Wednesday, March 3, 2010

Bodegas Bilainas Rioja Viña Zaco 2006

Picked this wine up at Costco 10$. Although clearly a riper, more modern style (as opposed to traditional Rioja), this is pretty good for 10$. It goes without saying that this particular wine could, to a certain degree, just as easily come off as a Petite Sirah, or Syrah, or a Napa Merlot or some other fucking thing. Such is the modern wine world. I don't know that it's bad--after all, this is solidly made wine, but it is disappointing to me in the same way that a Foster Farms chicken is. Sure, that chicken satisfies a lot of folks and is inexpensive, but I have to tell you something--a chicken from the Farmer's Market or one of the pasture-raised Bronze chickens tastes incomparably better. Not to be disingenuous, but it must have something to do with a chicken being a chicken, and not some hyper-steroidal piece of protein. The bronze chicken will cost you around 12$, which is admittedly more expensive upfront. However, you get bigger legs, smaller breasts, the giblets, a tastier piece of meat, and a chicken that lived like a chicken, not a prisoner at Gitmo. Although people may take umbrage with this statement, that Foster Farms chicken is probably more expensive in the long run--just like a lot of industrial food. Poor dietary habits and obesity costs America (meaning you, me and everyone else) a lot of money each year. Every time I see some land whale running around with a cheeseburger, KFC, or whatever else, I get pissed because I end up subsidizing their craptastic habits. (Fuck you, land whales.) These costs are not reflected in the cost of subsidized corn and cheap meat that everyone is inexplicably eating. Anyways, I must be a hypocrite because I drank this wine, redolent of blackberries, smoke, cinnamon, and earth, with a fleshy frame but ample acidity, and enjoyed it. No chickens died to make this wine (er...well I'm pretty sure at least), but there is no denying that this is the vinous equivalent of a Foster Farms chicken. Despite my reservations, this is solid. B/B+ 

5 comments:

CabFrancoPhile said...

Nice rant on land whales, haha. On one hand I'd like to defend industrial food production because on the whole there's simply not enough food to feed the world. But there's a correlation in the US between economic class and obesity. Clearly people are getting more calories than they need from processed food diets. My concern is the issue is getting turned into a black and white debate, essentially a political one.

There's this article: http://www.cnn.com/2010/HEALTH/02/23/real.food.challenge/index.html?hpt=Sbin

What irritated me was the blogger leading the charge is "neither a chef nor a nutritionist, but a full-time real estate office manager." She should have her opinion and ultimately eating whole foods will do more good than anything. But why a people are following a non-expert is bewildering. It's like buying wine based on a Jay Miller score!

I mean clearly people who spend only 15% of their income on food and are obese are getting a false economy. But at the same time the luxury of spending 50% of one's income and 50% of non-work time on food prep is not an option for every person. An upper middle class, two income suburban soccer mom really isn't the person to be preaching to the masses.

Jeff said...

Interesting... I like how she "rendered lard to avoid processed oils." She seems a classic example of seeing the trees, but missing the forest. My main beef with industrial food production (and for what it's worth, I work for a food manufacturer, LOL), and nutrition in general, is that it's so far removed from historical eating patterns, and every thing has become so convoluted. Eating in a healthful manner is incredibly confusing. There's too much information, people have forgotten how to cook, and people generally can't tell what's good from bad anymore.

I completely disagree with the notion of not having time to cook. You an cook cheaply and easily in as much time as it takes to drive to the drive through and back. It just takes a little advance planning and know-how. And that's something that US has completely lost.

CabFrancoPhile said...

I totally agree, making something healthful takes no time at all. I was more thinking about the person in the article who was grinding her own flour to make breakfast. There's a reason why early American settlers built mills on creeks and rivers! I mean you can have milled flour without it being bleached and generally denuded of nutritional value.

On the flip side, I saw on one of those Food Network processed food shows how turkey bacon is made. I'll take the real stuff, thank you! Funny how a source of food info is focused on processed foods, though the worst one is that overeating show Man vs. Food on the Travel Channel.

Jeff said...

That's part of why it's so complicated--the whole conversation has gone off the deep end. Grinding your own flour is one side of the crazy spectrum, turkey bacon is the other. I think there is a general problem with America that saner, more middle of the road types are marginalized (especially in the media) by opposing sides espousing extreme views.

And yes, Man vs. Food scares me. I've seen a few episodes of it and am disappointed that it's a celebration of lowest common denominator gluttony. The irony is that it's masquerading as a food show when it really has more in common with rubbernecking at an accident on the freeway or sports.

CabFrancoPhile said...

I wish Man vs. Food had never been invented. But hey, the TV reflects what people want. If it's gluttony and hyper-polarized perspectives, I suppose that is what folks want.

A that's why there's $10 modern, international Rioja to drink with the KFC boneless wings bucket while watching Man v. Food.