Weygandt Wines, located in Cleveland Park, reminds me a lot of Kermit Lynch Wine Merchant.  That venerable Berkeley institution is one of my can’t miss shops whenever I visit my alma mater, and for good reason: the wines I buy from the store are perhaps the freshest, most vibrant wines I’ve ever found.  KLWM is sort of like a farmers’ market for wine.  If that is the case, then Weygandt Wines is sort of like the Eastern Market of wines.

The namesake of the shop, Peter Weygandt, and his wife Maria (née Metzler) have been importing boutique French wines since 1987.  He has recently expanded his portfolio to include wines from Italy, Germany, Austria, Australia, and Spain.  He imports some killer Beaujolais and Burgundy, and has an excellent Rhône selection.  In all, they import around 70,000 cases of wine from over 100 producers.

The Weygandts were not at the media event, but the event was run by the store’s general manager, Tim O’Rourke.  Tim has an interesting history, having started out as a chef.  He graduated from L’Academie de Cuisine in Maryland in 2000, did tours at Café Atlántico, Ristorante Tosca, and Citronelle, and has cooked with such celebrity chefs as Daniel Boulud and Michel Richard.  Being the general manager of a wine store probably has its own set of stresses, but I can imagine that it might also be very relaxed in comparison to working in some high-profile kitchens!

I had been to Weygandt only once before, and recently: I picked up a bottle of Cabernet France for an ongoing dinner with friends at Dino (which is right across the street).  The store was technically closed but I sneaked in and asked who I found out later to be Tim whether he could recommend a good Cab Franc, which he did.  Unfortunately, I don’t remember which bottle he selected, but it was good, and I appreciated being able to pick up a bottle after closing time (and at a substantial discount to boot!).

The event started out with a flight of six sparkling wines–one Crémant de Bourgogne and five Champagnes.

The N.V. Chermette Crémant de Bourgogne Brut, made of 100% Chardonnay, was lean and almost stony.  It wasn’t fruity per se, but it did have some citrus character.  It was tasty but not especially interesting (especially in relation to the Albert Sounit Crémants carried by Ansonia Wines).  The next wine, a bonafide Champagne, was the N.V. J.L. Vergnon Brut “Conversation”, a blanc de blancs that had tropical fruits on the palate a tart green apple on the finish.  This one was refreshing and would be perfect as an aperitif.

The next two wines were from Nathalie Falmet and were both non-vintage.  The Brut Nature, made with no added sugar (hence the “nature” in the name), had ripe apple and a nice round mouthfeel.  Even better than that, though, was the Le Val Cornet Brut, which had even more apple–the finish reminded me of the bitterness you get from apple skin, not a bad thing–and was fuller than the Brut Nature.

Bringing up the rear were the N.V. Philippe Prié “Depuis 1737″ Brut Tradition and the N.V. Nicolas Maillart “Platine” Premier Cru.  The Prié had what I thought was some noticeable malolactic character, and while I tasted some stone fruit/apple on the palate, the thing that struck me about this wine was the hint of something non-fruity.  I couldn’t quite put my finger on it: maybe it was herbaceous, maybe it was minerally, maybe it was even a bit of sous bois.  Whatever it was, however, it was quite attractive.

The Maillart had rich fruit–like an apple and quince tart–and very nice body.  The Prié and the Maillart were my two favorite Champagnes of the evening.

But we had more to go.  Derek of the Weekly Wine Pick started off round two by contributing a bottle of grand cru Burgundy he had picked up from MacArthur Beverages’s bargain bin for around $20 or $30.  The 1983 Domaine des Lambrays Clos des Lambrays grand cru was created during my birth year and, like me, seems to have faded with age.  You can see its brick color in the picture below.  It had a cranberry nose, and the palate reminded me vaguely of pine nuts.  It was very light and had a short finish.  While pleasant, it was clearly past its prime.  I did appreciate being able to try such an old wine!

