Keen's - Round Two

Picture this: all the haters were sitting around a table in the back of Keen’s. We had just finished a glorious dinner, which had been highlighted by two gigantic porterhouse steaks, each steak purportedly portioned for three people, but in reality, about big enough to feed six. We had two of them. And those two steaks went with two bottles of California cabernet, two heaping plates of fries, and a couple other sides. All that had all been preceded by Keen’s big raw bar platter. So maybe you get the impression that we were, by the time the steaks had been cleared away, rather well sated. Oh, did I mention that some of us even ate dessert?

In any event, sated or not, we were ready to enjoy some after dinner malts. In truth, there really isn’t such a thing as an after dinner scotch, but in my experience, some tastes are so strong that they overpower the palate before a meal. I think of the peatier island malts as those kinds of whiskies. Plus, it only makes sense to move in the direction of quality. I think it has something to do with the second law of thermodynamics, but really, would you want to drink Talisker 25 at the start of the evening? And if you did that, would you really enjoy an Edradour 10 a couple hours later? I think you get my point.

We ordered the Great Scott’s flight – four whiskies, each one from a different region. Here’s the lineup: Bladnoch 20; Glen Grant 26, North of Scotland 40, and Port Ellen 21. Lowland, Speyside, Highland, Islay.

The Bladnoch 20 was flowery, spicy and reminiscent of Rosebank. Joe gave John and me a taste of Bladnoch one time at Federal, and we loved it, but were disappointed to discover that this is yet another marvelous lowland distillery which had been closed. However, the good news, according to Jackson, is that the distillery has reopened in the new millennium, and so will soon be producing that distinctively light but flavorful lowland malt that we’ve come to appreciate. I actually think a lowland is best before dinner – like the Rosebank we had enjoyed in the bar earlier that night. But this Bladnoch had enough flavor to impress us even after a dinner of steak and red wine. John’s call: “A knockout!” I can’t argue. Jackson is not a huge fan of lowlands, but Jim Murray rates several Bladnoch offerings in the low 90s. I can’t argue with that either.

Glen Grant is the backbone of Chivas, and so one would expect a smooth whisky without such strong flavors that they might intimidate the larger scotch purchasing public. We sampled a 26 year old bottling, and the various reviews included, woody, honey, iodine (I didn’t get much iodine), chamomile, and oak. This was a fine whisky, but I think the general sense was that it was undistinguished. Certainly, in the company of the magnificent malts we drank at the Haters Ball, the Glen Grant did not stand out. But its smooth character and long finish told us that it was an enjoyable drink.

North of Scotland, 40 years old. For starters, not one of us had ever heard about this whisky. Jackson makes no reference to it, in his guide to single malt scotch. But as it turns out, that’s because North of Scotland is not a malt whisky, it’s a grain whisky. The collective palate at the Haters Ball could detect that difference right away. We thought it was a rye; maybe I thought it was a rye. Rico went to the bar afterward and learned it’s made from wheat. I found a reference to it in Jim Murray, under single grain scotch. Murray likes it, and here’s a quote that seems to be consistent with our tasting: “begins in a bourbon sweetness, then dries toward very old Canadian.” That’s the rye flavor. Our notes show references to vanilla, citrus and caramel, but we also recognized two distinctive and most enjoyable characteristics. First was a long finish, as one would expect from a forty-year-old whisky. Second was a silky texture on the tongue; Danny thought in that respect, it reminded him of the older Bunnahabhains. So putting that all together, it’s like a sweet Canadian whisky, buttery and rich, long finished. And I regret to advise all the haters that this is yet another whisky which is fast disappearing from view. The distillery stopped producing in 1980, and was dismantled in 1993. That’s perhaps why we were drinking such an ancient bottling at the Ball. Oh well, better to drink it now, while there are still a few drops to be found, than to read about it after it’s gone, and never have had the chance to taste.

Which brings us to the gem of the evening, to quote Joe Howell from Federal, Port Ellen 21 – cask strength. I think I’ll just let the notes speak for themselves: “enormously flavorful”, “wonderful aftertaste”, “deceptively smooth”, and my favorite review of the night, although I can no longer recall who said it: “an orgiastic feast for the senses”. Here’s the other thing I want to point out – we drank four fabulous malts on one flight. Two were from distilleries long closed – and therefore, two were whiskies which might not be around by the time of the next Haters Ball. All four were outstanding; and Keen’s price for the flight was really quite modest. I know it’s not the price that matters, and I know we went there for the Haters Ball, but when it comes to malt whisky, Keen’s is really all about the love. Love of good whisky.

Oh, and by the way, we weren’t done yet. There was the After Dinner Flight as well. But that will have to await my final posting about the Haters Ball.