Global Wines

[Capaneus]

Has globalisation actually done what this film implies to the wine world? The review raises interesting questions and even discusses Robert Parker, among others ... a good read for today ...

←

I think so, yes, at least to some degree. The trick, though, is that it has also had other effects, that Parker's opponents never bring up: I remember the widespread disgust at slipshod winemaking with which we'd greet each Burgundy vintage (and to a lesser extent Bordeaux), back in the Bad Old Days. Then Parker came, held many of the culprits to account ( even if we don't agree with his accounting), much of France was forced to modernize, and these days the main problem facing the wine industry is an *excess* of good juice. The fact is that many wine regions pick up their standards when the glare of the Globe falls on them. It's happened in France, it's happened in Italy, it's happened in Spain. I've hopped aboard too late to know if it's happened in Germany, so maybe someone else can comment on that.

I happen to think we are in a Golden Age for us chronic drunkards. It's true that there's a lot of undistinguished wine out there. Newsflash: 90% of *everything* is *always* bad. It's only the fact that mediocrities fall from memory that allows us to romanticize the past. There's good wines at every price point available today, though. And yet there are still (and hopefully always will be) traditional winemakers in every appelation.

Would I prefer that every Amarone were made to be a monster needing twenty-five years to mature? A side of me does, yes. But I don't have the storage to age anything for years, so those wonderful wines would be out of my reach in any case. Modern styles at least allow me to approximate the experience. And the small minority of drinkers who do have cellars can buy the wines still made in the old style. And hopefully I can weasel a glass out of them, now and again.

Edited April 14, 2005 by Capaneus (log)

[Rebel Rose]

From a former thread (that was supposed to be about cat piss in Pinot Grigio, but got a little off topic):

I think there were a lot of great players then as now. However to dismiss the interesting wines of the past in a headlong defense of the squeaky clean commercial wines of today is to ignore the foundation on which today's industry was built. I had some wonderful wines in the late 70's from Wente, Martini and other such names that are dismissed today in favor of technically perfect wines.

If we wax nostalgic about old ball players it is partially out of respect for what they accomplished without the knowledge and technology of today. This most certainly does not mean we do not have respect for the current generation of winemakers - or was that ballplayers.

And I have very fond memories of old time Martini wines...reds matured in old, scuzzy redwood tanks!  They were marvelous in their day and many old vintages are still interesting today.

There is an ocean of technologically "perfect" wine today, to be sure.  But there are many really fabulous wines being made not only in California, but around the planet.

Look at some of the superb wines from France from places that had god-awful wines twenty or thirty years ago!  Wines from Corbieres, for example, were (in my opinion) nearly undrinkable way back when.  Today you can find really good wines and sometimes exceptional wines in that region.  The same can be said for much of the Languedoc. 

So, what do you think now? Are wines becoming better, or just more standardized? Or both? Are we losing true vintage and varietal character? Or there still interesting wines out there, but perhaps from new and unrecognized players?

[Carrot Top]

So, what do you think now?  Are wines becoming better, or just more standardized?  Or both?  Are we losing true vintage and varietal character?  Or there still interesting wines out there, but perhaps from new and unrecognized players?

←

My opinion is definitely "inexpert", Rebel Rose. . .I've had three semesters with Kevin Zraly "way back when" and have had the opportunity to taste some of the world's greatest wines due to the fact that I had to order them (and know their taste) for formal dinners planned to showcase them (and the pockets of the people that were having the dinners ) in the past.

And of course I've had the opportunity to taste some of those older "less-perfect" wines that definitely suited my own pocketbook at other times in those years past.

My opinion is inexpert because I think one has to drink wine daily and think of it daily in order to give a really good opinion, and I don't!

So here is a reaction from that "audience" which is me. . .I think there is a great deal of standardization and less personality being shown in the average bottle of wine that hits the shelf. And from what I hear, it is what the average customer demands. They do not want to "explore" too much this idea of wine. They do not want to take the risk of possible mistakes. . .which of course can happen when exploring in any new area. Most people just want something to taste the same. . .just as if they were buying a bottle of Coke rather than of Pepsi.

