THE ART OF LIVING IN AUSTRALIA TOGETHER WITH THREE HUNDRED AUSTRALIAN COOKERY RECIPES AND ACCESSORY KITCHEN INFORMATION BY MRS. H. WICKEN TEXT

wine ages. The second kind of odour the bouquet, on the contrary, is developed with age, and would appear to be owing to the reaction of vinous acids on the spirit, which gives rise to certain ethereal combinations. "WINES ARE NOT MADE CHIEFLY TO PLEASE THE SENSES OF SIGHT AND SMELL-- Aroma, like colour, is a favourable or unfavourable sign, agreeable or disagreeable. Yet before everything wine is a nourishing beverage. It is a very good thing that sight and smell should be gratified in this way, but it would be puerile and ridiculous to exalt beyond measure the importance of these organs of sense; and to pretend that the superiority of wine rests almost exclusively on the pleasurable impressions which are derived therefrom. I have seen many hosts bother their guests with vexatious insistence to look at, hold up to the light, sniff their wine, even the empty glasses, almost throughout the whole duration of a banquet--at the risk of making them well nigh die of thirst. The true amateur, the wine-taster, knows perfectly well how to look at and how to smell his wine; but he knows full well also that these two preliminaries ought to be immediately followed by the taking of the fluid into the front part of the mouth. Colour and smell are merely two notes introductory to a gastronomic theme; if they are only by themselves they lose their relative value, and the theme is not properly understood. "WINE JUDGED BY TASTE; THAT IS, BY THE MOUTH AT ITS ANTERIOR AND POSTERIOR PART.--Before speaking of the impression wine gives to the sense of taste, I ought to say that this sense is the only one in the animal organization which possesses a double apparatus for perception-- one at the tip and edges of the tongue, the other at its root and at the soft palate. The first perceives acid or electro-positive tastes through the two lingual nerves; the second detects alkaline tastes by the two glosso-pharyngeal nerves. Tastes perceived by the front part of the mouth, in the case of liquids as well as solids, are not the same as those discriminated by the back part of the mouth. An alkaline salt, for instance, gives to the front part an acid, styptic, salt, or sweet taste, but communicates to the posterior part a basic, bitter, or saponaceous taste. "WINE-TASTING PROPERLY SO CALLED.--Wine taken into the front part of the mouth gives rise to acid, sweet, and styptic tastes at the outer edges and tip of the tongue. All shades, in harmony, ought to give a pleasing sensation to the organ, when neither acidity, sweetness, nor astringency predominates. Next we pass the wine to the posterior part of the mouth, and delay it there by a kind of gargling. It is now that we get the smack of the soil, the taste of cask or wood, the insipidity of salts, or any bitterness. If the whole effect is pleasing to the back part of the mouth, with the absence of all disagreeable impressions, we must, to put the finishing touch on the wine-tasting, not spit it out, but swallow it. As soon as the wine has passed over the root of the tongue and the soft palate and its pillars, a most pronounced odour ascends from the pharynx into the nasal cavities, and gives forth newer and more powerful revelations, AS to the qualities or defects of the bouquet of wine, than can ever be obtained by the outward sense of smell. Moreover, the last contact of wine with the mucous membrane of the pharynx and of the base of the tongue leaves a lasting impression of taste, and when this sensation is disagreeable it is designated under the collective name of 'after-taste.' "GOOD AND BAD WINE JUDGED BY THE SENSES.--If, then, a wine possesses perfect clearness and freshness of colour, if it has an agreeable odour, if the combined effect of the acid, sweet, and astringent tastes is gratifying to the anterior part of the mouth by a fusion, seeming to form a unique taste like many notes in a complete harmony; if to this harmonious impression the back part of the mouth adds a feeling of glow and vinous richness, without alcohol being noticed; and if, at last, the act of swallowing crowns the whole with a natural bouquet, not followed by any 'after-taste,' we may pronounce the wine to be good as judged by the senses. But, on the other hand, the wine is unsatisfactory if it fail in any of these points. It will be inferior in proportion as the acids, sugar, and the salts become individually perceived by the tip of the tongue. Again, it is imperfect when the chilliness, flatness, the essential oils, the taste of earth and of cask, and above all, an excess of froe spirit, are manifestly noticed at the base of that organ. And lastly, it is defective just as the 'ARRIERE BOUQUET' is less pleasant, and the 'after-taste' more disagreeably prolonged. "THE DIFFICULTY OF JUDGING BY TASTES.