By this point I had decided to purchase a one-way ticket to Drunksville (business class, mind you).  So, I made a rounds of the store and my eyes settled on the Rhône.  But Southern Rhône or Northern Rhône?  I asked Tim for a recommendation, and we settled on the 2009 Yann Chave “Le Rouvre” Crozes Hermitage, a bargain at $29.99.  This Syrah, along with the pair of Beaujolais cru I will be mentioning soon, was my favorite wine of the evening.  It offered up a beautiful nose of dried herbs, violet, and anise, and the palate was a cornucopia of flavor: raisin, graphite, minerals. Relatively light-bodied, it had good acid and moderate tannins, with a long finish.  I could drink this all night long (and I did), and I could not believe how well it was drinking!

I would have stuck with that wine, had I not mentioned casually to Tim that I loved Beaujolais.  He instantly offered to find an older Beaujolais cru somewhere from the recesses of the store.  He brought back a 2007 Domaine Pierre Savoye Morgon, but when I mentioned also that I loved the ’09 Beaujolais vintage but had not yet tried the ’10s, he graciously opened up a bottle of the 2010 Daniel Bouland Chiroubles as well.

My loyal readers will know how much I freaking love Beaujolais.  To me, Beaujolais is a happy wine that can be put to serious use.  It pairs well with nearly everything, but when eating is not the point it is also just terrific to gulp and guzzle by itself.  Beaujolais cru are more complex, but at their price point (usually $15-$30, tops) it’s not a shame to use them just to slake one’s thirst.

The Morgon was more mineral and “cheese” than fruit.  It was a complex, delicious wine that was like the flirty bookish sister of a nice premier cru Burgundy.  The Chiroubles, by contrast, was all light cranberry and reminded some tasters of bubble gum.  It was juicy, bright, and just plain fun.  If the Morgon was the flirty bookish sister of a nice Burgundy, then the Chiroubles was the youngest sister everyone’s worried about.

After the Beaujolais came a trio of other wines.   Someone chipped in the 2009 Font Sarade Vacqueyras, and if I recall correctly Jessica and Jonathan of Jessica In Search Of… bought a bottle of 2009 Alfredo Maestro Viña Almante “La Olmera” Tempranillo (from the Castilla y León region of Ribera del Duero).  Aaron from Hogshead: A Wine Blog contributed a bottle of 2010 Domaine des Soulanes “Kaya” from the Roussillon.  The Vacqueyras, composed of Grenache, Mourvèdre, and Syrah, was a darker older cousin to the Chave Crozes-Hermitage, all tangled vines, leather, and green olives.  The Alfredo Maestro was juicy and fresh and reminded me of a Rioja crianza.  The Kaya, made of 100% Carignan, didn’t make too much of an impression on me, I’m afraid, because by the time I got to it the drunk train was nearly to the station.

Overall, this was a terrific event and I met some wonderful bloggers, some of whom have scooped me on this story.  The wines I tried at Weygandt were all at least good–many of them were excellent, and both Beaujolais were inspirational.  I would like to try some more of Weygandt’s Rhône portfolio, too.  My thanks to Tim, Weygandt Wines, and all the bloggers and people who made this such an awesome evening.

Considering sparkling wine is like considering heaven and hell.  On the one hand, you have sparklers that barely qualify as wine–Andre and Cook’s come to mind–while on the other hand you have Champagnes that will take you to the sky (related to price).  I haven’t had too much sparkling wine in my life, which is a shame because they are fun, well-made, and, as many are coming to realize, are absolutely terrific with food.

Last week I was fortunate enough to be invited to a trade tasting of the sparkling wines of Schramsberg Vineyards, a venerable California sparkling wine institution located in Napa Valley, at Marcel’s in DC.  I had had their wines once or twice before, but was never in a condition to remember too much about them.  With this tasting I was in luck, however, because not only would I try a number of Schramsberg’s wines but would also participate in a blind tasting of Schramsberg wines and the finest French têtes de cuvée (prestige cuvée) wines.