I feel that the variety of tastes is being lost in a generalized way to a wish to homogenize so that the wines will sell.

And possibly the distributors are looking for this homogenized taste, too, for the same reason.

But I am sure that the wines are out there. . .just not maybe in the average wine store or grocery store (for sure!). The exceptional wine store with a loving proprietor and the small local wineries. . .that probably is where they are to be found.

The trend towards the artisan movement in all things food. You can not get it "everywhere" but you can get it if you care to hunt for the treasure.

[Florida Jim]

Mary,

Both.

There are many paths to "standardization," many of which I have issue with. I'll leave those out of this discussion.

But on a happy note, niche players are everywhere, whether by virtue of doing what they have done for decades or making in-roads with a unique take. I think a lot of the new folks are maintaining their own independent style because they are choosing wine-making as a life-style as opposed to a way to make their only living. And the folks who have done it their own way for decades feel the traditions upon which their life is founded.

Certainly, greater incomes can seduce either of these groups toward standardization, but not as readily as an operation that answers to its stockholders or one which provides the only means of support of a family.

Best, Jim

[Rebel Rose]

Assuming that more wine is being made than ever before, and assuming that more people are drinking wine than ever before, is there a real danger that ever-increasing production of "homogenized" wines will win over a greater share of the wine drinking public? Will these wines slowly squeeze out artisanal producers, who may find it increasingly difficult to explain, let alone sell, their wines?

Or do you think consumers will continue to cut their teeth on the Kendall-Jacksons and Gallos of the wine world, and then continue to learn and seek out wines with more personality?

[JohnL]

Let's not forget that both Gallo and Kendall-Jackson are responsible for a number of "induividual" or more interesting wines under various labels in addition to their "mass produced" wines.

Also--many of those "individual artisinal" producers have produced a lot of "crappy" wines.

The notion that small is good and big is bad just doesn't work. (neither does the reverse).

That said--there are more options for wine drinkers than ever before and this is growing every day-- from Yellowtail to small production wines made from heretofore obscure grape varietals. That is good!

My concern is that acess to a wide variety of wines via the internet, direct sales and retail shelves be encouraged with little government intervention--laws taxes etc.

Finally,

We should also accept the fact that many people are perfectly happy with the Gallo or Kendall-Jackson and are not "cutting their teeth". Nor do a lot of people neccesarily want a wine with more "personality."

For eg-my wife is perfectly happy eating simple domestic roe--as happy as she is with beluga caviar (I can't stand any of it).

Does this mean that neither of us is elegible for "gourmet" status?

[Brad Ballinger]

Without a doubt I believe that wine is becoming "standardized." But we have to use that term very carefully.

To a degree, most wine throughout the ages has drifted toward standardization in that there are standards for growing grapes and producing wine in many appellations across the globe. If the wine is not in line with those standards, it doesn't get the cachet of an appellation on the label. That's being very literal in looking at the term standardization.

But I have a feeling the word is being used to be more in line with the title of this thread -- which others have called "international style," "universal palate," "McWine," and even "Mondovino." In general, I believe more wines are being sold that could've been made anywhere in the world. Less and less does either terroir or true varietal character matter whether the wines are mass produced or artisinal. But both of those production extremes appraoch it from different directions.

The mass produced wines are seeking a broad appeal. I hesitate to use the term least common denominator because that sounds too snobbish. But I've certainly seen others use that term. The producers of these wines are also savvy marketers.

The artisanal wines (that one would label as "universal") are seeking a different consumership. They need to get a reputation -- and get it quickly -- to make a profit. The quickest route is to get some critic to gush over your wine and assign a large point score to it. To the extent that some (not all) "artisanal" wines are being made in a style that gets high scores, one could argue there is a trend toward standardization.

Thankfully, as Florida Jim points out, there is still a lot of variety in winemaking worldwide. We may see something of a trend toward a world standard, but there is still enough wine available to appeal to a broad range of tastes.

[Rebel Rose]

Less and less does either terroir or true varietal character matter whether the wines are mass produced or artisinal.

