This brings me back to one my favorite definitions of "brand:" it's the image of your product in the customer's mind. It's not, in other words, what you say it is. It's what the customer believes it to be. Natural wine has an acquired image, rather than a manufactured one. I'm sure many producers are thrilled with where it has landed, and probably some aren't, but regardless, there's only so much any given producer can do to move the market's perception of the category.
I agree with the thesis that the PDO system has ossified wine. In the States we see more experimentation—with hybrids, coferments, etc.—because it's not forbidden and there's also no tasting panel at the tollgate telling you to shove off. Not that our appellation system is perfect, far from it! But it feels less hidebound by tradition and expectation, except in certain tiny pockets (er-hem, NAPA cough, cough...)
Totally agree - and this is, I think, why Sara's article totally didn't hit home for me. Marketing, if it is a thing in this context at all, has to be seen holistically. It cannot be divorced from the product itself.
Thanks for that, Simon. Actually, not sure what you say is even close to the whole story "What’s the purpose of wine? I’d say it’s to provide deliciousness, refreshment and pleasure." The purpose, too, is to provide an income to farmers like me utilizing steep, almost-impossible-to-till land where few other crops can be grown (now in Norway, before in Piemonte). One should not be growing grapes on flat pasture land for a myriad of reasons. Anyway (seriously) that is another purpose, as I see it. 😀
The wine market is in transition; then again, when is it not? The so-called natural wine movement is one of the more interesting developments because it does harken back to the eras of traditional Old World wines when almost all the wines were, in fact, made in natural styles, and were very unpredictable coming out of the bottle. I started in the wine industry in the mid-1970s when many European wines (with the exception of maybe German wines) were exactly like this. It amuses me when when I hear today's natural style wines described as "new" or "alternative," when in reality they are just reflections of vintners wanting to produce wines the way they once used to be.
The thornier issue for many of today's more knowledgeable wine buffs and professionals is the matter of terroir vs. the natural wine movement. It is true that the most terroir focused wines of the world tend to be wines made by minimal intervention. The less you do to a wine, the more likely it is to express its place of origin, which is a good thing.
Be that as it may, the big issue with many of today’s so-called natural wines is that with all the techniques associated with the emerging category⏤foot treading, native or wild yeasts, whole cluster red or skin contact white fermentations, large format or amphora vessels, minimal sulfuring, et al.⏤the results can include lots of funky or feral, oxidized or dirty microbrial aromas and flavors, which can make many of these wines as predictable or even unpleasant as what you find in clean, unblemished but highly commercialized conventional products sold on grocery store shelves by the container loads.
Sure, at the moment, many people like funky, unpredictable alternative style natural wines, but is this terroir? For the most part, you have to say “no.” Many of the wines made in alternative styles for the sake of being alternative are more about winemaking, or winemaker ego. Just another case of winemakers taking the grapes furnished by Nature and imposing themselves, rather than letting sensory qualities intrinsic in a vineyard to express themselves.
Many natural style producers are terroirists, and many of them are not.
In the end, though, it's up to consumers, who ultimately control the market, to sort this out for themselves. Like I said, we are in a usual stage of transition. Invariably, vintners mature and improve their products, and consumers become more knowledgeable and discriminating by the day. It really makes no sense for pundits to pass judgement because people end up figuring things out for themselves. As Bob Dylan once said, you don't need a weatherman to know which way the wind blows.
Everyone tells me that the era of feral wines getting a free pass is over....
I would just add that techniques such as foot treading, whole cluster, use of clay/amphorae for fermenting are all perfectly valid and capable of yielding wines with terrific sense of place, so long as they are not used indiscriminately.
To me it is up to the winemaker to figure out the most sympathetic and low intervention methods of transmitting the information in their vineyard to the consumer. That is surely the art of winemaking?
Perhaps the biggest change in the modern era, apart from the return to "old fashioned" low intervention winemaking, is that modern consumers are producer-lead rather than region or appellation-lead. I'd further add that this change has been forced on them in many cases. Many of the best European wines no longer fit the cookie-cutter mould and may not speak their geographic names on the label.
Change is inevitable, and it's long reached the point where the taste of consumers themselves varies so much there is now room in the market for wines appreciated for any number of reasons.
Case in point: Since terroir itself always involved human input, this has always translated into what happens once grapes leave the vineyard and get into the hands of winemakers. It is interesting that the old French word for the producer has always been "vigneron," which translates more accurately as "winegrower," thereby implying that the person who manages a vineyard also crafts the wine. The reality in the modern world is that there are growers and there are producers or winemakers, and so most wines are no longer made by someone who is one and the same. Inevitably, then, winemakers, and companies or brands, end up making it all about themselves, or their "art," and not about expressions of vineyards. There is nothing wrong with that, of course, because we all love art.
