The Independent, Various Musings and More: Being the 154th issue of Cosa Bolle in Pentola

Greetings! I'm sorry to be late with this, but summer is a difficult period for me -- like many parents I count down the days remaining before school resumes, and this year has been worse than the last, because now there are two sets of homeworks to get done. We've got less than a month to go!

I have managed to get a fair amount done on the Italian Wine Review and Italian Food, however: The most recent additions to the IWR are a rundown of Carpenè Malvolti, a look at the single vineyard wines from Castello di Querceto, and a rundown of Frascati, a white from the Alban Hills that can be quite good. I've also added a link to an article on the situation in Brunello that Monty Waldin wrote for Jancis Robinson, and which she allowed Franco Ziliani to repost on Vino al Vino (in English, and he has translated it into Italian). Monty's article is both distressing and frightening, and to be honest brings to mind a photo I saw a while back of a guy face-down in a urinal, with the caption: "When you hit bottom you'll know."

I hope I haven't offended anyone, but the situation has reached a level between sickening and grotesque, and is likely going to spread: A friend and colleague tells me the prosecutor who is carrying out the investigation has had the police pay visits to all the major figures involved -- cellar masters, agronomists, winery owners, consulting enologists and so on -- and examine the hard disks of their computers. Since many of these people, especially the consulting enologists, also work elsewhere, those elsewhere are nervously looking over their shoulders. And there's more: My friend also tells me the scope of the investigation has expanded beyond winemaking, to cover all sorts of other things including land use, hiring, and accounting practices. It could take a long time for the dust to settle.

You'll find Monty Waldin's article here -- scroll down past Franco's introduction.

The most recent additions to Italian Food are a bit simpler: First, we went to the coast for Ferragosto (the major Italian summer holiday, on August 15), and since it was cloudy the day we arrived I took the dog blackberry picking. Came home with pounds of blackberries, and Elisabetta put most of them into a blackberry crostata that should have served many more than it did. You'll find it here. Looking a little further back, the most recent article is on watermelon.

The Independent: Tourists Beware - Right or Wrong?
Moving in a very different direction, Mr. Berlusconi's center-right coalition has by now been in power for several months, and I had planned to write some about what they have done and are up to, but The Independent beat me to it (sort of) with a piece entitled "Tourists beware: if it's fun, Italy has a law against it." In it they say that Mr. Berlusconi set out to address a "security emergency" and in doing so allowed town and city mayors to enact all sorts of strange regulations, which, if broken by uninformed tourists, can result in hefty fines. And then they cherry pick among the regulations enacted by mayors (who do have a great deal of latitude within their city limits), some of which do sound strange.

But first, let's backtrack, because as is often the case in Italy, things aren't quite as linear as non-Italians try to make out. Despite Mr. Berlusconi's "we will increase security" electoral platform the first thing he did upon taking office was to try to block the magistrates who have been trying to convict him of tax evasion, corruption and influence peddling for years and years. Since he couldn't simply order them to suspend the trials (the PM's power does have limits) he started out by proposing legislation that would suspend all trials for relatively lesser crimes (those with sentences less than 10 years, which include housebreaking, rape and kidnapping) for a year to allow the serious cases, of which Italy has many, to proceed. Among the hundreds of thousands of trials that would be blocked were, strangely enough, Mr. Berlusconi's.

As one might expect, there was a great hue and cry, and commentators pointed out that the definition of "serious crime" was such that many perversions of justice would occur. For example the trial of a teen who shared his hashish with a friend would go on (sharing drugs is considered drug dealing), while the trial of a drunk who raped a girl at a bus stop would not. The heat proved too much and Mr. Berlusconi's coalition backed down.

Only to talk about reinstating parliamentary immunity, and this invites a brief aside. Because Mussolini disposed of his rivals in Parliament by having them convicted on trumped up charges and sent into exile, after the war the Italian constitution granted all MPs full immunity -- an MP couldn't be charged unless parliament first voted to rescind his immunity. As one might guess, this proved an invitation to corruption, because MPs across the spectrum covered each others' backs, and soon nothing happened without a bribe. Until 1992, when a divorced woman went to a magistrate, Antonio Di Pietro, to complain that her husband -- a Socialist -- wasn't paying alimony. He claimed to be broke, so she produced the numbers of the Swiss bank accounts where he deposited his graft; the thread Di Pietro followed grew into a thick rope that launched Mani Pulite (the Clean Hands scandal), and brought down the entire political system -- after public outcry caused the repeal of Parliamentary immunity.

There was outcry about the reinstatement of Parliamentary immunity too, and in the end the Government proposed that the four highest offices of the land (President, Prime Minister, and Presidents of House and Senate) be granted immunity to protect them from the actions of magistrates with political axes to grind. This measure passed, and having seen to his security, Mr. Berlusconi turned his attention to the rest of us. One of the first things the Minister of the Interior proposed was to fingerprint all gypsy children, to make it easier to identify them now and in the future. This was deemed racist by the Opposition (and some segments of the EEU), so the proposal was withdrawn, and the Minister announced that all IDs issued after 2010 will include fingerprints. In other words, since singling out gypsies is racist, they're going to open up files on all of us.

And security? The latest budget included plans to reduce the police force, which didn't make anyone happy. So the Ministers got together and decided to deploy several thousand troops in the major Italian cities, where they will be patrolling with the police forces. I'm not sure this is what we need, but it is what we're getting.

