Elementor Page #941

Nobody seems to know what is meant by natural wine. Unlike organic wine, which is defined by Federal regulations, or biodynamic wine, which is certified by the International Demeter Federation, there seems nobody manning the natural wine wheel other than nods of approval from a few poorly informed bloggers whose unsupported beliefs concerning terroir, microbiology, healthiness and allergies comprise a whole universe of fake news.

I find much to appreciate in the emerging creative experimentation taking place in our playful youthful winemakers. I like the emphasis on ethical, sustainable farming. I like the trend towards alcohols circa 12.5% like the good old ‘70s. I like composting and biochar and the trend towards horses, ducks and sheep to replace tractors spraying herbicides and pesticides.

Here’s what I find offensive.

1. The term “natural” implies that everybody else is UN-natural. One of my less beloved bloggers is actually called Not Drinking Poison. My beef is two-fold. Winemakers are among the most hard-working, dedicated professionals I know. There’s no money in it. I say “Never be a winemaker or a jazz musician unless you have to.”
2. But jazz musicians get to have a day job. Winemakers are all in. So why do pundits like Mr. Ayscough want to urinate on these fine folks? To see who’s really drinking poison, read on.
3. Secondly, the notion that commercial yeasts are a forbidden manipulation that suppresses terroir
   expression is simply baloney. Research at ETS and elsewhere has demonstrated that the yeast conducting spontaneous fermentation does not come from the vineyard but rather inhabits the winery itself and in most cases is a commercial super-strain even if never purchased by the winery. 

What does come from the vineyard are dozens of soil-borne yeasts and bacteria that produce a wide variety of toxins. The average concentration of hyper-allergenic biogenic amines – the principal cause of red wine headache with lovely names like putrescene and cadaverine – is ten-fold that of inoculated fermentations. You may have noticed the natural wines also on average exceed the legal limit of vinegar, often by a wide margin.

3. Somehow, the NW paparazzi have urged winemakers to lie about how hard they work. You constantly hear “Oh, I do the minimum.” Of course they do – intervention costs money. But to regard benevolent neglect as a virtue is just nuts. Worse yet, winemakers have stopped talking and learning from one another like we did in the ‘70s for fear they’ll be exposed as manipulators.

This is an odd situation. Winemaking is cooking, a fancy form of canning, the ultimate slow food. According to Random House, the term “manipulation” has two definitions:

ma·nip·u·la·tion  (noun).

1.    Treatment or operation with or as if with
the hands or by mechanical means, especially in a skillful manner.

2.     Shrewd or devious management by artful,
unfair, or insidious means, especially to one’s own advantage.

 

A synonym for the first definition is “artisanality,” the essence of what’s expected from a winemaker. Sounds good, no?

In the second definition, however, we see the root of the accusation — deceit.  Artful in the
sense of the Artful Dodger.  It’s not what we do that counts, but how forthcoming we are in explaining our motives. And the plain truth is, winemakers are quite duplicitous, and the paparazzi can smell it.

As Walt Kelly’s Pogo used to say, “We have met the enemy, and he is us.”

If you were to transport a wine maker from 8000 or even 200 years ago into a modern winery, he would not recognize anything he saw. The real game-changing technologies he would see are electricity for pumps and
lights, stainless steel, inert gas and plastics. Oddly enough, natural wine makers seem to have no beef with these innovations. I believe that is because they have them in their kitchens and are comfortable with them, hence ignoring their impact on modern winemaking.

It wasn’t until the 1980s that winemaker stopped talking about such innovations as reverse osmosis and micro-oxygenation, mostly because they didn’t understand them very well themselves. A growing suspicion among wine writers that they were not being told the whole truth, led them to regard winemakers as untrustworthy — and rightly so.

In contrast, I love it when Wolfgang Puck gets on TV to brag about new technologies. “I’ve got this gooey brie I want to grate into my potato puffs, so I’m going to freeze it with liquid nitrogen. Wanna watch?”  But winemakers have abandoned the moral high ground to the non-interventionist credo when they should be
bragging about the magic they perform. In fairness, they are simply trying to keep their heads down while the nattie press fires live ammo over their heads.

There is no question that the wines on your grocer’s shelf have gotten boring. There’s a reason for that, but it’s not wine technology. For most shoppers, the complexity of wine is way too overwhelming. Accordingly,
if you want to get your wine on the shelf at Safeway, don’t make anything “interesting.” Sure, there are 40 Merlots, but they all taste the same within a narrow window. These are made by 65 wineries making over a million cases and thus possessing the clout to get and hold shelf position. This is a different industry – call it the “McWine Industry.” 

Take the big boys out of the equation and you are left with 13,000 wineries averaging around 2,000 cases. Folks like me. Over 400 are right here in Sonoma County, each with its own unique story.

Here’s how you can support your local winery. These folks are dying to share their techniques and why they use them. All you have to do is to be genuinely curious, thus creating for the winemaker a safe space to
share her secrets. Invite candor and you’ll get it.