Yikes!  A blind tasting at a trade event?  I felt outclassed, but I decided I would drink more than I spoke. I rolled up (on foot) to the tasting in my black suit (featured in my previous post) and heavy black backpack (at least it matched my suit!) and was greeted with a glass of Schramsberg’s Brut Rosé, which had pretty strawberry and peach aromas that were mirrored on the palate.

We were then led to long tables, where I sat next to David (the proprietor of the excellent Pearson’s Wine & Spirits in Glover Park) and the wine director of the Ritz-Carlton.  The phalanx of glasses reproduced above awaited us, as well as scoring sheets:

Hugh Davies, son of the founders of Schramsberg Vineyards, gave excellent commentary and production notes throughout the whole tasting.

For the first flight, which was the blind tasting of the Schramsberg sparkling wines and the Champagnes, the idea was that we were supposed to rank the wines from first to seventh and determine if we could which were blanc de blancs and which contained Pinot Noir, and which were the Californian wines. These are my transcribed notes from A to G:

• A | aromas reminiscent of white Burgundy–hazelnut and lanolin.  A long finish but a noticeable burn.  | MY RANK: 6
• B | thin bodied and high acid, with notes of green apple.  | MY RANK: 7
• C | wow!   Clover honey and bread, tart but rich.  Really freaking good.  I thought this could be the oldest wine in the lineup, and could contain Pinot.  | MY RANK: 2
• D | some aroma I couldn’t place… more of the Burgundy, maybe… really evocative and old-smelling.  Well-balanced, with tangerine notes.  | MY RANK: 1
• E | gentle floral aroma, with lemon curd.  | MY RANK: 5
• F | a rich color which made me wonder if this was an older vintage.  Burgundian aromas, with a round, full taste evocative of papaya and tropical fruits.  I thought this might contain Pinot.  | MY RANK: 3
• G | pineapple on the nose, less fruit-driven and more hazelnut on the palate.  | MY RANK: 4

• A | 2002 Dom Pérignon | mostly Pinot, 100% malolactic fermentation | TASTING RANK: 7
• B | 2000 Taittinger | 100% Chardonnay | TASTING RANK: 5
• C | 2004 J. Schram | 85% Chard, 15% Pinot | TASTING RANK: 2
• D | NV Krug | blend of Chard and Pinot | TASTING RANK: 3
• E | 2004 Louis Roederer Cristal | 50% Chard, 50% Pinot, 100% malolactic | TASTING RANK: 5
• F | 2003 Schramsberg Reserve | mostly Pinot with some Chard | TASTING RANK: 1
• G | 2002 Perrier-Jouët | 50% Chard, 50% Pinot | TASTING RANK: 4

We had a spate of seven wines for the tasting, starting with the decidedly NOT Burgundian Drappier “Carte d’Or” Blanc de Blancs Brut Champagne which I included because, hell, it’s 100% chardonnay, and hell, who doesn’t like Champagne?  We went through three whites–a basic Mâcon-Villages, a Chablis, and a Chassagne-Montrachet–and three reds.

The first red, the 2005 Domaine René Leclerc Bourgogne, was a basic rouge I picked up at MacArthur Beverages for around $25.  However, it was really, really good, with nice acidity, some spice, and a hint of funk.  This is definitely something I’d pick up as a “house Burgundy” if I ever make that much money in the future.

The second was Kate and Rahul’s favorite red, the 2005 Domaine du Clos Salomon Givry Premier Cru (around $30-$35 on sale at MacArthur).  I have to say this was very impressive, just really well integrated with nice body, a bit of berry, a bit of mushroom, and a lot of pepper on the finish.  Though pinot isn’t the first varietal that comes to mind when eating steak, this particular wine would make a good match.  I could imagine lamb as well.  Watercress, escarole, or arugula would make good sides.

MY favorite of the evening, however, was the 2005 Nicolas Rossignol Pommard ($70 at the Wine Specialist).

