Fermentation

“I do not believe nature has any use for our democracies. Some things are better than others, and on of our functions is to guide our readers toward appreciation of these distinctions as gracefully a we’re able.”

This is Terry Theise, the great importer of wine, explaining his belief that quality is objective and can be discerned in wine. It is also Terry explaining that it is the obligation of the learned wine aficionado to tutor the less knowledgeable in a kind an gentle way.

I cam across this quote while reading through Theise’s new book, “Reading Between the Wines” a new issue form the University of California Press that just goes to show that the ivory tower can churn out some pretty wonderful products.

But what Theise does not explain, as far as I can tell as of yet, is what philosophy of aesthetics determines how we can derive an objective criteria for determining quality in wine. Clearly, he’s not convinced that “pleasure” derived from the drinking of a wine gets us toward a criteria for determining quality in wine:

“There are no ‘invalid’ moments of pleasure in wine. But there are higher and lower pleasures.
Once you have graduated from the low you can always return. It’s fun to return. You should return frequently, because it’s good to stay in touch with your inner redneck.”

Despite the downstream implications of possessing an “inner redneck”, the fact remains that far more drinkers determine the value and even the quality of a wine based primarily on whether or not it gives them pleasure. Theise know this, yet he dismisses this tendency of the average drinker as philistinism. He dismisses it for what is surely the same reason nearly every critic, wine professional, winemaker, grapegrower, wine retailer and wine writer dismisses the simple “pleasure criteria” as too simple an approach to wine evaluation: They have developed a heightened level of discernment  where wine is concerned that they don’t want to waste.

With a higher level of discernment, the non-wine redneck is able to do a number of things the average pleasure seeking redneck cannot. Among these things are:

-Detect and describe production faults in the wine
-Measure the length of a wine
-Determine the relative age of a wine
-Measure a wine against an historic model of its type
-Detect evidence of a region’s terroir in a wine
-Discern and detect higher or lower levels of alcohol
-Detect the impact of vintage variation on a collection of wines

The list goes on and on. The point is that as soon as a motivated collection of people can discern more in a wine than the average person (because they care to), the next and most obvious step is ranking the importance of various characteristics wines might possess. This in turn inevitably leads to creating something of an objective outline for what constitutes quality in a wine.

But let’s be clear about something. While Terry Theise and many others, including myself, obviously have adopted the notion that there are a set of factors that can help us delineate one wine from another based on its “qualitative” factors, these are subjective judgments.

No one can say with any degree of righteousness that to be of a “better quality,” Chardonnay must exhibit some degree of acidity. No one can say with any guarantee that “fine” Bordeaux ought to have at least a bit of tannin. And no one can say with finality that “great” Red Burgundy ought to have some ability to age. All they can say is that these are the criteria and factors we have adopted to determine the qualitative differences in wines.

What is really interesting is that despite the Rednecks’ proclivity to judge wine base primarily on the “pleasure” it delivers and not on whether it matches a pattern or principle or model, they are surely willing to admit that these models for quality they don’t understand probably exist. There is no other way to explain the fact that “shelf talkers” that show up underneath wines on grocery and drug store shelves do indeed help sell those wines. The Rednecks, while not being able to judge the wines with anything like the same sophistication as the critic who is mentioned on the “Shelf Talker” underneath the wine, do appear to believe that there is some objective criteria that led the critic to bestow the wine with a score of 90 or with a description reading, “a beautifully crafted Zinfandel delivering harmony and intensity”.

Of course the other side of this coin concerns the sophisticated wine drinker that has bought into the notion that wines can be judged objectively. If you’ve ever sat a formal wine tasting or judged a wine competition, you’ve likely heard a wine sophisticate say something like this, “While this is really an outstanding example of X, I simply don’t like this style of wine.”

The pale-necked wine drinker is admitting that while they believe in the notion of objective standards of quality, they return to hedonism where their own preference is concerned.

By the way, Theise’s “Reading Between the Wines” is a pretty interesting work from a man who is as deeply involved and ensconced in the detail, romance, science and marketing of wine as you’ll ever come across. It’s well worth a read.

The upcoming November 2nd election is among the most important for the American wine industry in a very long time. Two issues should be watched closely by the wine, beer and spirits industry: 1) the outcome of the race for control of the House of Representatives and 2) the outcome of Initiative 1100 in Washington State.