As a small producer I don't want to believe this, but your statement reminds me that last year I attended a blind tasting of 21 California syrahs, all from small to mid-size producers. I only found two wines in the whole lineup that had that blueberry, bacon, licorice thing that I expect and crave from syrah. The rest of them could have passed for interesting to so-so cabernets. I was saddened and frankly, amazed. Are producers themselves afraid to produce those intense flavors, and is it strictly because of marketing? Sometimes I get the impression that our new generation of producers have been effectively brainwashed into thinking that if doesn't taste like black cherry and cassis, and nothing else, it's not a well-crafted red wine.

[JohnL]

I attended a tasting of Pride wines led by Bob Foley, the winemaker, last week.

There was a flight of three syrahs. Two('01,'02) were somewhat "anonymous" wines--good--big rich dense, lots of fruit and much like many Australian (and some Cal) Syrahs.

One ('00) was very "Rhone" like funky, bacon fat notes etc.

Foley said he could not really explain this difference as all three were vinified identically and were from the same basic grape sources and the weather was not a real factor.

With wine there is often a "magical" or "mystical" factor--it's what makes it so damn interesting!

As for the terroir thing--I see both sides and wonder if sometimes make too much of this debate. That is it is hard to find absolutes on either side that work.

I do prefer wines that reflect the varietal--in otherwords syrah should taste different from cabernet.

But then there are extremes looking at say, sauvignon blanc --there are subtle grassy styled bordeaux and sweeter tropical fruit styled NZ versions and various versions in between. All distinguishable as Sauvignon Blanc.

Back to Foley--he is a very charming and interesting "character" by the way--it was incredibly educational and entertaining listening to him!

He said that for him a very important factor in making wine is planting the right varietal in the right place.

I suppose that this is where terroir starts! (and maybe ends).

[Brad Ballinger]

He said that for him a very important factor in making wine is planting the right varietal in the right place.

I suppose that this is where terroir starts! (and maybe ends).

←

Some people practice this. Many don't. How many vineyards were ripped up to replant with merlot because it was "popular"? With chardonnay before that? With pinot noir and syrah now? How many vineyards have all of these varieties growing side by side?

[Florida Jim]

Less and less does either terroir or true varietal character matter whether the wines are mass produced or artisinal.

As a small producer I don't want to believe this, but your statement reminds me that last year I attended a blind tasting of 21 California syrahs, all from small to mid-size producers. I only found two wines in the whole lineup that had that blueberry, bacon, licorice thing that I expect and crave from syrah. The rest of them could have passed for interesting to so-so cabernets. I was saddened and frankly, amazed. Are producers themselves afraid to produce those intense flavors, and is it strictly because of marketing? Sometimes I get the impression that our new generation of producers have been effectively brainwashed into thinking that if doesn't taste like black cherry and cassis, and nothing else, it's not a well-crafted red wine.

←

Perhaps, in the overall market-place, Brad is right. But with even the least attempt, one can divorce oneself from that market and hunt out wines that do emphasize varietal character and/or terroir.

So while I will accept the premise I would suggest that, with reasonable effort, it is irrelevant.

Best, Jim

[JohnL]

He said that for him a very important factor in making wine is planting the right varietal in the right place.

I suppose that this is where terroir starts! (and maybe ends).

←

Some people practice this. Many don't. How many vineyards were ripped up to replant with merlot because it was "popular"? With chardonnay before that? With pinot noir and syrah now? How many vineyards have all of these varieties growing side by side?

←

Interesting--Bob Foley noted that a lot of syrah was being planted in less than optimum locations in california.

he also talked about cabernet franc and merlot-- and that a grower/winemaker must understand the grape varietal and "know" what soils and climes will bring out the best the varietal can offer and those that will "encourage" the bad traits the grape can show.--hence the "weedy" vegetal merlots and the "stinky" thin acidic cab franc's we often see.

He also noted that with cab franc he determines optimum ripeness by "squeezing" the grapes in his fingers and looking at the inside the color etc. he does not care much about brix levels etc.