Pommard was apparently the most popular Burgundian appellation in the US market back in the 60s and 70s.  This popularity may have led to some degree of complacency: as at least one commentator has noted, Pommard now has a reputation for being among the worst values in the Cote d’Or.

Nonetheless, there are always exceptions, and this offering from Rossignol was one of them.  I had tried his 2005 basic Bourgogne rouge a few months ago and was not impressed–it seemed thin and lacked focus–so I didn’t have any expectations for the Pommard.  I popped it open about an hour before the tasting and poured it into a decanter to open up… I took a sniff once it was in the decanter, and man… already it smelled wonderful.

So, the moment of truth.  It was the last wine of the tasting.  I poured a bit in everyone’s glass, we swirled and sniffed.  Gorgeous, gorgeous nose reminiscent of lavender, purple fruits, slight trace of earthiness.  Into the mouth.  OMG.  A stunning, shimmering mouthfeel, like velvet or silk.  Absolutely seamless integration.  Very fruit-forward, a basket of berries picked in the shade of flowering bushes.  Lingering hint of violets on the finish, like the footsteps of some forest-fairy.  Magical–one of those precious few wines that elicit a slow spreading smile upon tasting.

I would highly recommend the Rossignol Pommard to any Burgundy lover.  It would be a great wine with which to impress anyone.  I wouldn’t pair this one with food because it is so delicate, so utterly perfumed and graceful that drinking it with food would coarsen the experience.  If I HAD to pair it, however, I would do so with mousse pâtés, duck stewed with cherries, or with fruit/dark chocolate-based desserts.

Clark Z. Terry of KLWM wrote in the aforementioned post: “Burgundy fanatics often talk about their ‘Burgundy moment’: The bottle that flipped a switch in their brain and set them on a destructive path to buy all the Burgundy they can in search of more wine that will replicate that vinous epiphany.”  This wine is fully capable of inspiring any number of Burgundy moments.

Then, others are… well… not what I would have ever anticipated for a wine blog.  “Wisdom teeth coffee” has come up–presumably for my entry on how getting my wisdom teeth pulled temporarily ended my wine drinking career.  “LegalZoom sucks” has come up 24 times since I started my blog–and I can assure you quite readily that LegalZoom does not, in fact, suck.  A morbid series of phrases deals with how to throw a party for a dying person–which is somehow derived from my post on the psychology of a dying party (as in a party that is winding down, not a party for… well… dying).

But perhaps one of the most enjoyable series of phrases shows how the Internet is truly being used: the second most popular search phrase on my site is “French women,” the fifth is “women smoking,” and somewhere lower on the list is “French women smoking.”  My post isn’t really about drinking per se but is about the relatively recent ban on smoking in France.  (Look out for the nasty comment comparing me to a Southern slaveowner!)

In a similar way, a few weeks ago I was at The Wine Specialist in DC to literally purchase only a pack of Fever Tree club soda (which is delicious and the best, purest, softest club soda you will ever drink or mix with).  That was it.  I was resolved to purchasing only this small little item and getting the f out of there.  We know how this story ends.  I end up buying some alcohol.

I have a defense!  This defense stems from the same impulse that led hundreds of visitors to my site–the same love of French women, those beautiful, usually cultured beings with sexy accents, who until recently smoked at streetside Parisian cafes and are currently drinking slightly more clear distilled liquors like vodka at the expense of their native wine.  This particular French woman was a sales manager at Vignobles & Signatures, a import/export company based out of Alexandria, VA.

She was wearing a sassy-yet-down-to-business outfit and pouring tastes of Champagne Drappier, which I had not heard of until that moment.  The tasting was free, so I figured what the hell.  Besides, it was being poured not by some hairy overweight Virginian dude but a very attractive woman of Western European extraction.

So I tried the champagne.  The first, a blanc de blanc, was decent–good but rather ordinary.  The third, their non-vintage “Val Des Demoiselles” rosé, was very, very good–rich, smooth, with a clear taste of red berries.  There was a pretty good mouthfeel and mouthful of bubbles, but… but… by that time I had fallen in love.