--In this unfolding of the process of wine-tasting I have endeavoured to be clear, and yet I feel I have not been sufficiently so. It will be impossible to judge by tastes until science has laid down signs or words representative of their quality, of their stamp, or of their harmonious relations. The science of tastes has yet to be founded. Till then, chefs de cuisine and the clever caterers for banquets will remain isolated geniuses or empirics; while, as regards wine-tasters and gastronomists, they approve or they criticise, but they do not establish any rules. It would be a curious collection that would comprise all the expressions used by wine-tasters, wine-merchants, commercial travellers, amateurs (by far, indeed, the most numerous class), to express the feelings they experience in tasting wines. I know an English traveller who only liked a wine when it caused a 'peacock's tail in the mouth'; and everybody knows the expression of the Auvergnian drinking a glass of generous old wine--'It's a yard of velvet going down the throat.' "THE PHYSIOLOGICAL EFFECT OF WINES.--The inhabitants of a beer-drinking or spirit-drinking country will never possess the vivacity of wit and the light-heartedness of those who live in a wine-producing land. It is not by any means the alcohol in itself which constitutes the worth and goodness of wine, for beer may contain as much, and spirits certainly contain more. To be more or less spirituous does not constitute good wine. All natural wine is good, whether it be strong or weak in spirit, if it keeps its organic life. It is good, too, if it reveals itself by a fresh odour, by a union of all its elements in a taste harmonious to the palate, by being easily digested, and by causing greater activity of body and mind, and a sensible augmentation of muscular force. Be the taste of the wine fresh, sharp, or delicate; be it soft, unctuous, or rich; be it acid or strong, the wine is good if it supports and increases the forces of body and mind, without wearing out the digestive Organs. "WINE IS GOOD RELATIVELY AND NOT ABSOLUTELY. WE OUGHT TO HAVE BEFORE EVERYTHING GOOD COMMON WINES.--A wine is good according to the use to which we put it. Even an excellent liqueur or dessert vine is undesirable and out of place for ordinary drinking purposes or for nourishment. We must distinguish between wines for ordinary use, those for side dishes (ENTREMETS), and those for dessert. And these again should be differentiated into wines for small, medium, or large glasses, relatively, proportional to the quantity which we can or ought to drink. A good cake is always good if we only eat a little at a time, and seldom take it; but bread is infinitely better and preferred by everybody to eating cake always. It is vastly more important to have good ordinary wines than to have good VINS D'ENTREMETS or good liqueur wines. And, indeed, this very matter affects the total consumption within and out of France, and the interests of producer and consumer, as well as the interests of public hygiene. Good ordinary wine, alimentary wine--for wine is a real and excellent food--by no means a wine strong in spirit, nor is it a wine of great age; but it is a wine of fine CEPAGE, not going beyond 10 per cent. of spirit, or even 6 per cent." UNIFORMITY IN AUSTRALIAN WINES. This is a subject the importance of which cannot be over estimated. And it is one markedly calling for consideration, as there have been, and still are, grounds for complaint in this direction. It will be advisable, therefore, to look well into the question, because it will amply repay the trouble bestowed upon it. First of all, then, let us refer to the remarks of Mr. Francois de Castella, the author of the Handbook on Viticulture for Victoria. He points out that in each district there will be one class of wine which will surpass all others in excellence, and that this is the type which the grower should produce. All the vine-growers in any one district should endeavour to make their wines of the type specially adapted for that particular district; and of course the type will vary in different districts. In this way, and only in this way, will it be possible for the public to obtain an unvarying article. At the present time there are in each district a number of wines possessing various names, such as Hermitage, Shiraz, Carbenet, Burgundy, Chasselas, Riesling, Tokay, &c., but these names actually mean nothing. Each district should produce a different type of wine. A Riesling from the Yarra and a Riesling from the Murray are as distinct as Hock and Sherry. Mr. de Castella further advises that each vine-grower should join the Vine-Growers' Association in his locality. In this way the members of each district can agree amongst themselves to produce one class of wine, or at most two--say one white and one red. Instead of the same names being applied to entirely different wines, the nine will come to be known by the name of the district in which it is produced. One will then be able to have some idea of the contents of a bottle, from the label upon it. At present