And this brings us back to the Independent's rather sarcastic article. In Genova, they say, it's illegal to wander about with an open bottle of wine or beer. A friend of mine got arrested for doing the same thing in Upstate NY years ago, so I don't see anything wrong with Genova's wanting to keep people from drinking in the streets (and dropping the bottles when they're empty, as drinkers are want to do).

The Independent approves of the fact that in Rome one can drink in the streets, but seems surprised that one can be fined for sitting down on the Spanish Steps to have lunch and perhaps take a nap. Would London object to tourists using the gates of Buckingham Palace as a backrest? I rather think so.

Olbia, they say, fines those who smoke on the beaches. However, if you've seen how pristine Olbia's beaches are, you'd understand why the locals would be upset if people smoked on them -- without ashtrays. After all, where do you suppose the cigarette butts go?

They also poke fun at the Minister of Health's banning massages (mostly given by Chinese) on the beaches. We'll ignore the fact that the masseurs don't wash their hands as they go from one sweaty body to the next, and ask a more serious question: Who trained them? An MD colleague of wife Elisabetta's suffered mild whiplash in an auto accident last year and went to a licensed chiropractor because his neck was sore. The guy made a mistake -- they think he compressed the arteries for too long -- and the resultant ischemic episode paralyzed Elisabetta's colleague from the neck down. She has heard of similar things happening after beach massages, and I therefore wouldn't let anyone touch me.

Another thing I couldn't help noticing is their disapproval of Italian attempts to limit panhandling in tourist areas. "And in Florence," they say, "it is now illegal to clean the windscreens of cars waiting at traffic lights." One can almost hear the disdainful sniff. One wonders how often the authors drove through Florence before the ban went into effect. Every long traffic light had several washers -- always the same ones at each light, so they were divvying up the territory -- and if you were driving you felt like you were running a gauntlet. At least I did, and I'm a fairly big guy, big enough that they moved on with a scowl when I said no. Cars with single women, or women with children got a much rougher treatment however, with the washers (especially the north Africans) trying to threaten the women into paying them. It got so Elisabetta planned her routes to avoid some traffic lights, especially in the evening, and I know other woman friends of ours did too. That's not how things are supposed to be, and nobody -- with the exception of a few idealistically inclined young communists (mostly male) who said the windscreen washers were being deprived of their jobs -- objected when the ban was imposed. Quite the contrary, we were glad to have our streets back.

Well, I've gone on longer about this than I intended. And there have been Italian reactions to the article, which was mentioned in the news. "At least we're allowed to stand up in soccer (football?) stadiums," one commentator observed.

Pasta Con Le Sarde Grigliate - Pasta with Grilled Sardines
Winding down, though you might not think to grill sardines -- there are many much more glamorous fish out there that look much more impressive when served off the grill -- they are extremely tasty, and if you do grill them you'll discover that they go very fast, and people will want more. In addition to serving them grilled, you can make them into a tasty pasta sauce. To serve 4:

• 1 2/3 pounds (700 g) fresh sardines, cleaned
• 2/3 pound (300 g) penne or ziti, smooth sided or not as you prefer
• 2 cloves garlic, peeled and crushed
• A small hot pepper, crumbled
• 2 heaping tablespoons bread crumbs
• 6 tablespoons olive oil
• 1/2 teaspoon freshly chopped oregano
• Salt to taste

Remove the heads from the sardines and also their spines, being careful not to split them -- you want them to open like so many books. Gently rinse them and pat them dry.

Heat the olive oil over a gentle flame and slowly brown the garlic, taking care not to let it burn. When the oil is flavored, remove and discard the garlic. Next, turn the flame up and brown the breadcrumbs over a brisk flame, stirring in the pepper too. As soon as the bread crumbs are browned remove the pan from the fire. If you are perchance using dried oregano (just 1/4 teaspoon) add it now.

Set pasta water to boil, and while it is heating arrange the sardines on a grill and brush them with some of the bread crumb mixture.

Cook the pasta, and while it is cooking grill the sardines for about 8 minutes.

Drain the pasta, season it with the flavored oil and the fresh oregano, if that's what you have,, carefully incorporate the grilled sardines, and serve at once.

A wine? I might be tempted by a Frascati, and I'd follow the pasta with a more glamorous grilled fish.

This time's proverb is Roman: Beato quell'arbero che se pô ricoprì cco' le su' foje - Blessed is the tree that can cover itself with its own leaves.

Until next time,

Kyle Phillips
Editor, The Italian Wine Review
http://www.italianwinereview.com
Want to comment? Drop me a line at Kyle@cosabolle.com

PS -- Please forward this to anyone you think would enjoy it! If you would like to read past issues (nothing in them really gets stale), you'll find recent ones at Cosa Bolle.Com, http://www.cosabolle.com, and older ones at http://italianfood.about.com/blbol.htm.

Elections, More Montalcino, and More: Being the 148th issue of Cosa Bolle in Pentola

Greetings! The latest things on Italian Food are a look at how the Perini Family, which has a fine deli in Florence's Mercato di San Lorenzo, puts its food on display: if you work carefully you could do something similar the next time you hold a party, buffet, or cookout. Also, a look at some of the wines that impressed me the most at Vinitaly.

Le Elezioni

And though this naturally leads us towards Vinitaly, a quick aside on yesterday's election results. Mr. Berlusconi, the conservative businessman who was prime minister from 2000 to 2005 won handily, and will be leading a center-right to right wing coalition for the next 5 years.

