Skip to content

Saucer champagne glasses – in plastic.

October 4, 2011

How wrong is that?!?

Now and then, I try to get downtown for the monthly First Saturday Art Crawl here in Nashvegas. It’s a fun event – as long as the weather is bearable – and you never know who – or what – you’ll see. Last Saturday, I was hanging out on the upper level of the Arcade, and the what I saw was a used plastic saucer champagne glass perched on the railing. I took a picture of it with my iPhone. I try not to use my phone as a camera, at least not in public, but this time I felt compelled to do it. I’m not sure why – I just knew I needed to.

So, I’ve been thinking about the “glass” I photographed ever since.

And my thought is this: Why?

Why do saucer champagne glasses even exist? I’ll admit there’s a certain trashy/retro charm about them – sort of a June Cleaver, June Alyson, Jayne Mansfield three-way decorative/domestic arts mash-up going on. But that’s about all I can say in their favor. They are hard to drink from unless you don’t mind spilling the contents – causing a potentially tragic loss of valuable sparkling wine and quite possibly a dry cleaning bill to boot. Plus the sparkling beverage within gets warm and goes flat in no time – which could lead to guzzling – which could, of course, lead to all sorts of other problems.

And why, oh why do they exist in plastic – with a hollow stem (another no-no in my book) and an ultra-inelegant detachable foot. Furthermore, can we really call it a glass? Isn’t the term “plastic glass” oxymoronic? So, do we call this a “plastic champagne saucer” or maybe a “saucer champagne plastic”?

If the lovely character of good (or even so-so) champagne is damaged by the saucer shape rendered in glass, it is destroyed completely by plastic. It’s an insult to one of God’s loveliest gifts to mankind.

So, really – why?

And, the marketing point here would be … ?

All this reminds me of how expedient, yet cheesy, new products and line extensions can damage a good brand. Champagne is a beverage with a very, very good “brand.” In almost anyone’s mind the mention of champagne calls up visions of  celebration, lavish living, romantic possibilities – and of course that very special tingly buzz you get when you’ve had about a glass and a half. But, served out of a crummy vessel – a rather idiotic glass rendered in plastic – champagne loses just about all of its reason for being. True, you can get a buzz going in no time flat with champagne no matter what you drink it from. But, if a buzz is all you want, there are far more effective ways to get one – at a far friendlier price. And a buzz is only part of the reason to drink champagne.

It’s as if Gucci decided to do plastic versions of their super-deluxe leather goods and sell them by the boxcar load at Wal–Mart. The leather Gucci items would still be super-deluxe, but the damage done by Wal-Mart would make the good stuff seem … less deluxe.

The point here is that the brand and the branded product or service must support each other. A good brand can support a declining – or downright lousy – product for a  while, but not forever. Eventually it will crash if the promise of the brand is not met. The reverse is true, too. A great product can be dragged down, or even completely hidden by a lousy brand. Witness the cars now being made by American car companies. Their quality has risen to meet that of the Japanese brands, but relatively few seem to care any more – or even notice.

Drink Time!

By gad! All this talk of champagne and Gucci has got me feeling thirsty, and craving luxe. And, as we approach the uber-deluxe holiday season, what better way to quench a luxe-craving thirst than with an elegant champagne-based cocktail. There are lots of these, but – though I hate to do it – I’ll limit myself to two – the aptly, though rather unimaginatively, named Champagne Cocktail, and the French 75.

A Champagne Cocktail is just what it says it is – champagne and a few other ingredients to make it into a cocktail. The French 75 (so named – maybe, these things are often murky – for 75mm French artillery shells used in WWI) takes it a little farther out there, adding gin (or brandy if you like) and lemon. Breathtaking – and potent!

A word or two on “champagne”…

One: I’m using the word champagne here because of the “brand” thing as mentioned above – the sparkling, seductive associations it carries. These days American sparkling wines are no longer labeled champagne, but California makes some of the best in this category including my favorite, Schramsburg Blanc de Noirs. Italian versions are usually called proseco, and Spanish, cava.

Two: Don’t be afraid to use the cheap stuff (well, maybe not cheap, but reasonable) in these drinks. In fact you probably should. It’s not that you need to use indifferent champagne, but you can because the extra flavors help cover, even perk-up, not-so-hot bubbly. And the result is about the same as if you use high-end vintage bottle. So, use whatever you can afford – make sure it’s on the dry side –  and enjoy the results. That said, even if you can afford anything you want, I wouldn’t waste Dom Pérignon – or even Schramsburg – in either of these drinks. I do that stuff straight.

Champagne Cocktail

  • 1 sugar cube (you can get these at the grocery store)
  • 2 dashes (8-10 drops) Angustora bitters
  • 1 teaspoon brandy
  • Champagne (icy cold)

Drop the cube into a flute (No flute? Use a wine glass or a jelly jar or something else taller than it is wide.) Add the bitters and soak the cube. Add the brandy, but don’t stir. Top off with the champagne, make a toast – or not – and go for it.

French 75

  • 1 ounce gin (or brandy if you prefer – try both!)
  • Half–ounce simple syrup
  • Half–ounce lemon juice (Need we say it? Fresh.)
  • Champagne, as always, ice cold

Combine the first three ingredients and shake with ice to get them cold. Strain into a flute and top with the champagne. Excellent – but watch out! Three of these will knock you on your can. Maybe only two.

Either of these concoctions is guaranteed to make an occasion more deluxe, and an ordinary day into an occasion. Nothing wrong with that!

6 Comments leave one →
  1. Stuart permalink
    October 4, 2011 7:23 am

    I love that you have written about “plastic champagne saucers” and then told us we can mix our drink in a jelly jar?!!!!

    • October 4, 2011 8:57 am

      What we have here is the dichotomy between choice and necessity. Our official position here at Marketini Central is that it’s always better to have a nip than not to have a nip. As I’ve said before anything that holds liquid – including a hubcap – can be used in a pinch. But we also want to promote things being done as nicely as possible, and glass is generally better than plastic.

      So, in a pinch, by all means use a jelly jar. If absolutely necessary, one could even use a plastic champagne saucer, but I’d probably scout around for a jelly jar before taking that step. (I just can’t get past that detachable foot!) A plastic flute, on the other hand – and these do exist – would present a more difficult choice, but I might still go with the jelly jar if I had the option.

  2. Will Owen permalink
    October 4, 2011 7:58 pm

    Yes. If there is champagne (or a reasonably close relative) worth sipping, and the only vessel in sight is the ghastly plastic saucer, go for it. If there were also styrofoam cups available, this would present a real dilemma: that cup would do a much better job of delivering flavor and aroma, and of keeping the bubbly bubbly and cold, but I have not enjoyed disgusting people since I was eight. And that would do it.

    We do have plastic flutes as backup. We also have some large grey ones that came with a soft cooler, along with a wing-type corkscrew, also plastic. Why CHAMPAGNE glasses and a CORKSCREW? As neither are satisfactory, and the cooler a gift from a long-dead music company, I think this is what’s called “moot”.

    • October 5, 2011 11:21 am

      The plastic saucer/styro cup choice is indeed unappetizing. But, as always, if it’s nip or not nip, you take the vessel you have and go for it. And I wouldn’t worry too much about disgusting others as long as you don’t disgust yourself.

  3. January 22, 2013 12:15 pm

    I’ve read some excellent stuff here. Definitely worth bookmarking for revisiting. I wonder how so much effort you set to create this kind of fantastic informative website.

    • January 22, 2013 2:59 pm

      Thanks.

      The posts aren’t hard to write once I have an idea in my head.

Leave a comment