Many of the finest wines of the world, however, are still all about their sense of place, whether it's Lafite or Mouton, Scharzhofberger or Steinberger, or Pinot Noirs from Côte de Nuits, Willamette Valley, Russian River Valley or Central Otago. There are many wine lovers who still care very much about expressions of place, even if the commercialized industry selling on the basis of brand style or varietal character have come to dominate much of the market. In the New World, in fact, appreciation of appellations and sense of place is increasing, not decreasing, which is all part of the growing sophistication of consumers and the industry.
Ergo, we no longer live in a world where the love of wine is about just one thing or another. Whether it's about a winemaker's "art" or appreciation of terroir, wines will most likely be made in ways that vary as much as the tastes of consumers themselves.
It's this line from the Danese article that you highlight “I also wonder whether their more pungent, distinctive aromas— rather like unpasteurised cheese — give less wine-experienced drinkers the confidence that they’re actually tasting something, that they’re participating in the ritual of wine tasting”.
Gets me thinking. If you've got a great Zin from Dry Creek in front of you, are you tasting cherries, cranberries, strawberries, raspberries, blackberries, or blueberries? Damn, that's difficult. Guess wrong, get corrected or looked down upon by the instructor/Somm/winemaker in the room.
But if it's weird, flawed and Kombucha like you just say "this tastes like a berry Kombucha" and you get the right answer. Validation! Winning! Applause all around. And easy to spot. A lot easier than figuring out what fruit it is and what the hell bramble notes are from Dry Creek.
It's also likely, more people than not will catch something like EA (nail polish remover) as it's distinctive where oolong tea notes is not universal in sensory analysis. Then if someone frames the EA as a natural bi-product of a natural fermentation, it gets explained away. Then common sense should kick in, if it smells like nail polish remover, should I be drinking it?
As we all are aware, VA is a natural bi-product of fermentation. But if the waft from the barrel smell like a nail salon, it's time to bring in the cross-flow and DVA equipment.
This brings me back to one my favorite definitions of "brand:" it's the image of your product in the customer's mind. It's not, in other words, what you say it is. It's what the customer believes it to be. Natural wine has an acquired image, rather than a manufactured one. I'm sure many producers are thrilled with where it has landed, and probably some aren't, but regardless, there's only so much any given producer can do to move the market's perception of the category.
I agree with the thesis that the PDO system has ossified wine. In the States we see more experimentation—with hybrids, coferments, etc.—because it's not forbidden and there's also no tasting panel at the tollgate telling you to shove off. Not that our appellation system is perfect, far from it! But it feels less hidebound by tradition and expectation, except in certain tiny pockets (er-hem, NAPA cough, cough...)
Totally agree - and this is, I think, why Sara's article totally didn't hit home for me. Marketing, if it is a thing in this context at all, has to be seen holistically. It cannot be divorced from the product itself.
Thanks for that, Simon. Actually, not sure what you say is even close to the whole story "What’s the purpose of wine? I’d say it’s to provide deliciousness, refreshment and pleasure." The purpose, too, is to provide an income to farmers like me utilizing steep, almost-impossible-to-till land where few other crops can be grown (now in Norway, before in Piemonte). One should not be growing grapes on flat pasture land for a myriad of reasons. Anyway (seriously) that is another purpose, as I see it. 😀
Fair point!
The wine market is in transition; then again, when is it not? The so-called natural wine movement is one of the more interesting developments because it does harken back to the eras of traditional Old World wines when almost all the wines were, in fact, made in natural styles, and were very unpredictable coming out of the bottle. I started in the wine industry in the mid-1970s when many European wines (with the exception of maybe German wines) were exactly like this. It amuses me when when I hear today's natural style wines described as "new" or "alternative," when in reality they are just reflections of vintners wanting to produce wines the way they once used to be.
The thornier issue for many of today's more knowledgeable wine buffs and professionals is the matter of terroir vs. the natural wine movement. It is true that the most terroir focused wines of the world tend to be wines made by minimal intervention. The less you do to a wine, the more likely it is to express its place of origin, which is a good thing.