The results are really not a surprise; Mr. Prodi's center-left coalition was a many headed thing that spent most of its time pulling in several different directions at once and got very little done.

Small wonder then, with the economy souring and a host of problems, that people should vote for change, though to be honest many of the problems Mr. Prodi failed to solve -- budget deficit, immigration issues, employment, housing and so on -- were inherited from the previous Berlusconi Government.

What is interesting, surprising even, is the complete collapse of the far left -- true communists, greens, and so on. They went from several senators and 20 congresspeople (including the Speaker of the House) in the former legislature to none at all this time, because the electoral law says -- to keep tiny parties from holding the majority hostage -- that to gain access to Parliament parties must get at least 4% of the vote. In 2005 the communists and greens got about 10%; this time they settled in at 3.5%. If they had spent less time squabbling and more governing, rather than behaving like the opposition (some of the radical MPs participated prominently in anti-government rallies), they might have gotten more votes.

Now the ball is in Mr. Berlusconi's court. The first test (of sorts) will be Alitalia; he said that if he won a group of Italian investors would emerge to save the troubled airline. We'll see if one does.

Vinitaly: Good, But Troubles Too

I enjoyed Vinitaly this year. It was a busy fair, but nowhere near as packed with people interested primarily in drinking as it has been in years past, and this made it much more productive for me. Troubles? They take the form of Velenitaly (PoisonItaly), the cover article L'Espresso, one of the major Italian weeklies, released on the day Vinitaly opened. The authors of the article weave together a scandal involving tainted very cheap jug wines that may or may not be poisonous, Brunello's problems, and several other things, some that are rather old, to unleash an indiscriminate blast at the Italian winemaking industry.

To be honest, I don't understand the logic behind the article, because wine is one of the few things that really works in Italy today. There are problems, and they need to be dealt with, but crude, sensationalist yellow journalism isn't the best way to go about it.

Especially not for a publisher that also puts out La Guida Dell'Espresso, one of the more respected Italian wine guides. The Guida's editor-tasters, who first heard about Velenitaly when they arrived at Vinitaly, all distanced themselves from the weekly's article while saying that the editors of the sister publication were independent and free to publish what they wanted. Enzo Vizzari (one of the Guida's editors) did, however, say he was profoundly disturbed (or something to that effect) by the Velenitaly article on his blog, which was hosted by L'Espresso. I say was and to that effect because following his comment the publisher shut the blog down, and now visitors to Vizzari's page (http://vizzari.blogautore.espresso.repubblica.it/) are greeted with "This user has elected to delete their account and the content is no longer available (in English)."

So much for editorial independence.

And this brings us to Brunello, the Continuing Saga
At Vinitaly I met with Lars Leicht, Banfi's Director of PR, who told me that yes indeed, Banfi is under investigation for fraud with respect to the 2003 vintage of Brunello, which they have been told to declassify. But not for having used non-Sangiovese grapes to make Brunello. Rather, for overcropping (producing more grapes per hectare than the Disciplinare governing Brunello production allows -- 80 quintals, or 8 metric tonnes), and this is where things become surreal and (to me) disturbing.

Banfi makes the Brunello in question from several vineyards located around the castle, and Lars told me the total yield of all the vineyards in question was less than the legal limit of 80 quintals/hectare. However, it was uneven, with some producing slightly less, and one slightly above. And that's what created the problems; the Prosecutor in Siena looked at the vineyard-by-vineyard yields, and even though the yield for the total vineyard area was within the limits set by the Disciplinare declared the entire production illegal because one vineyard produced more.

From a very narrow legalistic standpoint the man is right; yields should be below 80 quintals per hectare.

However, as Lars points out, vineyards are not precise factory environments. Vines produce grapes, and if left to their own devices produce lots, so the winemaker aims for a given per-hectare yield through vineyard management, which includes green harvesting and whatnot. While it's true that if one stays well under the maximum yield, one has no problems, doing so also costs money -- less wine = less income -- so people try to get close, and if this means averaging production, I see nothing wrong with that, provided total production doesn't exceed what would be allowed for a single vineyard of that area.

You may wonder, don't the vineyards that produce more grapes produce less quality? The answer is not necessarily. What is important is the production per individual vine, and if a producer has some older vineyards planted to a density of 4000 vines per hectare, and newer ones with vines planted to 8000 vines per hectare, the 80 quintals from the newer vineyard will be much better than the 80 quintals from the older vineyard because the older vineyard's vines are producing twice as much. 81 quintals from the new vineyard will probably be better than 65 from the older, and this is why I think the prosecutor is showing an excess of zeal in ordering that Brunello made from a series of vineyards whose average yield is less than 80 quintals/hectare be declassified because one parcel goes over.

"In the future we'll just aim for a maximum of 75 quintals/hectare; the wine will be better and we'll charge more for it," said Lars, and this brings up a second very important point about this investigation. The names that have come out so far are almost all large, but we've heard rumors to the effect that another 20-80 producers are under investigation, as is the Consorzio itself.

If these as-of-yet-unnamed producers are under investigation for using non-Sangiovese grapes in their Brunello, they should be prosecuted, because they're doctoring Brunello to appeal to market tastes (they could just as well label their "appealing" wine Sant'Antimo DOC, Montalcino's catchall appellation, but that doesn't sell as well as Brunello or for as much, which brings greed into the picture as well). Ditto if they're overcropping by a significant margin. But if they're under investigation for what Banfi is, the punishment -- having cellars sealed and being forced to declassify a vintage -- seems totally out of proportion with respect to the crime.

