artisanal and industrial methods. Here in France many people come to realise that there is a structural difference between artisan French wines and industrial French wines -- that it is not merely a question of France versus the 'anglo-saxons'.
The trap of chauvinism is universal. It is dangerous for political reasons. This is why it is good that Mark Ellenbogen is promoting this experiment. I hope it shows to US citizens that there is a difference between artisan Californian wines and industrial Californian wines -- that it is not merely a question of USA versus French wines. It would be good for the cause of natural wines but it could also help -- a tiny bit -- the US sitting in the world...

Félicien Breton on March 25, 2008 08:56 PM

Agreed, the wine list is quite good, but an excellent wine list doth not an excellent restaurant make.

Marco on March 26, 2008 02:52 PM

A bit unrelated to this post, but someone touched on ti, so.... I don't understand why so many people in the wine world, from producers to journalists and bloggers, are so emphatically against the use of points to rate wines. What's the big deal? The vast majority of wine consumers in this country and probably in the world don't care, don't look, and don't waste their time with wine scores. The purchasing decision is mostly based on price, varietal, region, bottle image, wine style (in no specific order, though price is #1 for sure), but points and scores are really not that big of a factor. Can someone please explain to me what the big deal is?

Paul on March 26, 2008 03:06 PM

Paul,
If you search on eric asimov's blog and lyle fass' blog for my name and thomas matthews, you can find a fairly thorough airing of the issues a few months back.

The very abbreviated answer is that wines aren't a scalar. There is more than one aspect to their quality, and more importantly to their utility. Mike Dashe's fatboy (probably smart of him not to call it the cuvee taliban) will be great with the food at the slanted door, but if I were grilling a steak, I'd rather have his Todd Brothers zin. It's riper, much darker, more tannic, and so on. Which deserves more "points"? Neither, they are both delicious wines that have their place in the world. They deserve comment and discussion, but not reduction onto a linear scale.

SFJoe on March 26, 2008 03:42 PM

SFJoe,

I agree. But my point is that I've come across people who have made the elimination of the 100 point rating system or any rating system for that matter a lifetime objective. All I'm asking is... what's the big deal? Most people don't care about the ratings. I personally have never made a purchasing decision based on ratings and I'm yet to find someone in my circle of wine-geek friends (about a dozen of us) who has.

Paul on March 26, 2008 03:57 PM

Hi Paul, Most drinkers are not wine geeks and are indeed sold crap based on points, because most of the world relates to a test score. Too many wine lists sport pages of plonk, boldy advertised with their high points. Many collectors I've met proudly tell me nothing is under a 90. Walk into most wine stores, points are selling the wine. It shows newcomers that wine can be reduced to the lowest common denominator and winemakers wanting sales make wine aimed at those points and the low-brow taste. In short it is the same kind of palate numbing destruction as television does to the brain. IMHO, that is.

Whenever an item/product is quantified it becomes about marketing and not about quality.

Alice on March 26, 2008 04:08 PM

Alice:

BS and truth...in equal measure, I think. Points only sell wines that are at the very top of the production/availability pyramid (and by that, I mean the smallest production/no-way-you-can-get-them tippy-top). The millions of cases of wine that are sold in the US to the average wine consumer are sold on availability/label/price point and don't have a need for points.

You are more strident than I in your opposition to the 100-pt scale (way to keep your schtick consistent!) than I am; and I, too, dream of the day when Americans' confidence in their own palates has progressed far enough that they don't need any mediator at all.

I think you meant to criticize those wineries that allegedly craft wines in a certain specific style to gain points in order to goose sales, and not winemakers, in general, that would like to make enough of a living to continue doing what they love?

A little disingenuous, that last line ("whenever an item/product is quantified it becomes about marketing and not about quality") don't you think? I bet both you and your publisher hope for the right kind of quantification. Does that make your book any worse...or better? Anyway, since when does telling someone about what you are trying to accomplish mitigate against a quality product?

You are, at the very least, interesting.

Steven Mirassou
Steven Kent Winery

Steven Mirassou on August 4, 2008 05:17 PM
Post a comment