Incidently the two most knowledgeable wine makers I have ever listened to are Foley and Olivier Humbercht (Zind Humbrecht in Alsace). Though very different personalities they both had a deep understanding of the science of farming--growing grapes as well as producing wine.

Both emphasized the need to understand the potential a varietal has and how to maximize it from where the grape is planted to how it is vinified.

perhaps this is the essence of terroir.

[Brad Ballinger]

Perhaps, in the overall market-place, Brad is right. But with even the least attempt, one can divorce oneself from that market and hunt out wines that do emphasize varietal character and/or terroir.

So while I will accept the premise I would suggest that, with reasonable effort, it is irrelevant.

Best, Jim

←

Jim, of course I agree that one can find wines that attempt to stay out of the ever widenening mainstream of McWine. I can especially agree if I'm shopping in a retail store known for its wine selection.

But now let's restrict my shopping to a grocery store, to a chain restaurant, to places like these where the majority of wine sold is sold. More and more, the industry (along its entire production and supply chains) trying to shape consumer drinking and purchasing preferences with the goal of making all of it more predictable. I think they're performing that job fairly well.

For the consumer to divorce himself or herself from that pattern is requiring increasingly more effort on the part of the consumer. And that assumes the consumer wants the divorce.

[Raoul Duke]

Economic factors have to influence this issue as well. At $10k- 15k per acre for planting new vineyard (plus property and other expenses), in California's central coast, some return is expected. Even when "cost is no object" growers/wine makers have this expectation, so market to the market.

[Rebel Rose]

He also noted that with cab franc he determines optimum ripeness by "squeezing" the grapes in his fingers and looking at the inside the color etc. he does not care much about brix levels etc.

I think the ripening sequence is tannins->pigment->flavor->sugar (Brix).

Tannins develop first because the skin and the seeds, in fact the entire being of the grape is the spawn of a woody vine. Pigments begin to develop slowly around now, early to mid-August. Followed by flavor components, although they are very hard to assess viscerally while the grape is still in the spit, spit, nasty unripe stage.

Sugars develop last. Growers and winemakers love to 'wow' onlookers by tasting the grapes and guessing the Brix measurement within half a point. (At least, I was amazed. ) But if you think about it, there are only four degrees between 24 and 28, so with practice it becomes fairly easy to assess where the grapes are at.

Splitting the grapes open is also important, as you want a thick, juicy skin; and a strong skin to juice ratio. (All of the important red pigments and much of the flavor and tannin components are contained in the skin, so in a red wine you want a healthy, juicy, chewy skin, balanced with some sweet, fruity acidity in the pulp.) Some vintages may produce pithy clusters you could scrub your sink with. Not good.

I think I've mentioned elsewhere that another measure of tannin ripeness is looking at and tasting the pips. They should be light brown, crunchy, and have a light nutty or popcorn flavor when the fruit is picked. If they are green and tight, and if you do a hard press, you will end up with green tannins in your wine. (Stemminess and skin quality are also a factor.)

Even if a grape is perfectly ripened, perfectly harvested, it can still end up being like . . . a trophy wife. Perfect, yet somehow lacking.

[Brad Ballinger]

Economic factors have to influence this issue as well.  At $10k- 15k per acre for planting new vineyard (plus property and other expenses), in California's central coast, some return is expected.  Even when "cost is no object" growers/wine makers have this expectation, so market to the market.

←

Very well put, which is why it's not a "blame the industry" issue -- although the knee-jerk reaction is to do that (and I've been guilty on many occasions). Certainly, the market is gobbling up these wines without hesitation.

[Florida Jim]

Jim, of course I agree that one can find wines that attempt to stay out of the ever widenening mainstream of McWine.  I can especially agree if I'm shopping in a retail store known for its wine selection.

But now let's restrict my shopping to a grocery store, to a chain restaurant, to places like these where the majority of wine sold is sold.  More and more, the industry (along its entire production and supply chains) trying to shape consumer drinking and purchasing preferences with the goal of making all of it more predictable.  I think they're performing that job fairly well.

