The last Saturday of April is unlike any other day, and little preps us more for the arrival of spring than the drive along Highway 100 on a sunny afternoon, the dogwood and redbud flashing their red, white and pink rays through the foliage flanking the highway from the I-44 junction to Hermann, where the annual 10-year Norton tasting awaits at Stone Hill Winery.
The Held family, which operates Stone Hill, has been doing this for 20 years; I’ve been fortunate enough to attend the large majority, and it’s always a fascinating experience. Norton, Missouri’s best red-wine grape (we think it’s the best of all the native American red grapes), bears the Latin name of Vitis aestivalis, as contrasted with the classic European grapes like Chardonnay, Cabernet Sauvignon and others which fall into the Vitis vinifera category.
The recent tasting involved the vintages from 1998 through 2007, and the release of the 2005 from the storage room to the sales counter. The 2006 (more on that potentially superb wine later) still is in bottles and will remain there another year for aging. The 2007 rests in its barrels.
Besides the opportunity to taste 10 Nortons, the event is a great party and a sales opportunity. The crowd – a sellout almost every year – is in a party mood when it arrives, or swoops into one very soon thereafter, fueled by sparkling wine and hors d’oeuvres. The crisp, dry sparklers, both excellent, were a blanc de blancs (all white grapes) that was a blend of Vidal Blanc and Chardonel, and a rose from a blend of Vidal Blanc and Chambourcin.
Attendance includes wine experts, wine writers, wine sellers, wine collectors, wine drinkers and folks who belong to other groups. Long tables hold a vast array of sparkling glasses, 10 for each guest plus a water glass and one holding whatever a guest has brought in from outside.
Informality and expectancy are the moods of the day. Patty Held and her brothers, Jon and Thomas, along with Dave Johnson, the winemaker for the last two decades, salute founding owners Jim and Betty Held, then tell stories, welcome the crowd, discuss the state of the 2008 grapes and the result of the 2007 harvest, crippled during an Easter Weekend frost massacre, but showing some wine from second growth grapes. Johnson delivered a Power-Point presentation (boy, has the Missouri wine industry changed in the 35 years I’ve been covering it) about growth and process. We talked about the wines over dinner, and Johnson reported that except for some tweaking here and there because of weather conditions, earlier or later ripening and picking times and a few other considerations, the Norton is made mostly the same from year to year. The aging barrels contain more American oak today than they used to, partly because of prices, but Norton remains Norton, with the rich, deep, Rhone Valley type flavors I’ve always found in it.
And the Nortonians chatted and gossiped and discussed the 10 vintages they were drinking. Afterward, drinkers vote. The Held family takes count, rather casually. One raised hand signifies a vote, two raised hands signify two votes, and are counted as such. If it’s noticed by the judges, fervent nodding of the head may result in a third vote.
I vote, too, but my thoughts were in major disagreement with the other people, at least according to the Helds’ count.
My favorite was the 2004, the wine that was released at last year’s tasting. I thought it had the freshness and full flavor of a young wine, with blackberry notes and lots of fruit, reminiscent of a youthful Zinfandel; at the same time, it had dark notes behind it, and a firmness and strength of tannin that indicated it would continue to improve for 4-6 years before leveling off. I thought it was the best of the 21st century, and the best since the glorious 1994.
The popular vote ranked it seventh, while the winner was 2000, which I found very good, but not great, and perhaps even a couple of steps over the hill.
The order of finish from there, with the popular choice in parentheses following mine, was
2nd: 2006 (2005)
3rd: 2003 (2002)
4th: 2005 (1998)
5th: 2002 (1999)
6th: 2000 (2001)
7th: 2001 (2004)
8th: 1999 (2006)
9th: 2007 (2007)
10th: 1998 (2003).
And what does it all mean? That I know more about wine than the voters that day? That I know less about wine than the voters that day?
Means nothing. Means different people have different taste buds, and experiences, and preferences. If I don’t like a wine that Robert Parker honors with 100, all it means is that he prefers that particular wine. My taste buds and my neural pathways are as good as his, and yours are as good as those of both of us. Don’t be intimidated because someone likes a wine better than you do, or vice versa. Two pieces of advice, given often: Keep track of the wines you like, and order them. Keep track of the wines you don’t like, and don’t order them.
And why did I rank the wines in the order I did? Here goes.
2006: I think this will be a great wine in a year or two, perhaps the best of this group. It has fruit, and balance, and backbone, and good tannin qualities to help it age. 2003: I think this will be a great wine in a year or two, perhaps the best of this group. It has fruit, and balance, and backbone, and good tannin qualities to help it age. 2005: The newest release, now available, has hints of blueberry and other soft fruit. Ready to drink now, but will be more fun next year. 2002: Very full-bodied, with blackberry in the aroma and plum jam in the smooth, elegant finish.2000: This rich, powerful, fruit-forward example of Norton is at its best right now. Some clove in the aroma. If there’s any in your cellar, drink it by Thanksgiving, when it will help the turkey.
2001: Dark cherries in the aroma, and a great deal of fruit remains, but the finish is shorter than it should be. Drink now. 1999: A surprising amount of tannin for a wine this old, but that’s what has helped it remain viable for almost a decade. A tobacco note in the finish. 2007: The survivor of last spring’s awful freeze is largely an unknown quantity, since it still is in barrel. There’s certainly a curiosity factor, and the Norton flavor shows through, but. . . . 1998: Brown edges on the wine in the glass and an almost rusty color are warnings that this is over the hill, but the port-like quality is interesting. As noted above, tastes are different.
–Joe