As I already had the opportunity to explain in question 18 (Do biodynamic wines age better?) I am convinced that wines produced biodynamically are generally more alive, and therefore more sensitive than wines produced conventionally. For me, more sensitive means more receptive to external influences such as the seasons, the weather, the moon, the place, the people, and so on.
Is this a quality or a fault? Does ‘more sensitive’ also mean more fragile? It is up to you to form your own opinion. Even if the social norm in France has, for a long time, confirmed the contrary, as far as I am concerned, sensitivity is a great quality. This could be said for human beings as well as for wines!
At this point I would like to go into detail on one aspect of sensitivity. In general, when you hear about a moody person, especially when it has to do with a woman, reference to the moon or to the lunar cycle is never far away. Don’t we talk about someone being a ‘lunatic’? So how does wine react to the lunar cycle? Intrigued by this question, over the course of one year I paid particularly close attention when tasting the 2007 vintage during its ageing at Domaine Leflaive. Nearly every day, sometimes twice a day, with various clients I tasted all the wines from the vat. Then, I routinely consulted the sowing calendar (biodynamic lunar calendar) to compare it with my tasting assessments. It was particularly interesting to conduct this experiment with wines in vat for two reasons: Firstly, the wines are much more free and alive in vat than in bottle where they are confined. Secondly, in a vat of over 2,000 litres I could taste the same wine from the same container every day, whereas wine in a bottle that has been open for several days evolves quickly upon contact with air. And, if I open another bottle, there is already a difference as it is not exactly the same container.
Undoubtedly you are already familiar with one of the biodynamic methods for describing the influence of the moon. There are four types of day: Fruit, Root, Flower, Leaf (see question 9: What is the planting calendar and what is its purpose?). These correspond to each element (Fire, Earth, Wind, Water) of the constellation in front of which is the moon, which allows a winegrower to focus their agricultural work on the cultivated plant itself. The calendar is based on work by the German biodynamic researcher Maria Thun (who died in 2012) and her son, Matthias Thun (The Biodynamic Sowing and Planting Calendar, Floris Books). A small booklet also exists in English which uses these results for wine tasting (When wine tastes best: a biodynamic calendar for wine lovers, Floris Books) and even, more recently, an iPhone application (Wine tonight?). The booklet explains that Fruit and Flower days are best for wine and that Root and Leaf days should be avoided. It is a bit too simplistic and the following is what I have been able to personally observe. The calendar days do not always have a noticeable influence on tasting, but every time I noticed a significant influence, it was always in line with the lunar calendar.
Fruit day: the vine is grown for its fruit and a Fruit day is naturally the most favourable day for work in the vineyard and the winery, as well as for tasting. The wine is generally very expressive and open aromatically, with a harmonious balance on the palate.
Root day: this type of day was found to be rather unfavourable as the wine can show itself to be a bit muted, as it is rather closed aromatically, particularly on the nose. In the palate the wine can also be quite closed and reveal the structure. Thus it may seem austere and hard. But for wines from great terroir which must naturally have good structure, it is a type of day that can be interesting as the minerality is very discernible.
Flower day: this type of day is generally favourable to tasting as the wine is very expressive, sometimes even more open on the nose than on a Fruit day. You should nonetheless be cautious as I have noticed that Flower days tend to exacerbate whatever is delicate and volatile: certainly the aromas, but also alcohol and volatile acidity (a sharp odour similar to that of vinegar). This seems especially to affect very rich wines, sweet wines, or those having undergone very long barrel maturation.
Leaf day: this type of day is usually unfavourable to tasting, and should even be avoided altogether as it only displays unpleasant elements in the aromas and the structure of the wine. Such elements evoke vegetative matter: vegetal on the nose and a lack of elegance, hardened acidity and the impression of underripeness. For rich wines with low acidity, there can be a bitter sensation, as well as harsh tannins for reds.
Each lunar influence generally lasts two or three consecutive days, and there appears to be a cumulative effect. A Flower influence, for example, is much more evident after two days than at the beginning of the period (the initial hours) when the influence from the preceding period can still be felt.
Observing lunar influence is fascinating, but we should not become overly dependent on it. In organising a successful tasting this is only one aspect of the environment among many to be taken into account: serving temperature, the general atmosphere, the type of food served, guests’ tastes, the personality of the terroir, vintage characteristics … Rather than classifying the days as good or bad, you should grasp the subtle interactions among all the elements. This is what constitutes the know-how of a great sommelier. Regarding the wines of Puligny-Montrachet, for example, a Root day suits a vintage such as 2006 very well: a rich, opulent, expressive vintage, with low acidity. On the other hand, for a Flower day, I would choose a wine from the 2007 vintage: cool vintage, very tight, good minerality, and somewhat closed in its youth.
And so one can say: this wonderful sensitivity is lost today in modern, overly rigid wines produced by chemical agriculture, but reclaimed in biodynamically produced wines. This sensitivity has always existed in wine. As proof, let me offer you the following quote from Jean Carmet referring to Charles Joguet, the great winegrower from the Loire. It was told to me by Bruno Quenioux, a wine merchant and taster, and goes: ‘I have sometimes seen wines disappear in the presence of an intruder in the cellar and reappear once he left. Let us know therefore what happens in the mind of a wine that resembles the man who made it!’