The fizz and fun of champagne

The love for that effervescent mystery called champagne is certainly nothing new. During the Renaissance, the only thing François I of France and Henry VIII of England agreed on was their preference for bubbly. Napoleon carted along cases of it to his battlefronts. Casanova used it to liven up his legendary seductions, while Madame de Pompadour employed it to tempt the Sun King, and Tallyrand imported cases of it to the Congress of Vienna for a different sort of seduction – procuring more favorable peace terms.

We owe a toast to the Benedictine monk who initiated the technique of adding cane sugar and natural yeast to still wine to cause it, after years of fermentation, to foam. Without a complicated series of additives, double fermentations, cooling at precise temperatures, and turnings and twistings, champagne would be a non-sparkling wine. Without the fizz, where would the fun be?

The best champagne grapes are grown in the network of vineyards that meander like narrow ribbons along the bottomlands south of the Reims. French vintners consider the best regions to be the Cote des Blancs, Montagne de Reims, and Vallee de la Marne. These are also the names for the three Routes du Champagne, which are signposted wine roads extending throughout the area.

In Champagne, more than anywhere else, time and weather are elements to be reckoned with and mastered. Bold words indeed where the vine is concerned, for here it is not man who is the master, but the weather. It certainly takes a lot more work, with a greater chance of failure from uncontrollable variables, to produce a great bottle of still red than a jeroboam of sparkling Veuve Clicquot or Louis Roederer, in my opinion two of the best available bubblies in the local market.

In 1833, Louis Roederer inherited the champagne company founded by his uncle in 1776. He immediately gave it his own name and set about spreading its reputation throughout Europe. He concentrated his efforts on Russia, and, not before long, the Tsar himself was drinking Monsieur Roederer’s champagne.

In fact, it became such a favorite of Tsar Alexander II that he asked Roederer to reserve him the best cuvee every year. Arrangements were made for the Tsar’s court cellarmaster to visit Reims once a year and to taste and approve the Tsar’s cuvee.

He then required that his personal cuvee be served in bottles made of crystal, so that the clearness of the crystal would immediately identify the bottle as his exclusive champagne.

The result was "Crystal." For more than a century, the appearance of the patented "Crystal" bottle has remained unique and unchanged and much, I might add, imitated.

Louis Roederer’s champagnes have a very distinct difference, one that is immediately recognizable. The key to the mystery lay not within the underground cellars, nor in the technology applied, however sophisticated, but in the craftsman’s constant quest for perfection.

The total stock cellared at the House of Louis Roederer exceeds five years’ sales, a figure far above the average in champagne. This policy ensures the unique maturation of their wine.

And that may not be such a large amount. Jean-Claude Rouzaud, grandson of Mme. Roederer and president of Champagnes Roederer, said that a recent survey indicated that "Roederer customers are more faithful than any other brand’s. They recognize the Roederer difference and are willing to pay the price."

A word about the word "champagne." Since the days of the grand époque, when dandies drank bubbly out of ladies’ slippers and beauties bathed in the stuff, the misuse of the word has aroused the wrath of even such venerable personages as the Veuve Clicquot herself. Only champagne made in France’s Champagne region can, by law, be called champagne. Bubbly made in any other area of France must be categorized as having been produced via the methode champenoise.

In the United States, each state has its own laws about this matter. In one state, you can call your bubbly champagne, while in another, you cannot. But don’t dare try this in France, since you will face lengthy litigation. Just ask Yves Saint Laurent, who once had the effrontery to name a new perfume he had invented as Champagne.