October - Wine Mythology

As a spectator of Jane Moore’s inflammatory and enlightening foray into wine additives and Malcolm Gluck’s recent related revelations, I have been amazed at the response both within and without the wine-world. I have a few points of my own to add as well.

Malcolm first.... Mr Gluck says a few very valid points in his Daily Mail article (27th September) about the prevalence of underhand winemaking practices and widespread smoke screening within the wine industry, but there are a couple of things he rides a little rough shod over...

First of all screw-caps! Let’s get one thing straight: cork IS not the baddy. As Malcolm states wine does vary, the permeability of the cork allows wine to develop at a controlled and necessary rate rather than to be merely preserved as is the case with screw caps. Wine is a natural and living product and what Mal’ neglects to mention is the difficulties for reductive wines being closed with stelvin and the associated bottle stink. The only bad thing about cork is when sub-standard (often unsanitary) cork bark is used, which admittedly is far too often. Consider also that unlike screw caps the production of cork is a CO2 positive process and that it can also be recycled and is biodegradable. His sweeping assertion that cork is dead is absurd and unhelpful; the ease of the screw cap is laudable but that’s about it.

Secondly his dismissal of terroir as a myth is misguided (albeit a little predictable coming from such a disenchanted viewpoint). Whilst dismissing it as myth he unwittingly contradicts himself by mentioning that the AC system in France is a guide to quality (and historically he’s right), but in fact the real ‘origin’ of the AC system and its counterparts in Italy and Spain was to protect the typicity of these individual local styles and in certain regions their terroir, the great ‘Crus’ of Burgundy, Beaujolais and Alsace come to mind. Sadly this is no longer the case; the current AC system in France is near redundant as so many conventional AC growers have to manipulate their wines in order to recreate the terroir that they themselves have muted through years of chemical dependence and didactic oenology. To be fair to them they never meant to do this, they had to cut costs to chase plummeting prices driven by our indiscriminate buying practices. Making wine to order has been the nail in the coffin for quality affordable wine, it is too homogenous a requirement, it destroys a wines identity and who wants vinus coca cola?

The only place you’ll find wines with distinct individuality or terroir is from growers who value this quality. Please note the importance of growers here; at best a winemaker is just a shepherd, a guardian of good healthy fruit taking its natural path towards alcohol. I wonder if Darwin ever slipped a wry smile about the abundance of yeast populations on a grape’s skin! Ask any winemaker worth his salt and he’ll tell you great wine is made in the vineyard. Champagne, which has come in for the biggest bashing both from Malcolm and also Jane Moore’s Dispatches programme (Channel 4, 15th September), has a mainstay culture of mass production where very few of the top houses grow their own fruit, this is where the biggest rip-off’s ‘lie’ as the houses and their marketing machines try to pass off their quantity as quality. The difference here with small high profile growers (Larmandier-Bernier, Anselme Selosse two notable exceptions from a handful) is very much about terroir, the fastidious love of the soil and the health of the vineyard are paramount, is it any wonder that these are the wines that really do the talking?!

It is the journalist’s prerogative to inform the consumer and Jane Moore’s programme was splendid for airing the issue of ingredient labelling on wine. Personally I want to drink wines from vineyards which have never seen a chemical treatment other than sulphur, I want the health and vitality of the vineyard to shine through in the wine. I find this is best achieved through considerate winemakers who allow the fermentations to be conducted by natural /ambient yeast, avoiding manipulation of the wine. The wine will be bottled unfiltered and unfined and have only a smidgen of sulphur added.

What I wouldn’t touch with a barge pole is that which is all too common, the product of an intensively farmed vineyard with poor soil, disease prone vines and a residue of chemical treatments on the unremarkable fruit. These malnourished grapes are never fermented naturally because their flavour will need to be improved using engineered yeast. In most cases the juice will have been sulphured to kill any microorganisms anyway and natural yeast cannot function in such a solution. If there are no other faults then only sugar and yeast would be added at this point, but often enzymes and yeast nutrients may be added to maximise the extraction of flavour. Post fermentation the wine maybe acidified/de-acidified and de-alcoholised. If there are any faults these could be corrected with a plethora of winemaking chemicals some of which include heavy metals. Flavourings normally oak or tannin maybe added at this stage. Then flavour could be tweaked further by clarifying the wine with a variety of proteins (frequently animal) all with an effect on flavour, then the wine will be filtered, and sometimes pasteurised or cold-stabilised before being finally sulphured and bottled.

As Jancis Robinson pointed out in the Dispatches programme we can expect an increase in the polarisation of the two approaches outlined above. This is obviously very sad, but ultimately it is the consumer who decides. Jane’s stance was helpful in the sense that it raised questions, sadly it also set out from the beginning with a clear agenda to shock which for me dug its own grave. For example the sugar added to champagne is no big mystery or threat; the wine would be unpalatable to many without it. The word Brut itself dictates that sugar is present in quantities up to 15g/L! I’m not scared of sugar, I’m scared of pesticide residues! Cut the wheat from the chaff please!

I applaud Jane and Malcolm’s bravery in speaking out against the complacency and deceitful self protection of the wine trade. After the food revolution of the last 10 years or so, wine seems to me to be a bit of dark horse. Wine may be a natural product but not all wines are created equal in that regard. Let’s have some transparency. Through education and awareness we can demystify, the consumer can then be informed enough to make a choice and reverse this sad polarisation of wine production. Let the debate continue and improve!