Be that as it may, the big issue with many of today’s so-called natural wines is that with all the techniques associated with the emerging category⏤foot treading, native or wild yeasts, whole cluster red or skin contact white fermentations, large format or amphora vessels, minimal sulfuring, et al.⏤the results can include lots of funky or feral, oxidized or dirty microbrial aromas and flavors, which can make many of these wines as predictable or even unpleasant as what you find in clean, unblemished but highly commercialized conventional products sold on grocery store shelves by the container loads.
Sure, at the moment, many people like funky, unpredictable alternative style natural wines, but is this terroir? For the most part, you have to say “no.” Many of the wines made in alternative styles for the sake of being alternative are more about winemaking, or winemaker ego. Just another case of winemakers taking the grapes furnished by Nature and imposing themselves, rather than letting sensory qualities intrinsic in a vineyard to express themselves.
Many natural style producers are terroirists, and many of them are not.
In the end, though, it's up to consumers, who ultimately control the market, to sort this out for themselves. Like I said, we are in a usual stage of transition. Invariably, vintners mature and improve their products, and consumers become more knowledgeable and discriminating by the day. It really makes no sense for pundits to pass judgement because people end up figuring things out for themselves. As Bob Dylan once said, you don't need a weatherman to know which way the wind blows.
Everyone tells me that the era of feral wines getting a free pass is over....
I would just add that techniques such as foot treading, whole cluster, use of clay/amphorae for fermenting are all perfectly valid and capable of yielding wines with terrific sense of place, so long as they are not used indiscriminately.
To me it is up to the winemaker to figure out the most sympathetic and low intervention methods of transmitting the information in their vineyard to the consumer. That is surely the art of winemaking?
Perhaps the biggest change in the modern era, apart from the return to "old fashioned" low intervention winemaking, is that modern consumers are producer-lead rather than region or appellation-lead. I'd further add that this change has been forced on them in many cases. Many of the best European wines no longer fit the cookie-cutter mould and may not speak their geographic names on the label.
Change is inevitable, and it's long reached the point where the taste of consumers themselves varies so much there is now room in the market for wines appreciated for any number of reasons.
Case in point: Since terroir itself always involved human input, this has always translated into what happens once grapes leave the vineyard and get into the hands of winemakers. It is interesting that the old French word for the producer has always been "vigneron," which translates more accurately as "winegrower," thereby implying that the person who manages a vineyard also crafts the wine. The reality in the modern world is that there are growers and there are producers or winemakers, and so most wines are no longer made by someone who is one and the same. Inevitably, then, winemakers, and companies or brands, end up making it all about themselves, or their "art," and not about expressions of vineyards. There is nothing wrong with that, of course, because we all love art.
Many of the finest wines of the world, however, are still all about their sense of place, whether it's Lafite or Mouton, Scharzhofberger or Steinberger, or Pinot Noirs from Côte de Nuits, Willamette Valley, Russian River Valley or Central Otago. There are many wine lovers who still care very much about expressions of place, even if the commercialized industry selling on the basis of brand style or varietal character have come to dominate much of the market. In the New World, in fact, appreciation of appellations and sense of place is increasing, not decreasing, which is all part of the growing sophistication of consumers and the industry.
Ergo, we no longer live in a world where the love of wine is about just one thing or another. Whether it's about a winemaker's "art" or appreciation of terroir, wines will most likely be made in ways that vary as much as the tastes of consumers themselves.
Love this :)
It's this line from the Danese article that you highlight “I also wonder whether their more pungent, distinctive aromas— rather like unpasteurised cheese — give less wine-experienced drinkers the confidence that they’re actually tasting something, that they’re participating in the ritual of wine tasting”.
Gets me thinking. If you've got a great Zin from Dry Creek in front of you, are you tasting cherries, cranberries, strawberries, raspberries, blackberries, or blueberries? Damn, that's difficult. Guess wrong, get corrected or looked down upon by the instructor/Somm/winemaker in the room.
But if it's weird, flawed and Kombucha like you just say "this tastes like a berry Kombucha" and you get the right answer. Validation! Winning! Applause all around. And easy to spot. A lot easier than figuring out what fruit it is and what the hell bramble notes are from Dry Creek.
It's also likely, more people than not will catch something like EA (nail polish remover) as it's distinctive where oolong tea notes is not universal in sensory analysis. Then if someone frames the EA as a natural bi-product of a natural fermentation, it gets explained away. Then common sense should kick in, if it smells like nail polish remover, should I be drinking it?
Ah come on, a little VA never hurt anybody did it? :-)
As we all are aware, VA is a natural bi-product of fermentation. But if the waft from the barrel smell like a nail salon, it's time to bring in the cross-flow and DVA equipment.