Wine, no more slaves to 'forced' pairings: here are the clichés to dispel
Among the hardest myths to die are that of combining oysters and champagne and that of red far from fish: as Veronelli used to say, the first rule is not to follow the rules (or worse, the clichés)
I have never been a slave to wine/food pairings, with the exception of desserts. There you can't escape it: the sweet taste commands and anyone who tries to contradict it ends up badly. Everything else, however, is a theatre of clichés worth dismantling, glass in hand.
Let's start with the hardest myth to die: oysters and champagne. The icon of luxury, the perfect couple, the cover photo. Too bad they often can't stand each other. The saltiness of oysters and the acidity of champagne smack each other around like two stars in an ego crisis. Better a quiet, unobtrusive white like a muscadet, or a finger of vodka, and the same goes for caviar. But at the end of the day: if you like oysters or caviar and the marriage with Champagne, what's wrong with that? Nothing.
Another dogma to be trashed: "red only goes on meat". The Pinot Noir, if it could speak, with its grace and elegance, would respond with a smile, being a wine capable of seducing even a fish soup without making a big deal out of it. Ditto for the Cerasuolo di Vittoria in Sicily or a classic Valpolicella (but not the ripasso, please): light tannins, elegance, versatility. Even a young Sangiovese di Romagna on blue fish does not make a mess and indeed, it reminds us of an old local tradition that I am not crazy about but has its own somewhat retro charm.
Chapter tuna. Let's treat it like meat, not fish: if it is raw or seared, the whites retreat with dignity. If, on the other hand, it is in oil, the white returns to the forefront, but with sobriety. Do you prefer to do as you please? Feel free: do it!
