When it comes to the subject of matching
food and wine, there are some striking differences of opinions among wine lovers. For
convenience, I've generalised these stances into four categories: the nihilist, the
legalist, the anarchist and the pragmatist. Which are you?
The nihilist: it's all a load of nonsense
This is probably the most extreme position, and, yes, I do know some fairly serious wine
lovers who take this view, even though it is probably only a minority. These people think
that all writing about food and wine matching is just a lot of hot air; that the whole
subject is a nonsense because most of the time they drink wine on its own, and when they
do drink it with a meal they don't put food and wine into their mouths at the same time. I
disagree. I really do think that the highest purpose for a wine is for it to be matched
with appropriate food, and that synergistic combinations do exist between food and wine
where each brings out the best in the other.
The legalist: it's an exact science, with a full set of rules
The traditional position, as espoused by the classic works of writers such as Hugh
Johnson. In some books you'll even find whole chapters devoted to outlining the best wine
matches for a surprisingly elaborate list of foodstuffs. This can appear quite
intimidating! Personally, I think such lists are unnecessarily prescriptive, and too
restrictive. Also, these lists are almost exclusively focused on old world classic wines
and don't take into account the new world options now available, many of which make superb
food matches.
The anarchist: tear up the rule book -- anything goes
This is becoming the trendy position, and has been adopted by quite a few wine writers
desperate not to appear stuffy and conventional. If you want to drink red wine with fish,
fine, they say. Or if you want to drink Sauvignon Blanc with steak, that's OK too. But
this is poor advice. Some boundaries are helpful. As in music and painting, it's only when
you have learned the rules that you can break them successfully. This certainly applies to
wine and food matching: a solid grounding in the basic principles may then enable you to
make the odd audacious pairing and actually pull it off.
The pragmatist: few really bad matches, few really good ones
Surprise, surprise! This is the position I'm going to speak out for. I think there are
some guiding principles in food and wine matching that act as helpful foundations. For
example, white wines are generally better with fish, and red wines pair best with red
meats. You know the sort of thing. Having said this, as long as you aren't flouting the
foundational rules, you'll probably find that there are few really bad wine and food
matches, but plenty of adequate ones and many good ones. From this, it follows that there
are few exceptional matches, but the fact that there are some makes the hunt for
these sublime, synergistic pairings an exciting and worthwhile pursuit.
And finally
One more area where there are divergent opinions concerns the respective quality levels of
the food and wine partners. A common view is that it is necessary to choose which is to be
the star, the food or the wine. According to this view, fine wines are best matched with
relatively simple dishes that lack strong competing flavours; conversely, dishes with
complex character need to be matched with simpler wines. I've certainly experienced
occasions where the strongly flavoured foods have all but overwhelmed the fine wines I've
been drinking with the meal. The contrasting view is that the best should be matched with
the best: fine wines need to be accompanied by first-rate food. This is a view I have some
sympathy for: excellent food and excellent wines have a natural affinity. So I'll sit on
the fence