Especially in the case of small wineries; someone Banfi's size will be hurt by a forced declassification, but makes lots of other wines that are unaffected and will weather the storm. Forced declassification and cellar closure could (probably will) be a death knell for many smaller wineries, and if wineries are facing this despite staying within the limits set by the Disciplinare something is very wrong. Especially since Lars tells me the Consorzio has always told people to figure their production over their total vineyard area, and adds that as a result of this policy the Consorzio is now also under investigation too.

Bottom line: There are two things happening at Montalcino. On the one hand, some people cheated and got caught. On the other, people followed established practices and are getting ground up by an extremely narrow reading of the rules. The former should be punished, but the latter? I think not.

Budino di Fragole, Strawberry Pudding
Moving in a very different direction, the markets have been full of strawberries of late. It seems a little soon but it's nice to see them. While you can simply hull them and enjoy them, you can also do other things with strawberries, and this pudding, which Elisabetta and I made the other day, is very tasty and very easy. To serve 8:

• 1 1/8 pounds (500 g) strawberries, hulled
• 1 1/5 cups (300 ml) heavy cream, lightly whipped
• 1 cup (225 g) sugar
• 1/2 an ounce (15 g) fish gelatin in sheets, or gelatin sufficient to set 1 pint (500 ml) liquid
• Maraschino or other liqueur (optional, and we omitted it)
• A sprig or two of fresh mint, as garnish

Set the gelatin to soak in cook water, separating the sheets (if you are using another kind of gelatin follow the directions on the package).

Rinse the hulled strawberries and pat them dry. Set aside 3-4 of the prettiest ones to use as garnish, and blend the rest with 2 tablespoons sugar, and a tablespoon or two of the liqueur if you're using it..

Set aside 1/4 cup of the sugar, and mix the remainder with 1/4 cup water. Heat it to a boil and simmer stirring gently, until the mixture thickens and becomes syrupy, about 8-10 minutes.

Remove the syrup from the fire. Squeeze excess moisture from the sheets of gelatin, add them to the syrup, and stir gently until they have completely dissolved. Whisk the mixture into the blended strawberries, mix well, and let the mixture cool.

In the meantime whip the heavy cream with the remaining sugar; you want the cream to be airy and light, but not stiff.

Fold the whipped cream into the blended strawberries.

At this point you have a choice:

• You can fill 8 small molds with the pudding, if you want to serve individual portions.
• Or you can put all the pudding into a pint (500 ml, or slightly larger) ribbed mold. Chill the pudding in the refrigerator for several hours, or, better yet, overnight.

Come time to unmold the pudding, heat a pot of water you can dip the mold into. Let the water heat the mold for just a second (longer and the pudding will begin to melt and run). Cover the mold with your serving dish and flip the two together; the pudding will settle gracefully onto the serving dish (if it doesn't, dip the mold briefly again).

Decorate the pudding with slices of the reserved strawberries, sprigs of mint, and, if you want, a little more whipped cream. Serve at once, before it has time to start warming up.

This time's proverb is Tuscan: Le Disgrazie Sono Come Le Tavole Degli Osti -- Misfortune is like the hostler's table (which is always set).

Until next time,

Kyle Phillips
Editor, The Italian Wine Review
http://www.italianwinereview.com
Want to comment? Drop me a line at Kyle@cosabolle.com

PS -- Please forward this to anyone you think would enjoy it! If you would like to read past issues (nothing in them really gets stale), you'll find recent ones at Cosa Bolle.Com, http://www.cosabolle.com, and older ones at http://italianfood.about.com/blbol.htm.

Montalcino, Restorations and More: Being the 147th issue of Cosa Bolle in Pentola

Greetings! The latest on Italian Food are Leonardo Romanelli's Tiramisu recipe, which gets around the dangers posed by raw egg in a deceptively simple way: He makes a zabaione of the yolks and stirs them into the Mascarpone cheese to make a Mascarpone cream. See here for illustrated step-by-step instructions. The latest on the Italian Wine review is instead an overview of the 2004 Amarone, with the notes from the presentation held in Verona about a month ago. 2004 is a good vintage, and some of the wines are superb. More could be, and those that aren't offer an opportunity to reflect upon the effects of supply and demand. See here.

Rumblings in Montalcino
Supply and demand lead us straight to Montalcino, where those in charge are doing their best to keep the lid on an ominously rumbling pressure cooker, and this invites yet more reflection.

Why the rumbling? Rumors of counterfeit wines. Actually, they're more than rumors: Before Benvenuto Brunello a friend and colleague told me that a dinner guest of his had told him that a fairly large -- several hectare -- vineyard not planted to Sangiovese had been found in the course of an inspection of one of the major Brunello producers. This would have been fine had the vineyard been destined to the production of Sant'Antimo DOC, which is Montalcino's catchall appellation for wines that contain things other than Sangiovese. Unfortunately, the vineyard in question was "atto a Brunello," for the production of Brunello -- winemakers must declare what their vineyards are for -- and since Brunello can contain only Sangiovese that vineyard shouldn't have had other varietals. But it did, and the Magistratura (essentially the DA) launched a criminal investigation for fraud, which is ongoing, and -- rumor has it -- has expanded to include several other major producers, who also have non-Sangiovese varietals in their Brunello vineyards.