CONTROL OF THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES & H.R. 5034
Despite the 137 Co-sponsors of the Wholesaler Protection Bill known as H.R. 5034, the beer and wine wholesalers who support the legislation that would give state the legal and Constitutional ability to discriminate against out of state commerce have a difficult road to travel to get their bill passed. Standing in their way is House Speaker Nancy Pelosi who has reportedly said she does not support the legislation and would work to keep it from passing.

The Speaker of the House has great influence over what legislation moves to the floor of the House for a vote, despite what happens in committee. Were the wholesalers able to get the bill out of committee, they still would have to deal with the power of the Speaker’s office.

However, if after the November 2nd election Republicans take control of the House of Representative, we are likely to be introduced to Speaker of the House John Boehner. Currently the House Minority Leader, Boehner has delivered the keynote address at the Beer Wholesalers of America’s Annual Legislative Conference as well as accepted many 1000s of dollars from the very same wholesalers. There is little doubt that if elected Speaker of the House under a Republican controlled House that H.R. 5034 would move to the floor for a vote.

INITIATIVE 1100 IN WASHINGTON STATE
All you have to know about this initiative is that that if passed by the citizens of Washington State it would allow producers of spirits to sell directly to restaurants and retailers and not have to go through a wholesaler. In addition, Initiative 1100 would take the state of Washington out of the business of selling spirits at retail and put that job in the hands of the private sector.

As you can imagine, wholesalers are against such a change. It removes their unnecessary monopoly and with it some of their political power. Wholesalers across the country have contributed millions of dollars to defeat the bill, including $1,000,000 from the National Beer Wholesalers Association.

While wholesalers argue that getting rid of the archaic, prohibition-era, state-mandated three tier system is bad public policy, what they are truly afraid of is that Initiative 1100 will be a movement that will spread to other states. To quote from a recent Associated Press piece on the initiative:

“National wholesaler and liquor distributor groups are closely
watching the outcome of the campaign, with some saying that it could be
the first step for Costco to try and change the system in other states.
“They’ll try to replicate the rules in Washington state across the country,” [Craig] Wolf [president of the Wine & Spirit Wholesalers of America] said.”

One can only hope his fear is validated. The single most insidious thing that is preventing the development of artisan beer, wine and spirits industry from growing in the United States is the requirement in most states that producers of these small production brands are required to sell to a wholesaler to get their products on store shelves and into the hands of consumers. When wholesalers are the state-mandated choke point for the products that get into a state, you always have a severely diminished selection of goods since wholesalers are not required to carry brands. It means they have the final say on what products are available to consumers in a state. And the majority of wholesales, the most powerful ones, have no interest in seeing small production goods make it to market.

Under a system by which producers in any state may choose to sell their products either through wholesalers or directly to restaurants, retailers or consumers you get a distribution system that is fair and consumer friendly.

Every producer of artisan wine, beer and spirits ought to know this is their dream scenario.

I was disappointed, though not surprised, to see that today a conjunctive labeling law dictating that “Sonoma County” be placed on every label on wines produced from grapes grown in Sonoma County was unanimously passed by the California Legislature . Pushed as an effort to promote “Sonoma County” wines and a consumer education effort, the new law instead forces vintners to needlessly sully their package and undermines their own marketing efforts. Yet, the law does nothing to educate consumers.

Passed unanimously out of the California Assembly and Senate, AB 1798 now awaits the Governor’s signature, which it will surely obtain. According to Noreen Evans, an Assembly sponsor of the bill, this new conjunctive labeling law “requires that any wine labeled with an American Viticultural Area (AVA)
located entirely within Sonoma County – – like Russian River Valley or
Dry Creek Valley – must also include the word “Sonoma County” on the
label, starting in 2014. There are 13 AVAs in Sonoma County.”

The problem, of course, is that by placing the words “Sonoma County” on a bottle of wine that is made with grapes grown in “Russian River Valley”, “Dry Creek Valley”, “Sonoma Valley” or any other AVA in SonomaSonoma County” have any single distinguishing feature derived from the fact that they were grown inside the borders of Sonoma County. County, consumers learn absolutely nothing about the wine in the bottle. There no evidence that grapes grown in “

Assemblywoman Evans concludes, “By improving consumer education on each bottle, conjunctive labeling
will unleash the full potential of our delicious wines to represent
Sonoma around the world.”

She’s correct. Beginning in 2014, “Sonoma County” will receive a tremendous boost in recognition due to the conjunctive labeling law that forces vintners to add more wording to their labels—whether they think the words “Sonoma County” help or hurt their marketing efforts.