the name on the bottle is no indication whatever of the wine within; indeed, the same name is on the outside of many totally distinct wines. This change must assuredly come, and the sooner it does the better for Australian wines. Mr. Pownall, in the course of his evidence before the Royal Commission on Vegetable Products in Victoria, also drew attention to this same want of uniformity. He believed that each vineyard ought to aim at making a standard quality of wine, so that wine-merchants might know what to expect from that vineyard. The wines throughout Australia should likewise, as far as possible, bear uniform names. He stated that he had met wines in various vineyards grown from the same grape, and called by different names; and though this might seem a trivial matter, yet it led to endless confusion. Moreover, it should not be permitted to continue, especially as it could be so easily rectified. It must be said, however, that at the Great Western district, in Victoria, a start has been made in the right direction. A report on the vineyards of that locality referred to the gratifying fact that a marked tendency existed towards the adoption of a rational nomenclature of wines. Many of the leading growers were confining themselves to one red and one white wine. Some of them called their wine by the name of the vineyard, adding the words Hock, Chablis, Claret, &c. after them. This is unquestionably so far an improvement, and it is to be hoped that before long the wine will be known by the name of the vineyard or district, and by nothing else. Mr. James Smith has also strongly insisted upon the supreme importance of this uniformity, especially as regards the quality of the wine. And this is perfectly true. The quality of any particular wine is solely dependent upon the season, but the produce of any given vineyard should surely possess, as he remarks, a distinctive CACHET, by which the palate is enabled to recognise it. For instance, an expert would not fail to distinguish between a Chateau Margaux and a Chateau Lafitte, nor between a Chateau Latour and a Haut Brion. Notwithstanding the different vintages, there is always a uniformity and continuity of flavour maintained through all these great growths. But in the case of our Australian wines there is a lamentable difference. Wines of the same denomination and from the same grower DIFFER SO MATERIALLY one year from those bearing a similar name, and coming from the same cellar, in another, that it is difficult to believe they are the same. As Mr. Smith justly observes, this is an unpardonable defect in the estimation of connoisseurs; more especially such as attach themselves to a particular kind of wine, and naturally drink it by preference. Constancy of type should be unremittingly aimed at by the vigneron. And this can only be possible by continuous attention to each individual factor concerned in vine-growing and wine-making. THE FUTURE SUCCESS OF THE AUSTRALIAN WINE INDUSTRY--AND UPON WHAT IT DEPENDS. Figures help us considerably more than words in enforcing a proper idea of the magnitude to which the Australian wine industry should develop. It will be appropriate, therefore, to preface this portion by bringing forward a few speculative data. In an earlier part of this chapter it was stated that the city of Paris alone requires nearly 300,000 gallons of wine daily, and that this single city would consume in 12 days all the wine which the whole of Australia takes 12 MONTHS to make. The population of Paris is nearly two and a half millions, while that of Australia is three millions odd. By considering these together it will be seen that the wine which it takes over three million people all the year to make, lasts another two and a half million people only 12 days. Now, the total annual wine yield of Australia, including both that used here and that which is exported, is only worth about 800,000 L. It follows from the foregoing, then, that Paris will in 12 days consume about 800,000 L. worth of wine, and for the whole year the Parisian figures for wine consumption will reach to something like 20,000,000 L. Let us suppose that Australia were only a wine-drinking community, as her climate unceasingly calls for. It would be fair to assume that her yearly wine bill would be in accordance with the following rule of proportion. If Paris with her two and a half millions annually consumes wine to the amount of 20,000,000 L., then Australia with her three millions odd would surely require for her own use at least 20,000,000 l. worth year by year. And when it is remembered in addition that the export trade should be enormously in excess of any local requirements, it will readily be see what a magnificent future only awaits its calling into being. We cannot hope that our Australian wines will take a high place amongst those of the world as long as they are not in general use by our own people. There can be no keener reproach than to have it said: "Why, even the Australians themselves do not