I hadn't mentioned this because the investigation is ongoing, and I didn't think it was worth saying much before the names were released and the charges were made public -- conjecture can and often does wildly exceed truth, and in the process do much harm. However, Franco Ziliani, who is always in the forefront when it comes to ferreting out problems of this kind, said on March 21:

"Insistent and worrisome rumors reach us from Montalcino, and also from Germany and Holland, to the effect that several wineries (4-5) have been seized after the discovery, by the NAS -- The Carabinieri's food fraud unit -- and the Guardie di Finanza -- the Revenue people -- of Puglian wine that was sold (or rather passed off) as Brunello di Montalcino.

"The charge is said to be the usual "frode in commercio e falso in atto pubblico", commercial fraud and public falsehood…" (translation mine, see here).

As one might expect, the effect of Franco's post was like kicking a hornet's nest; a great many other bloggers weighed in, many saying it's about time (there are always rumors of fraud, but they rarely come to much), and a few -- Franco quotes Wine Spectator's James Suckling -- saying that what's going on is driven by envy and will turn out to be a tempest in a teapot. Then, yesterday, La Repubblica, one of the major dailies, said in a short piece that fully a quarter of all Brunello might be at risk (what I said about conjecture…).

Faced with a mounting wave the Consorzio took the extraordinary step of sending out a blanket email informing us that since 2004, when they began inspecting member vineyards (in 2002 the Italian government charged the Appellations with making certain their members followed the rules), they have found 17 hectares of non-Sangiovese vines, in a total of 1667 hectares of Brunello vineyards inspected. Less than 1% of the total acreage is not what is should be.

On the one hand, this is reassuring: Most people are playing by the rules. On the other it is not, because we don't know how those acres are distributed. The occasional different vine in a vineyard planted to a density of 6-8000 vines/hectare can occur, because nurseries do make mistakes when they deliver (Marchesi Pancrazi's entire Pinot Nero vineyard, whose wines now win awards, was a mistake -- the nursery was supposed to deliver something else).

But I have the impression that the occasional mistake is not what we're talking about here -- it certainly wasn't in the case of the winery my friend mentioned months ago, because a several-hectare vineyard with the wrong vines is not the isolated Cabernet, Merlot, or even Colorino vine surrounded by legitimate Sangiovese vines. And while it's true that when cuttings (which look like sticks with a root grafted to them) are planted, one plants on faith, assuming the nursery supplied what it said it supplied, when said cuttings grow into vines and begin producing fruit, one can see what they are. And if they're the wrong thing, one rips them out and sues the nursery, or at the very least changes the designation of the vineyard. One doesn't continue declaring the vineyard to be a Brunello vineyard (and making "Brunello" from those grapes) when it no longer qualifies. Nor does one leave the isolated Cabernet or whatever vine there, because it doesn't belong and that's that. But is seems that some people have, and here's the rub.

Does this mean all Brunello is suspect? Certainly not, not any more than the persistent rumors one hears every year of Brunello (and other northern appellations including French) being cut with inky dark, concentrated, alcoholic wines from the south. Some winemakers will do it, and then the question becomes which, and why.

The which is easy: Winemakers, like everyone else, have all sorts of personalities. On one end of the spectrum are the upstanding who follow the rules. Because they're rules and serious people live by them. On the other are those people who are great fun at a party, but you wouldn't trust with your house keys. If the rules are convenient (for them) they follow them, and if they aren't they don't. The former's Brunello will be Sangiovese and nothing but no matter what the vintage was like, while the latter's may not be -- if they think they can work around the regulations to counter nature's adversity or get ahead they will, especially if they think they have to.

And this brings up the more interesting question, why would one cheat? After all, the risks are enormous, because if one is found out one is (ahem) screwed -- a sales rep who handles one of the wineries under indictment posted a comment on Franco's blog saying he's been told not to sell any of that winery's 2003 Brunello indefinitely.

The answer is multifaceted, and in part imponderable. In the case of a small winery, I can think of three reasons: Willingness to gamble, laziness/incompetence, and a desire to make "what the markets want;" with this latter factor becoming much more important for larger wineries.

To begin with the gambling, some people are simply willing to gamble. I don't understand it. Laziness/incompetence? A small winery that works well, and makes good wine, will always be able to find someone willing to buy the volume it produces. If it works less well, the owners may decided to cut corners, turning to outside help to get the concentration, color, or whatever they were unable to achieve on their own.

And this brings up "what the market wants." As I said, a small winery that makes good wine (of any style, from the traditional austerity to the most opulent starlet in a glass) will always find someone interested in purchasing it. A large winery that makes several times the volume of the smaller winery is in a much more difficult position, because it cannot wait for the impassioned wine merchant/importer to say "This is the wine I like and will sell to my customers!" It instead has to find many purchasers, and is therefore much more conscious of what the wine press speaks admiringly of, leading the vast mass of wine consumers to seek: Depth of color, concentration, power, smoothness of tannin, richness of fruit and so on. And if what's in the glass the large winery's enologist draws from the cask doesn't match what the press is favoring, he or she may well decide to make it so, with outside help (the owner or enologist of a small winery that wants high scores may also do this).

In other words, some winemakers of most every appellation -- Brunello producers are certainly not unique -- will bend the rules for a variety of reasons, and though some are more understandable than others, I don't approve of or condone any. I would venture that the winery my friend heard about at dinner was trying to make what it thinks consumers will like, because it has to move a lot of wine. And it's successful, because its wines get good ratings -- I've read them. This doesn't justify what the winery did, though I can understand why it did it, and I will be quite curious to see who else has gotten caught in the net.

