WHISKEY The Spirit Of
The Time
Are today’s
single malts the same as the sort created centuries ago? And how much does age
matter to whisky anyway?
OVER A MONTH ago, I went
to a whisky dinner at Bombay’s Trident Hotel. Most whisky dinners tend to be
boring affairs, where pompous middle-aged men who know nothing about whisky
brag about their knowledge of single malts, drink far too much and then stagger
out of the dining room, with their embarrassed wives helping guide them to the
lift.
This one, however, was
slightly different because, as good as the whisky was, many people in the
dining room were left agog by the spectacle of Vikram Seth, the evening’s star
turn, read his poetry out aloud. The notion of jowly whisky-drinkers, with ears
red from far too much malt, turning into poetry lovers is laughable in theory.
But that evening, I saw it happen. Partly it is because Seth is such a great
poet and such a terrific performer that he had the audience in the palm of his
hand ( Brunch’s very own Rachel Lopez was so taken with the poetry that she
refused to even drink her whisky). And partly it was that Vikram so entered
into the spirit of the proceedings that by the time he read his last poem,
there was so much frenzied energy in the air that the whisky actually cooled
passions.
Earlier this year, I went
to Scotland to shoot a TV film on malt whisky and my co-host was Peter Prentice
who now heads the Keepers of the Quaich, the famous whisky society. Peter is an
old pal and has long been aware of my disdain for single-malt bores, so he took
me to the Glenlivet distillery (among other places) to try and persuade me that
beneath all the pretension and snobbery, malt whisky represented an artisanal
tradition. (Full disclosure: Glenlivet was among the sponsors of the telecast.)
So, having done the
rounds of the Glenlivet distillery, I was intrigued by the whisky they were
launching at the dinner. And by its history.
Whisky production was a
largely illicit activity in Scotland for many years and the complex
relationship between the Scots and the ruling English led to the development of
a bootlegging culture. This lasted till a royal visit to Scotland by the
British king who asked for Glenlivet, a whisky whose reputation had spread to
England.
Glenlivet – then illegal
– was procured for him and the process of legitimising the Glenlivet production
began. In those days, Glenlivet was owned by a man called George Smith and he
became the first distiller on Speyside (a part of Scotland) to get an official
licence.
Soon, what had once been
an illegal trade became Scotland’s most famous product. In 1824, Smith
established his first official distillery to bottle Glenlivet. Another one
followed and eventually Glenlivet went on to find global fame.
But what kind of whisky
did Smith make? We don’t often realise it but even so-called ancient liquors have
changed dramatically in style. Till the middle of the 20th century, for
instance, most champagne had so much sugar added to it that it was sickly
sweet. The dry style is of relatively recent popularity. It is the same with
fine wine. Château Haut-Brion is mentioned in 16th century texts, but the style
of wine was so different that most of us would not be able to drink it today.
So it is with whisky. In
the old days most of us drank blended whisky, that is whisky made by blending
various malt and grain whiskies. But, in the very old days, before the fashion
for blends caught on, it was single malts that predominated.
Now, we have come full
circle. Blends still dominate the whisky market – and many are excellent – but
more and more whisky drinkers are going back to single malts. Except, what most
of us don’t know is this: are the single malts we drink these days the same as
the sort of whisky that George Smith used to distil illegally?
The situation is
further complicated by the age factor. These days, nearly every good whisky
comes with an age statement. Once upon a time, a really outstanding blend (say,
Royal Salute) was so top-of-the-line that the name alone was enough. But now,
even Royal Salute comes with more expensive older variants.
The same is true for
malts. In George Smith’s day, it was enough for him to make one version of his
Glenlivet. But today, there are innumerable age variants. The basic Glenlivet
is 12 years old, which you would think should be enough. But no, there are at
least five other variants going up to 25 years old. And that’s not including
the Cellar Collection and limited releases.
So how much does age
matter to whisky? In the case of wine, we know it does. Wine depends on grapes
and there are good years and bad years. Moreover, wine keeps maturing in the
bottle – it changes every year. So a wine bottled in say, 1996, will taste very
different today from the way it did when it was put in the bottle.
This is not true of
whisky. For a start, there are no good years or bad years. And more crucial is
this: whisky does not age in the bottle. A whisky bottled in 1996 will taste
much the same today as it did when it was bottled. (This is true of cognac also
so be wary of all the claims about really old bottles of cognac).
This is why there is a
divide within the whisky world on the age issue. Most people reckon that age is
a determinant of quality. But many others disagree.
I am on the side of the
age-does-matter lobby now that I’ve seen the distilleries. The key to the taste
of a whisky is the cask. When the spirit goes into the casks, it has little by
way of great flavour. But, over time, as the liquid comes into contact with the
wood of the cask, the flavours develop. That’s why, all quality whisky
companies will spend a fortune on the casks. Often they will use casks that
have been used before to make something like sherry so that the wood is already
flavoured.
An age statement for
whisky does not tell you when the whisky was bottled (as it does with wine). It
tells you how long (12 years, 15 years etc.) the whisky has been in the cask
and how long it has spent maturing in the wood before it was put in the bottle.
So yes, age does matter.
But nobody is sure how much and there are concerns. If you age a whisky in a
cheap cask, it will actually get worse not better, over time. And after a
point, does the ageing process stop improving the whisky? And anyway, just
because an older whisky tastes different from a younger one, is it necessarily
better?
What is clear, however,
is that the aged malt whiskies in the market today may be wonderful, but they
are made in a very different style from the stuff that George Smith distilled
and sold. He had no time to age them. And then he did not have access to the
many fancy casks that Alan Winchester, Glenlivet’s current master distiller,
usually uses.
The Founder’s Reserve,
the whisky that got Vikram Seth going at our dinner, is an attempt to go back
to the roots and to try and create a whisky in the style of George Smith. I
interviewed Alan for my malt whisky film and he was in the process of
overseeing the bottling of the new whisky then. What he has done with Founder’s
Reserve is unusual. He has matured his whisky in a variety of casks. Some are
the traditional aged oak casks used for malt whisky. But he has also used
first-fill casks made from American wood. A first-fill cask is one that has
never before been used to make whisky, so it has no whisky flavours already
embedded in the wood.
Alan says that he reckons
that George Smith made whisky the same way. He had no old casks of ancient
whisky to rely on. So he drew on a variety of casks of relatively young
whiskies and blended them to create the smooth single malt that attracted royal
visitors from across the sea, drawn by its fame. So finally, what should you
remember? Well, firstly, that there’s no point cellaring your whisky or storing
it. Whisky does not improve in the bottle. So drink it soon. Secondly, age
statements are useful, but they are not the only criteria when it comes to
whisky. Many younger malts are better than older ones. Don’t take the easy way
out and conclude that the older a whisky, the better it is.
Thirdly, remember that
all malt whisky is not the same. Even within a single brand – say Glenlivet –
there will be many different expressions. Age is now a distinctive feature. But
the cask may be even more important.
Fourthly, do not buy into
the current snobbery that says all malts are better than all blends. Both are
different kinds of Scotch and both have their strengths.
And finally, the next
time you come across a single malt snob holding forth about the age of his
favourite whisky ask him about the provenance of the casks in which it was
made.
That should end the
conversation fairly quickly!
VIR
SANGHAVI HTBR20DEC15
No comments:
Post a Comment