Context - structure-context
Structure: Why resilience is more important than intensity is often interpreted as a clear signal. The canon describes structure as the interplay of acidity, tannins, and alcohol as the supporting framework of a wine. It is independent of intensity or aromatics. This article shows its application, borderline cases, and typical misinterpretations – and refers to the canon (structure-definition-canon) as a conceptual anchor. The focus is on observation rather than judgment, as well as the question of when patience, aeration, or temperature truly help – and when they do not.
Structure is one of the most frequently used yet most imprecise terms in wine. It is employed to organize impressions without defining them. Structure does not describe what a wine tastes like, but rather how it carries itself.
At its core, structure refers to the relationship between the constituent elements of a wine. Acidity, tannins, alcohol, extract, and texture are all interrelated. Structure arises where these forces form a balance that allows movement without the wine falling apart.
Structure is therefore not a single characteristic, but a relationship. It cannot be isolated or measured. It is experienced. A structured wine feels vibrant, not harsh. It feels grounded, not heavy.
Structure is often confused with power. Concentration, intensity, or volume are considered structural. This equation is too simplistic. A powerful wine can lack structure if its elements are disjointed. A subtle wine can appear structured if its tension is compelling.
Structure is closely linked to time. It determines how a wine ages, not whether it ages. Structure enables development without forcing it. A wine without structure may be approachable early on, but quickly loses direction. A structured wine remains coherent even as it evolves.
In perception, structure often becomes apparent in the finish, where aromas don't simply disappear but linger. Structure holds the wine together as the initial intensity diminishes.
Structure is not static. It changes with maturation, exposure to air, and temperature. A young wine can be structurally complete but sensorially fragmented. Over time, its elements realign themselves without creating a new structure.
Structure becomes misleading when it's used as a substitute for quality. A wine is considered significant because it has structure. This turns the term into a badge of honor, not a description. Structure is a prerequisite, not proof.
Technical interventions cannot create structure. They can support or disrupt balance, but they cannot establish inner order. Structure arises from raw materials, decisions, and time. It is the result of a process, not a tool.
In wine evaluation, structure often only becomes apparent when it is lacking. A wine without structure seems flat, short, or generic. A structured wine remains present, even if it is subtle.
Structure is therefore not a promise of greatness, but of coherence. It allows the wine to change without losing itself.