With the sales manager?  No, though that would have made me feel all bubbly.  Rather, as in Goldilocks, the middle one was juuuuuust right.

The middle one was the Champagne Drappier “Cart d’Or” brut, which was a blend of primarily pinot noir with some chardonnay and a bit of pinot meunier.  This was just so… wow.  The initial intake was like drinking pure bubbles–and these bubbles were extremely concentrated and tiny.  An explosion of flavor–just rich and buttery from the chard but not overly so, round and full, pear and honey and notes of yeast.  Oh God, gorgeous, and much better than Veuve Clicquot–less of a metallic, sticky finish, for one.  For about $38-$40, it’s a comparable price as well.

The lesson here?  Keep doing what you’re doing, because sometimes you might find something you weren’t expecting but will completely blow your mind (like my blog).

For one, I’m living in a nice, comfortable apartment with great food.  I have a wonderful family that I appreciate more as I get older; great friends.  I am going to a good law school with outstanding professors and classes.  I have nothing to complain about, and I am going to try to be more appreciative of the incredible opportunities I’ve been given.

To kick off the new year, my roommate and I hosted a champagne and sparkling wine tasting, the details of which will be coming out in the upcoming Nota Bene (GW Law student newspaper); I will write up my blog observations on that evening a bit later.  Suffice it to say that the big winner in the tasting were a beautiful sparkler from France, the Charles de Fere Blanc de Blanc Reserve Brut ($12.99)–was, as I described it, “the group’s favorite, with a nose of hazelnut and toast, a light, almost ethereal mouthfeel, and notes of apple and pear.”

But I have to lay rest some unfinished deeds from the previous year, too.  I went to Mission Wines five times over break (1.33 times per week I was at home), during which I merely stopped by twice for bottles, attended a weekend tasting with some LegalZoom friends, drank some excellent wines with my high school friends, and visited with my roommate from DC, Alex.  Managed to catch up with people like Dave, Debbie, and Kirk; from high school, saw Billy–whom I haven’t seen for two years–Brian R.–who moved to Japan after Berkeley and had not been seen this side of the Pacific for quite a few years–Brian H.–UCLA film student extraordinaire–and Jen–soon to be lawyer extraordinaire.

Some notable wines were a 2005 Caymus Cabernet (approx. $70-$80), courtesy of Billy (whoa!)–intense, really really BIG–Robert Parker big–California big; vanilla and tobacco and earth throwing off crazy fireworks in the mouth.  Kirk let me try some of some fantastic zinfandel, and on another day Dave was kind enough to pour for us a bottle of the same, a 2006 Hartford Family Winery Zinfandel from the Russian River Valley (approx. $30)–spicy and full, one of the best zins I’ve ever had.

Alex and I shared a bottle of Casanova di Neri Rosso di Montalcino (approx. $25), from the Southern Tuscany–90% sangiovese and 10% colorino, pronounced acidity that wasn’t overbearing and actually well-balanced, cherry, a bit of spice.  An excellent food wine but also nice by itself, slightly chilled.  I managed to find and buy a bottle of this in DC at the Wine Specialist and got a $5 discount ($24 instead of $29) and am looking forward to drinking it with a nice meal.

And finally, a really wonderful wine from the Languedoc: the 2006 “Les Garrigues” from Domaine Clavel (approx. $12-$14)–everything you would ever want from a wine from the South of France: definitely a cold weather wine, with medium body, dark fruits, nice tannins, and a taste of–you guessed it–the garrigue.

All in all, I had some wonderful wines.  Oh, and before I forget, another wine I had here in DC at the end of the champagne tasting: the 2006 Domaine Joulin Saumur Champigny Rouge ($17.99).  A cabernet franc, it definitely was better than the “Cuvee de la Cure” from Charles Joguet (importer: Kermit Lynch) ($26), I felt–very smooth, very light.  It smelled like gamay and tasted a bit like strawberries, but there was a streak of minerality that separated it from a beaujolais.  Excellent, and a crowd-pleaser.

