Good Grape Wine Company

September 27 2007

Chasing the Wind with Wine Critics

Having been employed in and around the wine industry for a scant 12 months, I still consider myself an outsider.  It’s good, I think, to not be inured by others historical preconceptions and it fits my ethos of open-mindedness.  Plus, it allows me to call my shots here without much compunction. 

I do, however, have to say that one of the things that I love about the wine industry is the diversity of opinion, on all subject matter.  It’s like a Haight-Ashbury for modern man.

That said, one of the debates I’m growing weariest of is bashing against the perceived fondness of critics for ripe, fruit-forward “hedonic” wines, high alcohol wines that don’t pair well with food.  Likewise, I’m weary of the old-school vanguard that continually deride the critics, their influential palates, and the sway they hold on the public.

Color me bored.

Unfortunately, in order for it to be a debate, you have to have both sides engaged in dialogue.  However, getting to this debate is like chasing the wind.  And, unfortunately, a couple of the biggest wine critics don’t deign to respond to THEIR critics, leaving many in a sort of simmering, frustrating quietude, with no discourse on their differences.

A pretty good example of this is an article at Appellation America by Dan Berger.  Now, my caveat here is two-fold:  first, Appellation America is doing some of the most thrilling wine writing in the industry these days and second, Dan Berger has forgotten more about wine than I know.  That said, the folks at AA could sharpen their editing and Berger could sharpen his writing pen if he truly wants to get serious—not invoking the name Laube or Parker in a 5000 word two-part screed is the kind of civility you would expect, but the kind of weak-kneed writing that renders what is essentially a long-form op-ed piece toothless. If you’re going to call your shot, you gotta call your shot.  Otherwise it’s politics. 

That aside, his two part story on regionalism (read:  terroir) is a darn fine read, albeit heavy on opinion and light on source references, that covers a lack of character in Rutherford Cabernet as a reference point for Napa wine.  It highlights high alcohol as a by-product of the overripe flavors currently in vogue and gives a sort of viticultural lesson with the reasons that this occurs in the vineyard.

A summary of his article can be found in the following quote:

(Speaking in reference to a lack of terroir in Rutherford Cabs at a recent tasting) What has driven it out is the derision of some high-profile writers who prefer walking-around wine rather than classic dry, food-oriented wine.  And to that end, they have warped the grape, twisting it into a style that’s atypical of what the historic model represented.

The article in its entirety can be found in two parts, here and here.

This sort of writing is interesting if the industry would make some progress on this issue, divide into camps with clearer lines of demarcation or something … critics of Laube and Parker, both of whom are asserted to have “New World” palates that don’t respect the finesses, elegance, restraint, subtlety, and specificity of wine, just simply lob barbs across the transom hoping to find an audience of believers to mobilize, and that’s about it.

In contrast to this heavy sense of regionalism/terroir-ism is the following quote from a recent UC Davis presentation.  This response came unattributed, but it’s from an industry insider and was in response to the following question:

Will global brands dominate wine in the future such as a wine version of Budweiser, or will appellation brands continue to be important?

The response:

I think we will have both and these are kind of like parallel universes.  In the new world, appellation essentially is a marketing tool and a marketing trick.  I think it has very minimal real meaning.  It’s a branding exercise.  In the old world, appellation still has a little bit of meaning – and so the two are just not equivalent – they are two different animals.  We call them both appellation, but they aren’t really.  Appellation in the old world has so much more rigor associated with it as far as farming practice, varieties, spacing, trellising – all that stuff is so proscribed.  In the new world everything goes – to the point where appellation I think is essentially meaningless.

Well, that sums up the other side, for sure.  And, anybody with this opinion is certainly going to make wine that appeals to an audience, notably an audience that follows Parker or Laube ratings.

But, to make this more confusing … in contrast to this talk of Rutherford Cabs, lack of type in Napa, fruit bombs versus food wines and glancing references to “influential critics” is no less than Robert Parker himself.

He says in the October issue of Food and Wine, referring to Paso Robles:

There are now a half-dozen or so properties producing wines that are revelations of elegance, finesse, complexity and flavor concentration.  In fact, each year I spend 10 days there tasting, and each year the quality improves.  Major progress has largely come not from makers of Chardonnay, Pinot Noir, Cabernet Sauvignon or Merlot, but from a group of producers often referred to as the Rhone Rangers, specializing in grape varietals of the Rhone Valley of France.

Paso Robles remains a work in progress, but I believe the region already shows some of the most striking potential in all of California. 

Hmmm … what is Parker saying here?  He is indicating that Paso Robles might be the TRUE Napa Valley of California, if that makes sense.  He is invoking the French as a part of wines historical legacy, he is using the words finesse and elegance and complexity.  He is offering subtle endorsement for Rhone varietals, not a Cabernet, or varietal that California hangs its hat on. 

He is saying that he won’t be pinned down.  In fact, he is subtly using the Karl Rove tactic of using somebody’s strength against them in a kind of wine industry equivalent to a John Kerry swift boat dis-credit tactic. 

Smells like politics?  Kind of like chasing the wind, huh?

digg this | toast this! | add to del.icio.us | add to newsvine | add to furl | add to reddit |

Posted in, Free Run: Field Notes From a Wine Life. Permalink | Comments (0) | Print | Email This