Frankly, if I was making high end wine from the “Sonoma Valley”, “Sonoma Mountain” or “Sonoma Coast” AVAs that depended in part on the quality recognition that comes wtih these AVAs, I’d be pissed that I’m forced now to put a place-name on my label that told my buyers nothing of real value about the wine behind my label and, in some cases, demonstrably lowered its perceived quality.

Honore Comfort, Executive Director of the Sonoma County Vintners Association and an outstanding representative for Sonoma County wines noted this: “. “This moment …marks the
beginning of a stronger Sonoma County brand for generations to come.”

Proponents of the new Sonoma County Conjunctive labeling law like to point to a similar law that demands “Napa Valley” be placed on all wines that are made from grapes grown in that appellation, rather than simply using a sub appellation. They point to the prestige that the “Napa Valley” designation carries. But this prestige has nothing to due with the law that demands “Napa Valley”, in addition to simply “Rutherford”, be placed on these wines. It has to do entirely with the promotional effort that has gone into making “Napa Valley” a place associated with great wines.

Such an association will not be made with “Sonoma County” wines…ever. The vintners in Sonoma County simply can’t make a case for “Sonoma County” having any meaning or for a region as vast as “Sonoma County” delivering any degree of quality to the grapes.

Why is it important for someone making “Sonoma Coast Pinot Noir” or “Sonoma Valley Zinfandel” to help promote “Sonoma County”, a designation that has no ability to define the quality or character of the wines in my Sonoma Coast Pinot Noir or my Sonoma Valley Zinfandel?

This is an example of a County usurping the private label real estate, and it’s very valuable real estate, for the sake of promoting something that is of little use to private commercial interests. Ask yourself…If putting the words “Sonoma County” on one’s wines was such a great thing, why don’t more vintners who make “Dry Creek Valley”, “Russian River Valley”, “Alexander Valley” or “Sonoma Valley” wines already put these words on their label? They legally could…if they wanted to.

The new Sonoma County conjunctive labeling law is the equivalent of the State of California and the County of Sonoma claiming imminent domain over the labels of hundreds of vintners.

Back around the early 1990s if you wanted to spend time on-line discussing wine with fellow oenophiles you frequented the “wine boards” on AOL and Compuserve. These were the premier “bulletin boards” where folks passionate about wine would post topics, comment on topics and discuss the world of wine. I was somewhat active in the AOL board and its where I first witnessed not only the kind of very deep and consequential wine conversations that could be had on line, but also the kind of deeply contentious conversations that on-line forums could provoke.

Today, while the AOL and Compuserve wine forums are long gone,  the same kind of forums for wine lovers still exist. In fact, for many years, it was the “Mark Squires Bulletin Board” located at eRobertparker.com where by far the most robust and interesting on-line forum was found. Numerous topics of conversation were posted daily. Thousands of “commenters” would weigh in on a variety of subjects. Tasting notes, new wine releases, wine politics, philosophies of collecting, issues connected to terroir, buying strategies, anything under the sun was discussed.

To say the least, the “Squires Board” at eRobertParker was the most dynamic site on the Internet for the discussion of wine and for meeting up daily with some of the most interesting wine-minded people.

All this ended on April 26, 2010, when Robert Parker and Mark Squires decided to make access to this forum “subscriber only”.

Prior to this date, one needed only to register and you’d have access to the most robust wine forum on the Internet with “posting” privileges. Today, one must subscribe to the website at a cost of $100 annually.

The change to subscriber only access came swiftly and without warning to the thousands that used the forum at eRobertparker. However, their was an explanation given:

“Supervising the
huge volume of posts has become increasingly time consuming and
expensive. At the same time, we’ve noted that the
subscriber-only forums we created some time back are
increasingly popular and much easier to manage. Moreover, we’re
committed to providing even more functionality and greater
coverage of wines for our subscribers in the near future. This
will require us to spend wisely.

We are a small company with limited resources and, after months
of deliberation, we’ve come to the conclusion that it is in the
best interest of the people who count most – our subscribers -
that we change our policy with regard to the bulletin board.”

The response to the change was not pretty. Many users of the forum felt like they had the rug pulled out from under then. Some felt like they had lost access to good and close friends. Many thought the move to subscriber only access was a response to contentious conversations in the forum over its administration. Among the response to the move posted at the Forum were these:

“Draining the board of the majority of its content and its value to make it easier to run is simply irrational.

But destroying the board — and make no mistake that is precisely what you have done — to solve that problem is an over-reaction of epic proportions. I am grieving the loss of community I suffered. I am angry that there wasn’t any opportunity to prepare. An apology is warranted but I don’t expect one.”“This was the WORST insult I have ever suffered on the www!