And what would I suggest to people thinking about buying a Brunello? Traditionalists are much less likely to be involved in this sort of thing than innovators, for the simple fact that though full bodied, traditional Brunello is neither packed with color nor tremendously concentrated. With this in mind, I'd say the same thing I've been saying all along: 2002 and 2003 were very poor vintages, and there aren't many wines I would consider buying of either. 2001 and 1999 are vastly superior (of the sort there would have been much less pressure to "correct;" the incriminated wines are said to be 2003) with many very good wines to be enjoyed. If you have read my notes, you'll know what I said I would look for at the vintage presentations, and I think I would continue to look for the same wines now. In particular, see here for the 2001 Brunello, and here for the 2001 Brunello Riserva.

On Cleaning Paintings
Moving in a very different direction, you may recall the tremendous controversy engendered by the Vatican Museum's decision to clean and restore Michelangelo's frescos in the Sistine Chapel. A great many art historians/critics wailed that the frescos would be ruined forever, and we were much better off looking at them darkened by centuries of grime. Some even went so far as to suggest that Michelangelo may have put a wash of grime up there to tone down the colors. While I have my doubts about this -- the Renaissance was known for lavishness, and I can't see people who enjoyed lavish lives wanting to tone down their paintings -- one thing people really didn't talk about was the fact that the frescos had already been restored or touched up several times, and a respectful cleaning using techniques and equipment of a sort unthinkable even 50 years ago could give us a much better idea of what Michelangelo actually painted, and his patrons saw (Daniele da Volterra's Braghe, or undies, added to Michelangelo's naked figures by order of the Counterreformational Congregation of Trent in 1564, were but the first of many additions made to the frescos ). The truth of the matter is that very few old paintings have escaped restoration at some point.

And that's what makes Vasari's Pala Albergotti so interesting. It's a large panel depicting the Assumption and Crowning of the Virgin, with Saints Donato and Francesco to the sides, and a number of smaller panels with facial portraits surrounding the major composition, which Vasari delivered to Filippo Salviati in 1567. Salviati had it placed in a chapel of the convent of the Suore di San Vincenzo in Prato. In 1570 Nerozzo Albergotti purchased it for 200 Scudi, as Vasari notes in his diary -- exactly how the transaction came about is unclear -- and took it to Arezzo, where he had it placed in his family's chapel in the Pieve di Santa Maria. There it remained until 1865, when the Church fathers decided to restore the Pieve and moved the painting to the Church of Santa Flora for safekeeping. The restoration was radical enough that the Albergotti chapel was ripped out (to reveal what was older) and therefore Nerozzo's painting remained undisturbed in Santa Flora until quite recently, when the parishioners and Don Soldani, the Parish Priest, decided to get it cleaned.

It didn't take long for the restorers they hired to realize they were the first to have worked on the painting since Vasari, and they therefore had something unique in their hands, which offered an unparalleled opportunity to study the painting technique of a Renaissance Master without the filters applied by subsequent generations of restorers. Rather than rush forward, they have studied the work at length, and will be holding a conference that promises to draw restorers from all over.

Just a reminder that even the smallest parish church in Italy can hide an unexpected treasure. The restoration, we were told, will likely take a year -- if you visit Santa Flora now you will find Vasari's painting hidden behind the walls of a tent erected in the church -- and I eagerly await the opportunity to see it next year, once again looking the way it did when it captured Nerozzo's attention and admiration.

Pastissada di Manzo
Winding down, Pastissada is an old Veronese stew that draws from Austro-Hungarian tradition (Verona was a part of the Empire for a long time) and brings goulash to mind. Most of the recipes I've seen call for horsemeat, but this one is beef-based, and might be nice with an Amarone. To serve 6:

• 2 1/4 pounds (1 k) boneless beef; I would be tempted by the rump

For the marinade:

• 1 onion, finely sliced
• A carrot, peeled and diced
• 2 ribs celery, diced
• 2 cloves (the spice, not garlic)
• A teaspoon of powdered cinnamon
• A spring or two of rosemary
• A bottle of dry red wine, e.g. Valpolicella
• Peppercorns to taste
• Salt

Come time to cook:

• 2 ounces (60 g) cured lard or pancetta, cut into matchsticks
• 1 tablespoon tomato paste diluted in a little hot water

Put the meat in a bowl, together with the chopped vegetables, herbs, spices, and finally the wine. Marinate the meat for at least a day, turning it occasionally. Come time to cook it, remove it from the marinade and pat it dry. Make several thin punctures in it and slip the matchsticks of lard into them to baste the meat from the inside as it cooks.

While you're preparing the meat, heat the marinade in a saucepot big enough to comfortably hold the meat. Add the lardoned meat to the pot, together with the tomato paste diluted in warm water, cover, and simmer for about 2 hours, turning the meat every now and again.

When the meat is dome remove it, slice it, and set the pieces on a warmed serving dish. While you're doing this, cook the pan drippings down some over a fairly brisk flame, and blend them. Spoon the sauce over the meat and serve at once. Accompaniments? Polenta, and greens or spinach wilted in a pot, squeezed somewhat dry, and sautéed in a little olive oil with a clove of crushed garlic and salt and pepper to taste.

This time's proverb is from the Veneto: A chi che no ghe piase el vin , che Dio ghe toga anca l'aqua: May God leave he who doesn't like wine without water, too.