For the consumer to divorce himself or herself from that pattern is requiring increasingly more effort on the part of the consumer.  And that assumes the consumer wants the divorce.

Yes, that is the assumption.

I don't think it takes a lot of work to find and follow producers that are not interested in the lowest common denominator. Still, it does require some effort, the amount of which I would say is directly proportional to the degree to which the consumer wishes to be divorced from the ordinary.

Or, better said, to the degree the consumer wants something special.

Best, Jim

Edited August 3, 2005 by Florida Jim (log)

[Rebel Rose]

Best, Jim

Come on, Jim. You write some of the best reviews in our forum (well, some credit must go to Diane for the fabulous food pairings . . .) Tell us a little more than what you would shop for. Walk the windy alpine ridge of opinion with us.

You frequent boutique wine shops. What do you overhear on this topic from salesmen and customers? When you're shopping in a grocery, are you ever tempted to direct a befuddled shopper in the wine section to a particular wine? What do you see as an overall trend?

[Florida Jim]

You frequent boutique wine shops.  What do you overhear on this topic from salesmen and customers?  When you're shopping in a grocery, are you ever tempted to direct a befuddled shopper in the wine section to a particular wine?  What do you see as an overall trend?

Mary,

Maybe I am misunderstanding here, but what I would shop for isn't really the point - or is it?

If I am an average consumer, the effort I see as needed to separate me from those who are satisfied with commercial wine is really pretty easy; go to a tasting (or several), read an article or book, go on-line and follow what others are saying. By doing these simple things, you start to get a different perspective on wine buying and, if you are brave enough to ask questions, whether on-line or at a retail store, you get get some inter-active learning going.

For me personally, I do all of the above but I also visit wineries and people in the business, get together with fellow enthusiasts and ask questions of anyone that can respond. And I have been doing that studiously for 15 years and off and on for 30.

I also keep notes and try to taste any and everything; bad or good.

I do not follow the critics nor do I attempt to identify overall trends; I simple don't care about either. I trust only my own palate and I understand that some things I taste I will not like - but because I have tasted them, I will know why.

Certainly, Mondavi, Sutter Home and others are not usually my cup of vino, but I don't begrudge them their place in the economy. I prefer to ignore them and seek out producers that give me something special.

I suppose that, if more people did that, they too would make wine I like.

Best, Jim

[JohnL]

The fact is--the world has opened up winewise.

Previously, Europeans made and drank most of the wine produced.

Much of that wine save for Bordeaux and Burgundy major growths was drunk locally.

A lot of that wine was plonk (that's a British term?) mediocre at best and not very interesting other than it accompanied the local food.

Today--we have access to a huge range of wine from all over the world.

Also winemaking methods have advanced (some for the good some not so good).

There is more good wine produced because of this--no longer are we at the mercy of the weather/vintages to the degree we were in the past.

The fact is--many many people enjoy a glass of simple red or white be it a mass produced wine or not mass produced.

---few people will become connoisseurs few will care much about terroir or acidity--if it works for them--that's all they want. They will have their own preferences they will not spend much time learning about wine--they are not interested.

Be it Yellowtail Sutter Home or a vin pays d'oc what really is the difference?

I enjoy different things at different levels i have interests in many things other do not share my interests at all or to the degree that i do. I have a friend who is "into" the civil war and he has onjly a passing interest in wine--the reverse holds tru for myself--I find the Civil War opnly moderately of interest. I am not 'into French Antiques either though I appreciate a well made armoire.

These wines are not bad wines--there is absolutely nothing wrong with white zinfandel nor the people who enjoy drinking it. If it is cleanly made without flaws etc.

The fact is very little wine of all that is produced is of great interest anyway. Those of us who appreciate it and seek it out share the same joys that folks who salivate over

rare pipes and pipe tobacco or Greek Revival architecture etc etc etc.

ps

I think Mondavi has produced a lot of very interesting wine (see even we can disagree!) lol

[Marco_Polo]

Thanks for this, RR, it's an interesting and important topic.

