The case for red wine with fish (yes, really)

In nineteenth-century France, fish meant sole or trout, the wine cellar meant Chablis or Champagne, and the rule "white with fish" was simply a description of what was available. Modern menus do not follow nineteenth-century French logic.

Why the rule existed

It was never really about color. It was about tannin. Red wines made by extended skin contact contain tannins that bind to fish oils, producing a metallic, unpleasant aftertaste. Pour a young Bordeaux with poached cod and you'll understand the rule immediately.

But the rule confuses the symptom with the cause. The problem isn't red; it's tannin. There are reds with almost none.

The reds that work with fish

Three names solve the problem.

• Pinot Noir — Cool-climate Burgundy or Oregon. The textbook for salmon, but also for tuna, swordfish, even halibut with mushroom sauce.

- Gamay — Cru Beaujolais (Morgon, Brouilly, Fleurie). Cherry-driven, almost weightless. Try with seared tuna or grilled snapper. - Cabernet Franc — Loire Valley reds (Chinon, Bourgueil, Saumur-Champigny). Herbal, light tannin, gorgeous with anything grilled.

The fish that especially welcome reds

Fatty fish — salmon, tuna, swordfish, mackerel — have enough natural oils to handle a light red. Their fat coats the tongue thick enough that the wine never touches its weaker partner. Lean fish (sole, cod, halibut, snapper) still prefer white, mostly.

The preparation rule

Sauce matters more than fish. Grilled or charred preparations open the door to red. Cream sauces and butter generally call for white. Anything earthy (mushroom, truffle, lentil) practically demands a Pinot Noir regardless of the protein.

The shortcut

If you can imagine the dish with chicken or duck instead of fish, drink the wine you'd pour with chicken or duck. The fish version usually works.