The wines I had at the end of last year and the start of this year have been very, very good indeed, and more importantly, I was able to share those wines with friends and family.  I have much to be thankful for and much to look forward to in 2009.

Needless to say, I am pretty content right now.  Washington, DC is a great town, and I find myself enjoying law school much more than college.  One of the reasons for that is there are some good people here, and fun things to do.  Like drink.  And cook.  And drink and cook I did for three consecutive days.

Wednesday

My friend Adrian invited a few people over (all guys, regrettably) on Sunday for beef stew and poetry.  I brought over my “house red”–a bottle of Nero d’Avila from Trader Joe’s (retail: $4.99)–and we discussed Rudyard Kipling’s poem “If” over steaming bowls of stew and sips of wine.  To repay the favor, I invited Adrian and two of our friends to my place on Wednesday for a meal of roast lamb, honey-rosemary potatoes, and roasted garlic asparagus.

The meal turned out okay–I don’t have a meat thermometer, and I think the recipe short-changed the time required to cook the lamb.  It was pretty rare when I started carving it, but the problem was solved by quickly pan-frying the slices over high heat.

With the lamb I served a 2005 Cahors Chateau du Cèdre Héritage ($12.99); afterwards, for dessert (along with Alisa’s wonderful little vanilla pudding tarts) we had a 2006 Baron K’ riesling kabinett from the Rhine ($19.99).

I am in love with the “black wine” of Cahors.  They must contain at least 70% malbec, which is very unusual given that malbec is a minor grape in the rest of France (see: Bordeaux).  This varietal has been transplanted to the New World with HUGE success, so much so that many people immediately associate malbec with Argentina, for instance.  The Old World and New World styles are very different, however: New World malbecs tend to be denser, bolder, smoother, with more dramatic notes of chocolate and earth.  Old World styles are more refined, more restrained–in my opinion a bit more “leather-dampness-earth” than “sunny-earth”; definitely a rainy-weather red.  The Cèdre Héritage did not disappoint.  It went extremely well with the lamb.

The riesling had a bit of sweetness to it and a high level of acidity.  It wasn’t the best I’ve had, however, because it was a bit too insubstantial for my taste.  Pairing the riesling with the tarts wasn’t the best idea, either, as the sweetness of the pudding clashed a bit with the riesling.  Oh well.  Writing more of the first legal memorandum of my law school career afterwards was fun.

Thursday

I got it in my mind to cook Hungarian paprika chicken for dinner for a certain lady.  Hungarian paprika chicken’s three main components are chicken, LOTS of paprika, and sour cream.  I didn’t know exactly which wine to pair with this dish–I first thought of Jean-Luc Matha’s marcillac, which is made from a little-known local varietal called mansois.  The marcillac had very pronounced notes of paprika and pepper, which would have made it an excellent match.  I DID manage to find a marcillac from the Wine Specialist, but I decided to go with a South African pinotage (a cross between pinot noir and cinsault) from Indaba.

The Indaba… well, was very acidic at first, very spicy.  It later opened up and mellowed out and became a pretty enjoyable wine… but it’s definitely a food wine in my book.  It also got me really, really hungover for some reason!

Friday

Bell Liquor and Wine Shoppe was having a FREE champagne tasting.  Six of us decided to make reservations and go to the event.  We all dressed up fancy and walked en masse to the store, where we went to the upstairs tasting room.  They were serving eight champagnes–four from Piper Heidsieck and four from Charles Heidsieck.

The first four were an extra-dry, brut, rosé, and “cuvee supreme.”  All were mostly chardonnay, with smaller parts of pinot noir and pinot meunier.  The rosé had some reserve pinot noir wine blended in later during the fermentation process.  Of the four, the consensus favorite was the extra-dry, which, despite being extra-dry had a pleasant sensation of sweetness, probably from the citrus fruit on the palate.  It had an aroma of nuts and vanilla, and had nice body and a crisp, clean finish.

