THE LORD OF LANGENLOIS IN 2025

Before we consider the delicious doings at Bründlmayer, a small bit of news. Joshua Dunning has written an excellent article on the history of sugar in Champagne; not only dosage, but the evolution of tastes among Champagne’s customers, and how it seems to have landed on a creed whereby any residual sugar is held in the deepest suspicion. Mr. Dunning’s piece is here: https://wordonthegrapevine.co.uk/dosage-champagne/

I’m quoted, as you’ll see, which is hardly surprising as I’m a conspicuous critic of wine ideologies in general and this one in particular. But I was really tickled by these wickedly delicious thoughts in Dunning’s argument: “Dosage [became] an easy target and principal antagonist in a whole host of novel macro trends, creating a powerful reactionary sentiment which moralised sugar, stupefied public discourse, and strongly influenced production itself.”

He goes on to say, even more incisively: “These new wines, and the ideological persuasions of their makers, were widely propagated by trendy sommeliers, who can be distinctly susceptible to proselytising received wisdom. This preoccupation with sugar also enthused wine journalists, who grew fixated on presenting dosage not only as consequential but as largely undesirable. In turn, drinkers absorbed both the narrative and preference, creating a feedback loop which gave the impression they too only favoured the driest champagnes. “

I’ve spent many years (and many words) asking why drinkers don’t taste with their simple wits and like what they spontaneously like, regardless of whether the wine is “trendy” or aligned with the prevailing ideas of the “proper taste.” I don’t mind if taste is perverse – some people like burnt toast and queasy wines – as long as it is actually taste, and not some notion of what one “ought” to like. I believe, doomed and furtive idealist that I am, that true taste will apportion itself naturally at many points along the flavor spectra, and some people will realize they prefer Champagnes with unfashionably ”high” dosage, and even better, those who truly like bone-dry Champagnes will be honest in their tastes. There will also be fools such as I, who like them all, when they taste good. Still, I cherish a notion that someday, at some point, a bunch of tasters will be working through their chic flights of zeroes and one of them will muse “You know, these wines really do suck….” And there will be a chorus of massive relief and everyone will say “Finally! Someone speaks the truth!”

To the matter at hand, one of the purest, smartest, most sensible and humane wine estates I have ever known – Bründlmayer. We have not always agreed on one wine or another, but our divergences are always good humored and cordial. That said, I doubt we’ll have many quarrels about this group of wines….

A curious assortment in some ways: five GVs, three Rieslings, a Muscat, a Pinot Noir, and two sparkling wines. The Readers Digest condensed version of Bründlmayer.