I agree with most of what everyone has already said. There is undoubtedly a standardisation in wine and a trend towards fewer flavours, styles of wine, not least because wine, internationally at least, is now in the hands of the marketing boffins who have deemed that we potato-head consumers are utterly incapable of understanding much (if anything) beyond wines that are marketed as varietals, Cab S, Chardonnay, Sauvignon Blanc, Syrah, Merlot, Pinot Noir etc. In fact, they may well be right, but the wine world is a poorer place as a result. It is indeed easier for most wine drinkers - especially new wine drinkers - to order a glass or bottle of Chardonnay

instead of a Bourgogne or Macon Blanc, not realising that the village of Chardonnay itself is in the Maconnais or indeed that Chablis, Meurseult, Puligny-Montrachet etc are made from that now ubiquitous grape.

More and more wines from all over the world are being made from fewer and fewer grape varieties and this is limiting the range of flavours that we can enjoy.

But there are exceptions, wonderfully delicious and different exceptions. Take a country like Portugal, from where I've just returned (we go there regularly most summers). The wines are getting better and better - and on the whole remain steadfastly produced from a bewildering range of indigenous grape varieties. You won't get many people asking for a glass of Touriga Nacional from Douro or a Tricadeira/Aragones from Alentejo, or a white Antão Vaz from Terras do Sado - but these wines (especially the reds) are just awesome! Even the Vinhos Verdes are more characterful these days, notably those made from named grapes such as the green-apple-fresh Loureiro and the creamy, peachy aristocratic Alvarinho.

Italy too clings to its heritage of indigenous grapes that in some cases go back to the days of antiquity. This is it's greatest strength - but it also makes it difficult for even curious wine lovers to gain an understanding about Italian wines. And undoubtedly, too, it makes life damn difficult for wine shippers and importers to sell wines made from grapes that are hardly household names: Negroamaro, Nebbiolo, Sangiovese, Sagrantino, Nero d'Avola, Aglianico, Grignolino, Greccheto, Falanghina, Verdicchio, Vernaccia, Tocai, to name just a few of my favourites! So even in Italy, alas, Cabernet and Chardonnay continue to make inroads, and flying winemakers and consultants come, see and conquer, confident that they know their markets, they know what international consumers, what WE want. Accordingly, they pay a premium to growers, purchase grapes and create by numbers their own new brands that are juicy, fruity, easy to drink, whatever...international.

Yes, undoubtedly the world of wine is getting ever smaller. But there's still an awful lot to discover, to enjoy.

Cheers!

MP

[JohnL]

I have to disgree with a lot of what you said here.

Though I am viewing this from New York (I don't know what the situation in England is).

Right now-there is a huge variety of wine available in NY area and on the internet.

Wine from small producers, medium producers and yes, large producers.

There are a number of specialty wine shops--for eg-Chambers Street wines focuses on the Loire.

We are seeing more wine bars and restaurant wine lists that are featuring small heretofore obscure producers.

I think that we are seeing a lot of "international" style wines (sometimes I am not even sure what that is anymore) we are seeing the wrong grapes planted in the wrong sites there is a lot ot criticize but I can say for certain that since I have gotten into wine twenty five years ago or so a lot of very good things have happened.

Maybe I am optimistic but ten years ago there were precious few places to go and debate and discuss wine (like eGullet) and only a handful of critics and wine writers.

There were even fewer places to go to learn about wine--classes tasting groups etc.

even the largest wine shops had little wine from Australia, New Zealand, Spain, Portugal etc etc etc.

and bemoan em if you weant--there were few California wines from small producers. Garage and Boutique were not terms associated with wine at all.

German wines were considered cult wines-now there are rieslings available in most if not every wine shop.

What I can tell you is that there was a lot of lousy Bordeaux and Burgundy around as well as a lot of California cabernet that was overly tannic and just plain awful and wine made in terrible conditions-dirty barrels, tainted with bret etc.

I am convinced that this debate over the internationalization of wine is getting a bit overheated and over blown.

The glass is half full!