The last four were the expensive bottles.  The 1999 Charles Heidsieck rosé was MUCH more enjoyable than the previous one, probably because it was aged much longer and was fermented directly from whole pinot noir grapes with their skins.  It was also like… $80.

We got the chance to drink the “Champagne Charlie” brut from 1985…  What a fantastic champagne!  Members of my party described its nose as rubber or cheese–normally pejorative terms, I know, but fitting and perfectly appropriate in this context.  It had that nutty, slightly-oxidized character of old white wines.  Interesting and delicious–though, at about $180 I won’t be buying it anytime soon!

A few of us got bottles of the extra-dry ($33.99) to save for special occasions.  End of the semester, maybe?

There are different categories of champagne based on the amount of residual sugar:

(Thanks, Wikipedia!)

When I do drink champagne I like drinking brut. I typically am not a big fan of sweet wines or sweet foods in general (except for the homemade Hostess Cupcakes from Heirloom Bakery in South Pasadena). Brut has just a bit of sweetness to keep things interesting.

Champagne is excellent with cavier, apparently–I’ve never had that particular combination. It is delicious with Thai, and really, really good with sushi. An austere, dry champagne is a great foil for the smooth, cool texture and buttery, sharp taste of sushi. Rieslings and albariños are also good for this purpose.

I love the Brut Yellow Label from Veuve Clicquot. It is nicely crisp and, importantly for me, has a full body:

Prosecco and moscato d’asti are excellent alternatives to champagne–both being sparkling wines from Italy. Prosecco is decidedly more like champagne in its fullness and level of carbonation. Moscato d’asti is sweet, lighter, but offers a nice effervescent kick: it’s a good choice for dessert.

[ Update: I posted a question about the BEST champagne for New Year's on Yelp--here's what twenty Yelpers had to say. ]

But then a rapping on the door! I drag myself out from under my duvet and open it to reveal my resident L. and her friend A.

You know how sometimes you look at an attractive person and you’re like, “Sure, they’re pretty, but whatever”? And sometimes you look at an attractive person and you’re like, “My God I must holler at them.” (In my thoughts, I sound like a white suburban kid trying to be a gansta’.)

This girl, A., was in the latter category. Pretty face, big dark eyes framed with dark lashes, supple red mouth, all framed by “long dim hair” (a point for anyone who can identify that literary allusion). I was drawn to her lips, her eyes, her hips… her hips were womanly, curved and full of life.

The night developed well. For some reason I was feeling especially bold–I looked at her and into those eyes. She blushed, looked down, but always looked back up to meet my gaze.

She also could hold her drink. Luckily, I was a bad RA (or good RA, depending on your point of view) and had a bit of alcohol on hand for any occasion. I had Grey Goose with which to make vodka tonics; I had Jack Daniels to warm the soul and embolden the heart; and I had a bottle of Korbel Brut Rose champagne (or sparkling wine, to be exact, since it’s not from the Champagne region of France):

I don’t remember why I had this on hand. I think I had had it before and figured it was good to have–one of the few cases of my exhibiting some foresight!

This was the clincher. Valentine’s Day, some sparkling rosé. Candles burning. “Astral Weeks” by Van Morrison playing in the background. A. had a ring on her right hand, which I examined with my fingers. Then I brought her hand to my lips, my lips to her lips…

The Korbel brut rosé (pinot noir and chenin blanc) is very fresh and drinks relatively well, though it is not something I would want more than a glass of. It’s brut so it’s not noticeably sweet–there’s a bit of strawberry in it, and of course it’s pink, which gives the impression of sweetness. I can’t say it’s my favorite sparkler (Veuve Clicquot would take that distinction) but it’s definitely a huge step up from Cook’s, and an affordable college luxury.

And, when combined with vodka, Jack Daniels, candles, music, and Valentine’s Day, it’s pretty darn great!

(NOTE: We were both perfectly in control of our senses. And we both consented. Consent is awesome!)