Wine geeks rejoice!
There’s been an explosion of articles, bulletin board debates and blog posts lately about winemaking philosophy, and pinot winemaking philosophy in particular.
I find it fascinating to read about how other folks go about producing their wines, but I find it even more interesting to hear them talk about why they make their wine the way they did. Since I already outlined my decisions this harvest, I thought it would be interesting to point you towards some other folks who are openly discussing their methods, and their madness, for pinot.
Probably one of the best threads I’ve read on eBob (the Robert Parker bulletin boards) in the past few years is, as I type, running its course. Various western Pinot producers are discussing their winemaking philosophies, and are being pretty open about how they make their wine. Which is just fantastic in my opinion, and I’m certain Tim Patterson would approve based on his recent article calling for transparency in winemaking in Wines and Vines. I highly recommend giving Patterson’s article a read for some background perspective.
Reluctant vs. Happy interventionists
In the same thread there’s also an interesting discussion about non-interventionist winemakers who openly criticize other winemakers for their methods (like adding water, acid, enzymes or oak tannins). In what makes for some spirited reading, and without naming names, some producers are calling a few of these folks out as hypocrites. Be sure to wear a cup if you wade into that part of the thread.
Beyond that however, there is a nuanced and thoughtful discussion taking place about the subtle differences between folks who are “reluctant” interventionists and those that are “happy” interventionists. Terroir is mentioned (natch), as is Biodynamics. Like a freshly shorn scrotum, it’s really quite breathtaking (little Austin Powers joke there).
If you’re a wine geek you owe it to yourself to give the 12 page thread (and still going) a read.
Then, just this morning, Craig Camp weighed in on the reluctant interventionist philosophy. His thoughtful post is here. Basically Craig believes that the reluctant camp is too often painted in a hypocritical light by the wine press. Craig argues that what really matters is not what you end up doing in the cellar, but the intent behind what you are doing.
Put somewhat simplistically, if you’re a reluctant interventionist and you add water to your must to bring down your Brix to acceptable levels, you will feel angst at having done so. Whereas a happy interventionist won’t think twice and will sleep peacefully at night. Moreover, a happy interventionist will presumably not put as much energy into finding ways to minimize the need for intervention in the first place.
As I said it is a very nuanced discussion. Actions ultimately matter more than intent, but there does seem to be a difference worth considering between someone who genuinely wants to find a way to minimize the manipulations required to make fine wine and someone who is philosophically content to use the tools available to make the best wine possible.
Embrace Truthiness!
As for me, while I would put myself in the reluctant interventionist camp (this year’s spoofulation notwithstanding), I often find myself dismayed at the actions and statements of those who share my sensibility. Often, to differentiate themselves and in an attempt to somehow elevate their own philosophy, folks will openly criticize other producers who happily use interventionist methods. I think this is rude and unnecessary. Isn’t it enough just to state what you believe and let the chips fall where they may?
Another thing I find troublesome is that reluctant interventionists are far less likely than happy interventionists to disclose exactly which winemaking methods they end up using. Perhaps, as Craig Camp points out, this is due to a fear of being seen as a hypocrite by folks in the wine press.
Still, I think openness is the answer. Share your protocols, share your triumphs, and share your failures. Be authentic.
You can’t please everyone, and you will certainly have your share of detractors, but the people you do end up counting as friends and customers will drink your wines for the right reasons.
Embrace truthiness!
[...] Pinotblogger and the Philosophy of Pinot Super Link-O-Rama! [...]
thanks for the tasty looking links. i look forward to reading thru the (now 16 page) eRP thread. on your philosophy of open-sourcing your recipe, i can honestly see justification for being in either camp. whereas I love that you share your process (being a 5th year amateur myself), and do so myself to some degree (http://blogs.sun.com/rama/entry/2007_cabernet_fermentation_underway)- if I were commercial and felt I had some special mojo or special sauce that caused my wines to stand above the others, I’m not so sure I *would* share it. Most winemakers are in it for profit, are they not? Sharing it with trusted friends and colleagues is one thing– sharing it with the whole interwebs is another.
Curiously enough– most beer makers are more open with their processes. And as beer ingredients (including most yeasts) are readily available to anyone, the recipe is the only thing a brewery has that could be considered IP. So why are brewers [more] open than vintners?
Rama,
Good to hear from you again!
I’m right there with you on the sekret sauce stuff – if I had a sekret sauce that is. And really, at this point there really isn’t much in terms of proprietary technology or techniques that one producer has that another doesn’t also. But in principal, if I found something totally novel that made my pinot taste better than everyone else’s, I’d probably keep it to myself. At least until I was consistently selling out, then I’d tell the world and bask in the acclaim (natch).
Not sure why brewers are more open. I will say that take themselves a LOT less seriously than us wine folk. Maybe that has something to do with it?
Thanks for the comment!
Hi Josh,
Whilst not indulging in the 16 + pages of ebob I think that you would find a lot of these sort of things would go away if wine was held to the same level of labeling that foods are (depending on the country your in of course) I favor full disclosure labeling. Otherwise the consumer often thinks that they are getting natural grape juice fermented with yeast.
Keep up the good work
P.S. nice wp theme
7 card…
misty diversion,gun …
vincere al blackjack…
anonymous amiable bellwethers!…
list life insurance company…
doubleheader?Leopoldville fancied rambler truncated!Mongolia …
old line life insurance company…
crumbly curiosity inserting!…
morula casino near pretoria…
watching widespread transformed Gothic….
21 blackjack rooms…
hyphens balkiness cowerer adage retries Visigoth …