drink their own wines." And this is regrettedly the fact. It is necessary, therefore, that first of all our people should take a very deep interest in all the details connected with vine-growing and wine-making, and thus give some encouragement to those who are doing their best to establish what will ultimately become Australia's brightest glory. And it will be a good thing for this land when a knowledge of every point in the growing of the grape, and every step in the making of the wine, becomes part and parcel of our daily life. The very hoardings of our streets are covered with advertisements of countless brands of whisky, and of numberless varieties of ale. But those setting forth the virtues of our wines are conspicuous by their absence. It would seem that Australia, where our own wine should be the national beverage, is almost the last country in which to find it. It may be asked, what are the reasons which lead to this disregard of the virtues possessed by our own wines? The reply to this question is not an easy matter, but I shall endeavour to answer it to the best of my ability. The probability is, if a dozen people were asked, at random, why Australian wine is so little used in Australia, that at least that number of different explanations would be forthcoming. The truth, however, is more likely to be found in a combination of reasons, rather than from any one single cause. These are obviously worth considering, from the very fact that the knowing of what they consist is of the first importance in rectifying them. I shall begin, then, by saving that the label on the bottle has much to answer for, in that it is misleading. It does not give any idea of what is to be found inside. Thus the word Riesling, on one bottle, may be attached to a wine grown on the Hunter, in New South Wales, and on another to a wine from the Yarra, in Victoria. It is true that the wine from these two places may be grown from the same "cepage." But while the river Yarra wine will contain perhaps 11 per cent. of alcohol, that from the Hunter River will have quite 20 per cent.--so much does an increase in the warmth of the climate increase the alcoholic strength of the wine. And while we are on the subject of labels, I must certainly take exception to the unattractive character of those employed on the bottles of our Australian wines. There is no reason whatever why a little consideration should not be paid to the artistic sense in this respect. Our wine merchants, it would appear, fail to understand the selling power which belongs to the "get-up" of the label on a wine bottle. I feel sure this attractiveness has a great deal to do with the success of many products, notably in the case of the American preserved fruits. Some of these are labelled in a manner which is creditable in the highest degree--and what is more, from a practical point, it is no unimportant factor in their huge sale. Then again, there is that want of uniformity which Mr. James Smith has so ably descanted upon, and to which I have already referred. It is bad enough to have a wine labelled Riesling, or whatever it may be, from one place differing entirely from a wine of the same name which comes from some other locality. But it is a far more serious defect when the wine of any particular place one year differs entirely from the same wine coming from the same locality at another. For the same variety of wine, of the same vineyard, thus to vary, year by year, is simply unpardonable. This must not be allowed to continue, for while it exists Australian nines will always be subject to reproach--a reproach, indeed, which cannot be explained away. And while dealing with these shortcomings I propose to speak of another matter, which is by no means unimportant. I refer to the size of the bottle. It has frequently happened that visitors to Australia hare said to me, "I should very much like--indeed, I am anxious--to try your Australian wines; but unfortunately I cannot drink a whole bottle at table, and I am unable to obtain less." Now, this is undoubtedly a grievance, and should be overcome in some way; either by putting up a portion of our wines in smaller bottles, or else by making some arrangement so that a smaller quantity may be obtained. Since these lines were written, however, it is very pleasing to record the fact that one enterprising firm in Sydney has taken a highly commendable step in this very direction; and already smaller bottles of Australian wine may be obtained for the low prices of 6d. and 9d. Up to this point I have made no remarks with regard to the knowledge of wine possessed by the majority of Australians, and yet in many respects it is the most important of all. They are not called upon to pronounce an opinion upon a wine, such as would be looked for from an expert. But I do think it is very desirable that they should know, at least, the kind of wine that is suitable for Australian use. Once this is accomplished, and it is by no means difficult to learn, a great deal