The Answer

On my way to work this morning, I realized that I hadn't answered THE question in my last post. Last week's NY Times offered up the thought that maybe, just maybe, you don't need to cook only with a wine you would drink. I agonized over this knowing that a few days later I would be making Beef Bourguignon - which is one of the more wine intensive dishes that I ever cook. I went to the wine store without a firm decision on which way I would go (placing my meal in the hands of fate). The nice gentleman who helped me suggested that I could cook with a nice, cheaper California Pinot. One of the (few) definitive results in the Times had been the idea that less tannic wines cook better. And so I thought about the more typical, fruitier California wines - and finally, a decision: I bought the cheaper wine to cook with.

And it was fantastic! The recipe called for a cup, I used the whole bottle (why use water when you can use wine - especially wine you wouldn't otherwise drink). I can't believe that it could have been any better with a better wine (like those that we did drink).