Until next time,

Kyle Phillips
Editor, The Italian Wine Review
http://www.italianwinereview.com
Want to comment? Drop me a line at Kyle@cosabolle.com

PS -- Please forward this to anyone you think would enjoy it! If you would like to read past issues (nothing in them really gets stale), you'll find recent ones at Cosa Bolle.Com, http://www.cosabolle.com, and older ones at http://italianfood.about.com/blbol.htm.

Vintage Impressions, Cézanne & More: Being the 130th issue of Cosa Bolle in Pentola

Greetings!
To begin with the sites, I've been doing housekeeping and adding a few recipes to Italian Cuisine, but nothing really fundamental. For the latest, see http://italianfood.about.com. On the Italian Wine Review, I've posted my reactions to Casanova di Neri's Cerretalto, which was one of the most distinctive Brunelli poured at the Brunello presentation held last week. And, while I'm at it, need to make a correction. I Initially said last year's Cerretalto was Wine Spectator's wine of the year. A mistake, because Casanova di Neri did win the award, but with the 2001 Tenuta Nuova Brunello. The next time someone tells me something of this sort I will verify it before I repeat it, but in the meantime the mistake is mine and mine alone.

Addio Aurelio
Next, some sad News: Aurelio Settimo, who founded the winery that bears his name in La Morra in the 60s, has left us. I always enjoyed his wines, his Barolo especially, and he will be missed. Condolences to his daughter Tiziana, in whose capable hands the winery now is, and to her family.
Franco Ziliani has written a nice farewell, in Italian alas.


Chianti Classico, Nobile, and Brunello: Preliminary Thoughts
I spent much of last week tasting the new releases of Chianti Classico, Nobile di Montepulciano, and Brunello di Montalcino, and as always it was a fascinating experience.

We began with Chianti Classico.
This was the largest of the tastings, with more than 300 wines being poured. This is much more than I can hope to do well in the two days we were allotted, so I decided to taste mostly Chianti Classico D'Annata, the vintage wine. Some producers were presenting their 2005 vintage, and others their 2004, so that's what I had. I'll discuss how I selected which wines to taste when I put up the tasting notes, but wanted to say a few things about the vintages.

2005 was, well, Tart: Bright, lively, and acidic also come to mind as descriptors, as do scrappy and light. It was a wet, cool summer, and the wines are neither as full, nor as concentrated, nor as balanced as better vintages. This said, it wasn't anywhere near as wet or as cold as 2002, and though the wines are light, I found many to have a pleasing brambly grace to them. It's not a memorable vintage, at least for the quickly released Chianti Classico D'Annata, but these are eminently drinkable wines that will work very well with foods -- they're the classic bottles you set out while your diners are passing the platter of grilled meats around, and by the time the platter is making its second round, the bottle's empty and you need to set out another.

2004 is a very different animal. The wines are a year older, and therefore have that much more maturity and poise, but the vintage was also better, with more sun and warmth that led to greater ripeness and concentration; the resulting wines are quite elegant, with beautiful balance and poise, and though they will drink very well with foods now -- slightly less rich fare than the 2005 -- they will also age nicely for several year. In other words, it's a vintage to look out for.

Next, Nobile di Montpulciano.
They're coming off two very difficult vintages -- 2002 and 2003 -- so I was quite curious to see what 2004 would bring. The vintage, like the 2004 Chianti Classico vintage, was much better balanced, and as a result differences in winemaking philosophy were readily apparent. In particular, there seem to be two currents in Montepulciano at present; one that is fairly traditional (for want of a better term), which produces lively, elegant wines with ripe red berry fruit, brisk (but not overpowering) acidity, and a vibrant tannic structure to provide support. These wines I found quite elegant, and think they will become very nice with time. In short, something to seek out, and set aside.

The other winemaking current is, well, I wouldn't call it international, but rather soft: Big, strongly extracted wines that are extremely soft, with overripe fruit flavors (in many cases very overripe) and tannins that are ample and lax. There is acidity in some of the wines, and where present it does provide direction, but in many cases the direction is more tannic, and derives in large part from wood. These wines feel very much like the 2003 vintage, when the summer heat and dryness cooked the grapes, but the conditions weren't like that in 2004. So it's a conscious decision on the part of the winemakers to work with very ripe grapes, perhaps in pursuit of greater extraction and color. If you like the style you will like them, but I found them to be too soft and too settled, and also fear that they won't age well for long.

And finally, Brunello di Montalcino.
Here we had the 2002 Brunello, and the 2001 vineyard selections. Since I liked the 2001 vintage I tasted last year, I began with the vineyard selections, and tasted through them all. As one might expect, there were highs and lows, but my overall impression was quite positive. There are some excellent wines to be had, and they will age very well. In other words, fine wines for special occasions.

The 2002 vintage is a very different story: A few of the largest producers, who could pick through a large volume of grapes to make a small volume of bottles, produced acceptable wines, as did a small number of small producers. But the vast majority of the winemakers would have done well to follow the lead of the few who decided just to make Rosso in 2002.

Put simply, the 2002 Brunello di Montalcino is a wine that's Non all'Altezza, as Italians say -- it doesn't meet the standard. Sample after sample was lacking in fruit, presented unusual, in some cases off-putting aromas, lacked structure, or presented combinations of structure and aroma that were frankly improbable -- overripe fruit, for example, which only makes sense when you realize that the laws governing Italian winemaking allow what's known as a taglio migliorativo: winemakers can blend up to 15% of one or more other vintages of a given wine into a specific vintage of said wine to shore it up. For example, one could add 1997 and 2001 to the 2005, and here I suspect many producers tried to shore up their weak 2002 wines with a robust shot of 2003. Unfortunately 2003 has a different set of problems -- it was a very hot, dry vintage that yielded many heat-struck wines -- and combining the two vintages simply made a wine with two sets of problems rather than one.