“THE WORST ever! I absolutely do NOT want to simply continue like nothing has happened! This was an attack-like action – WITHOUT any pre-information – without any chance for everybody to prepare (e.g. gain some contact e-mails of friends)…..and the reason was simply the intention the prevent any discussion about it in advance.”

Today the Forum at eRobertparker is a shell of what it once was with a hugely decreased amount of discussion primarily because so many who had actively participated in the forum went away after its privatization and chose not to subscribe.

One very active member, still, of the eRobertparker forum as well as other wine forums on the net describes the upshot of the privatization decision in terms that users of forums would understand:

“At present time many posts will remain on the 1st page for days before moving to page 2, as of today (8/20/2010) discussions that were posted on 8/14/2010 are only on page 2, in previous times they would have been on page 6 or 7 by now.  There far less postings of tasting notes or wine driven conversation in the ‘Wine Talk’ section.  There is little to no posts in the Social Hall section on a regular basis. Mark Squires and Robert Parker are generating more topics than I ever recall seeing them do so since I’ve been a member since 2004.“

For those unfamiliar with the logistics of posting topics on wine forums, all this translates to their being very few new topics posted at eRobertparker forums than prior to the privatization. No forum is of much use if there is little or no discussion. After all, this is what folks primarily go to wine forums on the Internet for: discussion of topics that are their passion.

The on-line wine community is relatively small compared to those who come on line to discuss politics, celebrities, food, technology and any number of other subject matter. But, it is a passionate community. I think it can be said without exaggerating that the shuttering of the eRobertparker/MarkSquire wine forum to non-paying members was a real blow to the on-line community of wine lovers.

So, do wine lovers just stop their gabbing? Hardly. Conversation on the Internet is like water. If flows, as though a gravitational force is pushing it toward the densest community of conversationalists. It doesn’t stop.

There are other wine forums on the Internet where wine conversationalists have found a home for robust discussion.

Take WineBerserkers.com, for example. Founded in 2009 by former users of the eRobertParker board who either left in frustration or were actually banned from participating at the forum (that happens!), WineBerserkers is today, by most accounts, the most active wine bulletin board in use. In just the past 85 days, more than 72,000 unique posts have been contributed to the site by users for an average of 855 posts per day. Like all other wine boards, Wine Berserkers generates conversations on any and every topic under the sun.

Wine Berserkers, like most other wine forums on the Internet, benefited greatly from the exodus (banishment?) of users form the eRobertParker forum when it privatized. Wine Berserkers has increased its membership base by 50% in the four months since the eRobertParker Forum privatization and now counts roughly 3600 registered members. What’s important to realize, however, about this new influx of registered members at Wine Berserkers is that these new members are more likely to be active members since many of them came to Wine Berserkers as a result of being shut out of the eRobertparker forum.

Of course there are other wine forums on the Internet.

Wine Spectator Forums: Claiming over 15,000 registered users, the Wine Spectator forums are and have been very useful for a long time. However, a quick look at the number of daily posts shows that despite its larger number of registered members, it is not as active as Wine Berserkers.

WineTalk: Another relatively new wine forum, WineTalk also has fewer posts and users than WineBeserker.

West Coast Wine Discussion Group: A granddaddy of wine forums, the West Coast Wine Discussion group was founded in 1996 By Greg Harrington. It remains a place to find astute commentary on wine issues.

Wine Lovers’ Discussion Group: Another long time wine discussion forum, the WLDG was founded by Robin Garr. It too remains a venue where wine lovers can find a daily discussion of wine.

eRobertParker: At this point it is difficult to know exactly what kind of usage the eRobertParker board gets. The benefit, of course, is that Robert Parker himself often weighs in and that’s not a benefit to sneeze at. Parker remains the most influential wine critic in the world and access to his comments is not to be underestimated.

I’ve said it before, but I think it deserves saying again: The on-line wine forums are the single best internet-based venue for learning about wine and conversing about wine. They are the location where you will find the most passionate and most deeply involved wine lovers on the Internet. They are places where, if you put in the time you will make friends. Frankly, nothing rivals them for pure, interactive, wine talk.

But they can also be contentious. No question the eRobertParker wine forum made this clear. But that forum was not unique. Every wine forum I’ve ever participated in has had its moment of ranker and contention. And they always will because there’s something about conversing with people form a distance that encourages some to get aggressive and petulant. Still, the upside is great.

I encourage wine lovers that want to talk about their passion to check out WineBerserkers as well as the other on-line wine forums.