The article recounts how sommelier Erica O'Neal has eliminated the step of pouring a taste for the restaurant guest; after presenting the bottle to the diner, she takes the wine away, opens it, tastes herself to test for quality, and then brings it back to the table to pour.
This may sound like a pretty minute change, but it elicits strong reactions from the customers in the article and NYT readers in the comments. The question at play: should we eliminate elements of traditional wine service if they seem pointless or outdated?
On the one hand, O'Neal argues, the tasting of the bottle is often an awkward moment: the diner doesn't know what to taste for, the conversation has to come to a standstill. She says, "I don't want to put my guests in the position of having to guess whether a wine is corked."
Others argue that the point of the tasting moment is giving the consumer a chance to change the order if he/she dislikes the wine. O'Neal believes in that choice but not in the moment: "“I’ve found it’s actually easier for guests to talk about whether they like the wine without the ritual.” Eric Asimov, the author of the article and NYT chief wine critic, commends the attempt of making people feel more comfortable with wine.
For what it's worth, I have never felt particularly uncomfortable with the tasting moment at a restaurant but also don't think it's a meaningful one - I've never sent the bottle back. I honestly am not sure it makes much of a difference to the dining experience. What do you think - would you miss this step, do you enjoy the ritual, would you appreciate skipping it?
https://www.nytimes.com/2017/02/13/dining/should-restaurants-offer-guests-that-first-taste-of-wine.html
No comments:
Post a Comment