The bottom line is that the winemakers who took everything that was supposed to be 2002 Brunello and sold it as Rosso di Montalcino probably had the right idea; I did find a few wines that were pleasant -- wines made by people who didn't try to compensate for Nature's stinginess with oak, concentrators, or other-vintage additions -- but they tended to be uniformly light, and not what one expects from what should be the flagship of Tuscan appellations, if not of all Italian appellations.

I'm sorry to come down so hard on the vintage, but if I were to fork over a hefty sum for a 2002 Brunello (there is some talk of reducing the prices, but not by much) I would be tremendously disappointed. And if I had no other experience with the wine, after buying a bottle of 2002 I would also write it off as completely overblown.

Fortunately, the 2001 Brunello is still here to enjoy, and if you should happen upon a bottle of 1999, that vintage is shaping up to be spectacular.

Cézanne: The Master was once very Florentine
Not because he came to Florence -- when the French artistic elite failed to understand him in the late 1870s, he retired to Provence, where he lived in isolation, and died an embittered old man in 1906 -- but because a couple of wealthy Americans who lived in Florence were the first to recognize his genius, and assembled the most important early collections of his work. Their names were Charles Loeser and Egisto Paolo Fabbri, and while Charles is primarily remembered for his collecting, Egisto's story is more interesting:

Egisto's father and his uncle (also called Egisto) left Florence for the US in 1848, and while Egisto's father was moderately successful, his Uncle Egisto became a friend and associate of J. Pierpont Morgan, with a 15% holding in the Bank. When Uncle Egisto retired in 1885 he decided to return to Florence, and brought the family with him -- his brother was dead, but he had a sister-in-law and many nieces and nephews. Some of the nieces married Italian nobles (one became Marchesa Antinori), while the younger Egisto, who had already painted with Weir, La Farge, and others in the US, continued to paint, and moved to Paris with his sister Ernestine, where both studied with Pissarro.

Egisto also met the great dealer, Henri-Louis Ambrose Vollard. Vollard had paintings by Cézanne: Egisto bought all he could, 16 between 1896 and 1899, and even tried to visit the old man, who said no, but expressed astonishment that someone should like his work so much.

Egisto returned to Florence with his paintings following the death of Stephanie, his model and companion, and hung the works in the dining room. Both he and Mr. Loeser were quite jealous of their Cézannes, showing them only to those they thought would appreciate them (Charles kept his in his bedroom, and a young Winston Churchill, who also painted, didn't understand them).

Following the recognition of Cézanne's importance as the father of modern painting in 1907 (the year after his death) interest in the American collections in Florence increased, and both Charles and Egisto lent their works to shows, in particular the first major show dedicated to the Impressionists, held in Florence in 1910.

People's priorities change with time, however, and in the 20s Egisto converted to Catholicism and withdrew to the town of Serravalle, not far from La Verna, where Saint Francis received his Stigmata: He rebuilt the Parish church, helped the townspeople, and established a school of Gregorian chant that is still with us today. Important things, but expensive too, and to finance his projects he sold much of his art, including his Cézannes. Charles instead left his to the White House (Jackie Kennedy especially liked one), and by 1950 just about all had trickled away.

A lot has come back, now, albeit briefly, in a show entitled Cézanne a Firenze, which has just opened in Palazzo Strozzi, and will continue until July 29. Though there aren't as many Cézannes as there once were (they've brought together 22 in all), it's a fascinating show, because they also explore the personalities of the collectors, especially Egisto, with a number of works by his American teachers and contemporaries, and also several of his paintings, which are technically well done, though it's obvious that he was a follower more than an innovator (it's also interesting to see that despite his love of Cézanne he wasn't particularly influenced by him, while his sister instead copied one, and her copy is here too).

Egisto makes obvious sense, while Pissarro, the impressionist Cézanne was closest to, and with whom he painted before returning to Aix-En-Provence, is a pleasant surprise: His paintings are beautiful, and help remind us what Cézanne's impressionist contemporaries were up to -- to a degree working more with light than the volumes Cézanne finally concentrated on. And finally, there are several paintings by the Macchiaioli, the Italian -- Tuscan, especially -- contemporaries of the Impressionists. The word macchia means spot, and their work does bear a superficial resemblance to the Impressionists, in the way they dabbed and spread the color onto their canvasses, but their interests were different, and much more centered on capturing the human condition -- farmers in the fields, the aftermath of battle, bringing the cattle home, and so on. Oh yes, there's also a portrait of a gardener by Van Gough, which was owned by Ardengo Soffici, a Tuscan poet and critic, and which was, like the Cézannes, not understood by the Florentines who saw it in the 1910 show mentioned above.

Bottom line: I'm not sure I would make a special trip to see this show. However, if I was already planning to visit Florence, I would make certain I saw it. It opens several windows onto the past, all fascinating.

For more information, see the show's site, http://www.cezanneafirenze.it

I had planned to do more, but this has gone quite long enough.

This time's proverb is Tuscan: All'entrar ci vuol disegno, all'uscir denari o pegno -- You get involved (with something) by choice, but to get out costs money or sacrifice.

Kyle Phillips
Editor, The Italian Wine Review
http://www.italianwinereview.com
Want to comment? Drop me a line at Kyle@cosabolle.com