The principle of harmonizing the similarities in the wine gastronomy
The interpretation of the ’similar to similar’ principle
The similar – ones that fit together and can be organized into a system – entities can cooperate effectively and more significant efforts can be made by joining similar to similar according to the key principle. This also is the root of all community and social organizations. Opposites repel each other – if in a particular case they seem to attract each other, then those entities are only pseudo- opposites. If a high-quality entity is integrated into a system with a low-grade entity, the system (and the high quality entity) weakens while the low-grade entity improves slightly compared to its previous state. Regarding the positive and negative effects, the final outcome will be ’negative’ as the weakening of the system and the superior entity is more significant and means a bigger loss than the benefit generated by the slight improvement of the lower-grade entity. By applying this on wines, we find out that by blending a high-quality wine with a poor-quality one, the outcome will not be a medium quality wine, but indeed a low-quality one. Similarly, by adding poor-quality wine to an otherwise perfect dish, it ruins the food.
Wine gastronomy – The specialities of sense perception
When tasting together wine and food of a similar taste, the senses most commonly balance each other. If the wine and the food has similar taste, the sensory organs adapt to the tastes and both seem to be ’lighter’ than tasting them on their own. A unique feature of human perception is that in case of compelling sensations the intensity of sensual detection is lower, which means that the senses weaken and flatten each other. Consuming food and wine of a similar taste therefore generate lower effect because the taste sensibility weakens. The sensation of food can be modified by flavouring and seasoning. Such like salt and sugar can significantly affect the wine’s acidity: salty tastes flatten; sweet tastes intensify the acidity of the wine.
’Similar to similar’ principle in wine gastronomy
Food and wines of the same division having similar sensual features match: lighter dishes with lighter wines, reach food with characteristic wines. Raw, cooked or slightly roasted food goes well with young, fresh wines while. Broiled or grilled dishes match with wines matured in oak-barrels. However, these statements are only ’generally’ true. For a proper harmonization we have to take into account all the sensual perceptions of food and wine. This means that attention has to be paid on seasoning, type of side dish and sauce, colour depth and taste intensity of wines. Sweeter dishes are to be consumed with sweeter wines, sour dishes with sour wines, bitter ones (e.g. dish with paprika) with wines of higher tannin content, spicy dishes with spicy wines. In these cases, by combining the two, wines seem less sweet, sour, bitter or spicy. This is only true when the taste is mild – any taste that jumps out has to be compensated- an intensely spicy dish with a sweet, low alcohol wine.
Final thoughts – The problematic nature of the modern realization of integration
An utmost important, an almost ’compulsive’ effort of modern times is the intention for a most general, a most extreme social integration in terms of the modern idea of liberty, equality and brotherhood. But the question presents itself: shall everyone be integrated in the same community? Is there a certain similarity, by which everyone should ’belong together’? Is the consensus regarding the integration complete and does everyone want it? How much is the advantage and disadvantage of this far-fetched aspiration on a global scale? A sensibly implemented integration means that each entity finds their place and role in the system. In case if it is somehow not possible or not subservient, the entity has to be separated, implicitly in order to protect the community. On the other side, the integration that tries to hide the obvious, sometimes drastic and substantive differences by proclaiming equalitarianism is indeed a subversionary, chaotic and –after all- a pointless procession.
Yorumlar
Yorum Gönder