Reviews

WineCreator: defending quality and diversity
«Vinnaya Karta» №5(96) June-July 2008

WineCreator symposium took place in Spanish Ronda in the middle of April. It was decidedly one of the most influential international wine events this year.

World’s leading journalists, critics and winemakers gathered together for two days to discuss various aspects of modern industry.

The event’s idea was born about a year ago in a conversation between the main Spanish critic Jose Penin and a respected Priorat enologist Josep-Luis Perez. Our epoch of globalization and standardization often leads to simpler taste and loss of individuality in wine. In this context a new necessity arose — to create a platform where top representatives of the wine press and most authoritative enologists (“wine creators”) can exchange ideas and opinions to promote winemakers’ creativity and diversity of wine styles. Soon an organizational committee was set up under the chair of Jancis Robinson and with participation of Jose Penin, Victor de la Serna and Michel Bettane. It was decided to make an expert group of leading critics and journalists who would regularly choose 12 winemakers and invite them to forums. They will be held once every two years. Along with the committee members, the expert group includes Robert Joseph (Great Britain), Joel Payne (Germany), Bob Campbell (New Zealand), Michael Fridjon (South Africa), Peter Moser (Austria), Eleonora Scholes (Russia), Rodolfo Gerschman (Mexico), Ernesto Gentili (Italy), David Schildknecht (USA), Joshua Green (USA), John Radford (Great Britain), Pierre Casamayor (France), Joshua Green (USA), Charles Metcalfe (Great Britain), Bernard Burtchy (France), Steven Tanzer (USA) and James Halliday (Australia).

Enologists are selected against the following criteria — quality, individuality, history and international recognition of their wines, as well as respect of production process and understanding of climate, vineyards and soils. Following the vote and further discussions, the following “wine creators” were invited to the first event — Stephane Derenoncourt (France), Michel Rolland (France), Denis Dubordier (France), Jean-Claude Berruet (France), Olivier Humbrecht (France), Alvaro Palacios (Spain), Peter Sisseck (Spain), Carlo Ferrini (Italy), Riccardo Cotarella (Italy), Paul Draper (USA), Dirk van der Niepoort (Portugal) and Ales Cristancic (Slovenia). Berruet, Humbrecht and Cotarella were unable to come to Spain, and Michel Rolland was substituted by his wife Dany, also a recognized enologist who works with him.

The first event took place in Andalusian Ronda that made the venue even more memorable through dramatic weather. The town has an ancient tradition of wine production. Winemaking used to be so important that in the 4th century BC they used to stamp a grape bunch on coins. The symposium was made possible through financial sponsorship of La Melonera group that is currently setting up a principally new winemaking project. It will attract leading winemakers and support local varieties. Prestigious status of the forum was confirmed by the presence of Prince Michael of Kent. In his opening speech he announced a launch of new international debates which will influence all industry.

The symposium’s key topic “Will wine’s quality diminish wine diversity?” was aimed to draw attention to the problems caused by globalization. Although, as noted by Jancis Robinson at the start of the event, globalisaton played a positive role by increasing general quality levels, it caused a negative consequence of wine’s standardization across the planet. Experts and enologists held six sessions in two days where they discussed influences of terroirs, winegrowing practices and winemaking techniques on wine’s character; traditions and innovations; external factors of success such as prices, markets and consumer activities as well as the role of critics and press. The range of issues discussed within individual sessions was wide, with the following ones stirring most interest.

At the session “Fruity wines versus terroir wines. Is ‘a sense of place’ a definitive argument of a good wine?” participants tried to pinpoint how much modern wines can be called a product of their territory, if they truly reflect soil’s characteristics and how terroir wines are positioned on the market versus those with the idea of simple fruitiness at the core. While critics and journalists still cannot arrive to the universally accepted notion of terroir, winemaker Dirk Niepoort from Portugal says that “we should distinguish between well made, quality wine and great wines”. He notes that a site and a winemaker have equal influence on the character of a good quality wine, but the notion of terroir is much more important for great wines. When working with the latter, the job of a winemaker is to interfere as little as possible. “We must step back and let the nature do its work”, states Niepoort. Ales Cristancic, a passionate protagonist of a natural approach from a cult Slovenian estate Movia, adds that “if a vineyard is treated with due respect, the nature pays back in the same manner”.

Michel Bettane, in turn, finds interesting a question of how much wine should be treated as a food product. He believes that human evaluation of wine is not objective, but created through individual perception.

What is nature and what is man’s work? Wine is produced from grapes which already contain information. Bettane points out that before origin of great wines was defined by notions of ‘cru’, ‘climat’, ‘finage’, and only well made wines were described as wines from good terroir. Wine can signify a sense of place in various proportions — from a general beverage of the Planet Earth to regional type and to single vineyard. Joshua Green, Wine & Spirits editor, is more pragmatic in his approach. “We see many wines from different countries and try to understand — why would someone want them? Is it driven by quality or personality? What are winemaker’s intentions — to make simple fruity wine or to preserve the character of soil?” Reality, though, does not always coincide with winemaker’s plans. As Dirk van der Niepoort says, “even if we have an idea of wine, usually the last word is after the vineyard. Our job is to understand it and even push it”. The problem of irrigation was discussed at length, where each participant has own point of view.

