To oak or not to oak,,, Chardonnay is the question. There was a time when I would have laughed at the idea of any unoaked chardonnay unless it had Chablis on the label, and of course there was a time when Chablis was the standard term to be used for unwooded whites around the world until the French said ‘Non’ and secured protection for the style. I’ve often thought the unoaked versions are chardonnays in name only, but once I got over myself, I started to enjoy them for what they are which is easy drinking tropical fruit delights. As well as presenting an easier drinking and perhaps more modern style, unoaked chardonnays are generally cheaper to produce because decent oak ain't cheap folks and yet, my heart still draws me back to butter and vanilla.
I guess it comes down to the occasion and if it’s a light fruity aperitif or something to accompany an afternoon salad in a sunny climate then I'll go for no wood but if it’s to partner something more interesting than a lettuce leaf or to sit by the fire with then I want the wine to have seen enough oak to make a sideboard with. Its Chardonnays almost uniquely eccentric reaction to oak that makes the magic. It takes to wood like a squirrel to nuts and sucks the life out of it while undergoing a transformation like no other.
Anyway, the moral of this column is to re engage with Chardonnay this year and learn to love both styles. When the sun is splitting the trees and your lunch looks like the inside of a rabbit hutch, go unoaked but when you want an evening treat or something to impress the neighbours, go traditional folks.
Stellenbosch Chardonnay, Rustenberg
You could easily be fooled into believing you were in Montrachet when you taste this stunner. Fruity aromas with lashings of vanilla on the palate. Gorgeous.
Waitrose £14.99
The Crusher Unoaked Chardonnay, California
Unoaked styles are not usually my choice from the sunny state but this is a corker with ripe zingy fruit, fresh acidity and a lovely hint of apricots and tropical fruits on the finish.
Villeneuve Wines £14.00
Why are you making commenting on The Herald only available to subscribers?
It should have been a safe space for informed debate, somewhere for readers to discuss issues around the biggest stories of the day, but all too often the below the line comments on most websites have become bogged down by off-topic discussions and abuse.
heraldscotland.com is tackling this problem by allowing only subscribers to comment.
We are doing this to improve the experience for our loyal readers and we believe it will reduce the ability of trolls and troublemakers, who occasionally find their way onto our site, to abuse our journalists and readers. We also hope it will help the comments section fulfil its promise as a part of Scotland's conversation with itself.
We are lucky at The Herald. We are read by an informed, educated readership who can add their knowledge and insights to our stories.
That is invaluable.
We are making the subscriber-only change to support our valued readers, who tell us they don't want the site cluttered up with irrelevant comments, untruths and abuse.
In the past, the journalist’s job was to collect and distribute information to the audience. Technology means that readers can shape a discussion. We look forward to hearing from you on heraldscotland.com
Comments & Moderation
Readers’ comments: You are personally liable for the content of any comments you upload to this website, so please act responsibly. We do not pre-moderate or monitor readers’ comments appearing on our websites, but we do post-moderate in response to complaints we receive or otherwise when a potential problem comes to our attention. You can make a complaint by using the ‘report this post’ link . We may then apply our discretion under the user terms to amend or delete comments.
Post moderation is undertaken full-time 9am-6pm on weekdays, and on a part-time basis outwith those hours.
Read the rules here