WTN: Bordeaux 2004 - Part II - Giscours

Part I - Clerc Milon

Château Giscours 2004 Margaux 13% 38,50€ 3ème Cru Classé

This is a property that I haven't really liked in the past. They have seemed rather overdone and a touch more modern in style than I would prefer (2001-2003) or just plain uninteresting and dry with too few redeeming qualities (1994-1997). I haven't had the years in between.

The 2004 is the best of what I've had from them. If you'll permit a slight deviation from my typically Zoroastrian view of the wine-world, this isn't a modernist nor a traditionally styled Claret. The nose is rather oaky - not something I like, but not a flaw either in young Claret if it doesn't obscure all else. In this wine, the chocolatey oak does not obscure all else, yet it still seems a bit obvious. There is some nice, typically Margaux IMO, red toned berries and cassis underneath the oak. It is nicely lifted and savoury.

The palate has nice acids, yet is perhaps a touch overdone and -extracted and -oaked. But it does have the loveliest highish acidity!

I understand that the wine writers of days gone by were criticised for writing notes which personified wines. I think that a flawed analogy will work best with this wine however: It seems like a foolish teenager that uses too much make up at the moment. It might mature to a beautiful woman (as what is underneath the makeup is very pretty indeed) if she learns to use the makeup properly. We'll see...

Inspired by the recent thread on vegetarian foods and red wine, I tried this with Falafal. Falafal is very meaty, so this might be cheating, but it worked rather well. I didn't make the falafal very strong (herbal yes, but not hot), so though it may not have enhanced the wine it was very pleasant with it. And that is success enough for me.

-Otto-

[David M. Bueker]

Sounds lovely. I'm about to receive my 2004s in the next few days/weeks, so I will have a note or three as well.

Sounds lovely. I'm about to receive my 2004s in the next few days/weeks, so I will have a note or three as well.

Look forward to them! The few '04s I've so far had seem classically styled for a change which makes me hope that this will be, like '88, '94 and '01, a vintage that will provide many pleasurable wines for my tastes. I love Bordeaux very much, but I do feel like a betrayed lover considering what so many recent vintages have produced.

-O-

[David M. Bueker]

It's not the fault of the Bordelais that the weather has been warm recently. Considering that 1998, 1999, 2001, 2002 and 2004 have all shown significant classical charm, we have it pretty good as Bordeaux lovers.

It's not the fault of the Bordelais that the weather has been warm recently. Considering that 1998, 1999, 2001, 2002 and 2004 have all shown significant classical charm, we have it pretty good as Bordeaux lovers.

Very true. But for some reason the '98s, '99s and '02s just haven't appealed to me as much as '01s and now the couple '04s. It is possibly a reflection of what is imported here, possibly a larger trend, likely a mix of the two, but I also find the s-word becoming more widespread post '88. The '02s that we had up North tasted unclassical, as did our '99s. I got lucky with the '01s available and the couple '04s. A bad selection is to blame, hence my singling out other vintages. So I should probably have said that I feel like a betrayed lover based upon what I have managed to taste.

[David M. Bueker]

If by the s-word you mean the sp-word then it's even more likely to my mind that you just don't care for warmer vintage Bordeaux instaad of the way it's produced. '89 was very warm, as was '90, so your post-88 comment at least rings true.

2002 is very classical to my taste (and the guys on BWE - I know you know them). Have you had the 2002 Sociando-Mallet or Leoville Barton?

Of course I like Leoville Poyferre, so we do diverge somewhat.

If by the s-word you mean the sp-word then it's even more likely to my mind that you just don't care for warmer vintage Bordeaux instead of the way it's produced. '89 was very warm, as was '90, so your post-88 comment at least rings true.

Indeed. I have a dirty little secret I feel I should share - I'm not really all that fond of 2000s! Pichon-Lalande was lovely, but I don't think I have any others cellared. 1990 is similarily a vintage of which I love Lagrange, but haven't bought any others. Warm vintages are not my thing. I have a feeling, which I must confirm or debunk by more extensive tasting, that it is the combination of several hot vintages and an increase in sp-ing and the selection available here and my limited opportunities in ordering samples from abroad that have made me disillusioned with the area.

2002 is very classical to my taste (and the guys on BWE - I know you know them). Have you had the 2002 Sociando-Mallet or Leoville Barton?

Of course I like Leoville Poyferre, so we do diverge somewhat.

Some of the 2002s have been nice (Mouton and Lunch Bags if you like their style were superb), but I preferred their 2001 counterparts. It is classical - and as I have stated some time in the past, I give any explanation as to why I prefer 2001s. I would love to have a tasting of my favourite properties in these two vintages to see what exactly is my reason for my preference. Unfortunately I haven't tasted some of my favourite properties in '02: the two you mention and VCC and Pichon Lalande are untasted.

I guess since you liked Leo-Poy our tastes do indeed differ in that you seem to tolerate "modern" Bx styles better than I can. There are some properties (like the Giscours '04) which have obvious leanings toward the "modern" style which I still like, but the Leo Poy I found quite offensive in its dilliness and overt Rollandyness. So far the only Rolland wine I've liked is Beauséjour-Bécot 2001.

-Geshtin-