The second session was dedicated to vineyards, particularly to the question of how winegrowing techniques can give more personality to wine. Renowned Bordeaux professor and consulting enologist Denis Dubourdieu started polemic with a phrase that wine’s value is defined by civilization, primarily through the pleasure factor. He cited Moliere: “It is important to be liked”, which he finds appropriate for wine. The expert notes that wine with true personality has particular complexity that is difficult to copy. It is usually linked to the place of origin where winegrowers are to have several problems to continue evolution. “A simple rule that the world seems to have forgotten stipulates that unmistakable individuality of wine is made by two conditions — a right variety in a right place”, states Dubourdieu.

Alvaro Palacios, a key representative of modern Spanish winemaking, suggested that sites producing great wines have long been identified, and the main credit goes to religious institutions and monastic orders. “All that I did is I found historic sites next to monasteries where wine has special emotion, special sense of place”. A mystical aspect of fate is very important for Palacios: “Selection happened before us. It is given from above”. In the meantime, he is not inclined to find globalization such a drama as depicted by press as “wines are produced for different consumers and situations”. British critic John Radford agrees that classic production zones haven’t become such by an accident, and Jose Penin adds that terroir should be cultivated to get special wines.

The session “Can a different wine be designed at the winery? Is there a way to design wine with personality just with practices at the winery?” also proved of interest. Dany Rolland, the wife and colleague of the renowned ‘flying’ consulting enologist Michel Rolland noted that if before the market was tolerant to technical defects in wines, today they are unacceptable. In this respect enological progress facilitated a great advance of general quality.

As a participant of this session, I was interested to know what winemaking intervention is acceptable during production. On the one hand, I am very skeptical about winemakers’ phrases that wine makes itself as the vinification process always needs a degree of control. On the other hand — how not to go too far, how to preserve vineyard qualities rather than demonstrate technical skill of a winemaker in wine? There are two major tendencies conventionally associated with the Old and New World. If in Europe the prevailing mode of thinking is pre-defined by terroir, New World production usually starts with an idea, and vinification techniques and fitted in. Dany Rolland who has an experience of creating wines from ‘a blank sheet’ admits that nature remains the main wine creator, and winemakers are simply its interpreters. “We are unlikely to make a great wine in India, though this idea is very attractive”, she said.

Joel Payne noted that a new consumer trend is emerging in the US. Signature wines are getting more popular. Like luxury clothes brands, they provide assurance of certain quality and status. The world will be polarized even further. Stephane Derenoncourt called for enologists to remain behind the label instead of putting their names in the foreground.

When culture, traditions and innovations were discussed, winemaker Paul Draper from Ridge Vineyards cast light on the history of quality Californian winemaking. Before 1940s European tradition reigned supreme, and his approach was formed after tasting wines of early 20th century and reading specialized press published in the end of the 19th century and covering the issues of traditional winemaking. Danish Peter Sisseck who achieved a status of cult winemaker in Spain in a shot period of time was also ‘brought up’ on old great wines. He raised the problem that great wines are increasingly rated and consumed when they are too young. Alvaro Palacios defended old vineyards, calling for their restoration, and stressed that “winemakers should be jumble workers, and not wine ‘creators’”. David Schildknecht, Wine Advocate critic, accused the wine industry in abusing the notion of ‘tradition’ saying that the word is used mainly as a marketing tool. “Americans are infamous for forgetting their traditions, and Europeans, on the contrary, stick to them too hard”, he also noted. As for innovations, they should, according to Paul Draper who opened a cutting edge laboratory, be used for bringing knowledge about what’s going on in the vineyards and wineries.

The session dedicated to external influences on the wine’s quality found most resonance in the press due to the comment of Decanter editor who said that winemakers seek to wines to get approval from certain critics. Peter Sisseck finds his words unfounded and states that “winemakers have their own opinions”. In the meantime, Italian critic Ernesto Gentili believes that there is still room on the market for all types of wine. The job of journalists and critics is to promote diversity of wine styles from around the world.

A two-day forum touched upon many other issues on production of original high quality wines. The main result of the event can undoubtedly be considered as creation of new high profile platform that became a turning point in discussing current problems in the upper echelon of the winemaking industry. It would be good if in future the symposium would include not only general discussions, but also more practical formats such as seminars and round tables, and that representatives of wine trade would be invited as an inherent link of the general wine chain. Nonetheless, the first WineCreator symposium was a success and it is bound to influence further development of the winemaking industry.