[Craig Camp]

Let's not forget that both Gallo and Kendall-Jackson are responsible for a number of "induividual" or more interesting wines under various labels in addition to their "mass produced" wines.

Like what?

[JohnL]

Glad you asked!

Gallo has a label:" Gallo--Sonoma" that produces some very nice serious wines:

Zinfandel, Cabernet Sauvignons from single vinyards. I haven't tried one lately I remember the 97 vintage as being quite nice.

Kendall Jackson is a huge conglomerate.

Their Hartford Court label makes some very fine pinot noirs and zins. also some of the Kendall jackson Grand reserves are pretty good--they also have a great estates line of single vinyard wines--the ones I have tasted are also pretty good.

I am sure some of the others out here can provide some better information re: these wines.

[Capaneus]

....

My lasting memory of the wines of Basilicata will not be the beautifully stacked barriques with not a drop of wine split anywhere, nor the new space-age cantina being prepared for future wine-tourists, no doubt searching out those elusive vanilla-flavoured, micro-oxygenated ‘90s’. No, my memories will be of the Lucani people, for whom wine is produced for their family by their family. Wine that is produced with as much care and above all pride, as any of the other wines I saw produced and tasted in this dramatic and often overlooked wine region.

My epiphanic moment came at the family dinner table watching Giuseppe’s father’s gnarled fingers prizing the crown cap off of a bottle last year’s vintage. It was then I was suddenly reminded of Mr Broadbent’s comment during the film “A Standardised Wine.” Yes Sir, I think I agree with you. Maybe now, after 3 years of studying, I’m finally beginning to understand what this wine lark is really all about and long may my journey of discovery continue. Saluté!

←

Nice essay, thank you. But if I may, I'll use it as a launching point for something I've been thinking about a great deal - because I have come to believe we are fondling the elephant's trunk and calling it a snake: the problem isn't one of winemaking philosophy - like the gentlemen in your tale, vintners will make what the market demands, little philosophy there; it isn't even a problem with the critics: who among us believes that if Parker started championing old-school Cahors those wines would become popular? I don't.

The problem is simply the workings of an economy of mass consumption, and it has parallels in virtually every facet of our lives. Think of moviemaking, think of literature, automobiles, clothing. In each of these an homogenizing effect follows from the pressures placed on the producers to sell to the widest possible market. Gap, Hollywood, SUVs, Harry Potter, each steamrolling the competition.

But in those as in wine, the solution needn't to be "found", it already exists: quirky, idiosyncratic instances of all of these are widely available. Hundreds of them, in fact. To focus back on wine, look at the hundreds of grapes Italy grows, sangiovese and nebbiolo aside. The NYT ran a piece not long ago on the little culture of weirdd winemaking flourishing in (I think) the Adriatic coast just East of Italy (which former Yugoslav nation is that?).

The problem isn't bringing the wines into being. They're out there, oceans of them, delicious, unique... and unavailable. We know they exist, but we don't know *how* to get them. Because the mass-produced, massively-bought "product" can afford to be massively marketed and universally distributed, but our little guys cannot. So the problem is, first, one of disseminating the information; and second one of physically connecting the curious bibulator with the adventurous winemaker.

And the structures needed for that aren't in place. Not yet, and they may never be. But the *tools* needed are slowly coming into place: the Internet lets us talk to most anybody anywhere; and shipping is becoming *much* faster and less expensive as a retail proposition.

But I'm not sure *we* are ready to put our wallets where our (as the British put it) whingeing is. I know a lot of wine drinkers. 99% of their wine purchases go to what, six grapes? Let's put it this way: riesling is an exotic choice for many. I see a great many odd little bottles of unfamiliar wines gathering dust in local wineshops. The world is awash in the tears of importers who tried to blaze a path and had their wallets brutalized and lightened by an inflexible consumership: them's us, folks. When was the last time you went out and *sought* a new grape, a new region, just because it was new? I haven't nearly often enough, though I will say that I think I try. And I'm sure my excuses for not doing it more are much like yours : "I don't know; and I can't afford it" are foremost.

I have met the enemy, and he isn't Parker. He is us.