Would varietal labelling of French wine serve any purpose?

Salut/Hi D. Gerasimatos,

le/on Wed, 10 Aug 2005 00:26:39 +0000 (UTC), tu disais/you said:-

Could it be because European legislators don't like being told what to do by the USA? Just like the USA doesn't like being told by France that they shouldn't have invaded Iraq. I may think they're wrong, (and you can read that any way you like) but you have to admit that sometimes "advice" may well be taken in the spirit it is offered, and again - you can take that any way you like.

Salut/Hi Timothy Hartley,

le/on Tue, 09 Aug 2005 23:37:06 +0100, tu disais/you said:-

This is a subject that has come up here before and with the possible exception of DG's replies which have more to do with provocation than anything else, most of the valid points have been covered again.

As it happens - serendipity, if you like - we've got a "Courtier" from Burgundy staying here for a few days, and the subject came up - before I read your article and the replies to it.

I agree absolutely with what you say about the sometimes amazing differences that a few hundred yards can make in the difference between two wines made by the same grower, from the same clones of the same grape variety in the same year - especially in Burgundy, though I could perhaps more accurately say "with the Pinot Noir grape" as I think this is the cepage which seems to be most affected by terroir. Perhaps that's why some Oregon growers are now giving almost more weight to vineyard than to cepage!! (Shades of Burgundy).

However, as I said to Jean-François, take some P-N grapevines from Nuits to Pomerol and take some Merlots from Pomerol to Nuits, and you won't get a bizarre pomerol and an atypical Nuits. So the taste and overall character of a wine ARE indubitably much more dependant upon the cepage than upon the terroir, even if _when tasted against eachother_ the same cepage can show amazing differences from different parcels.

You point out that it's only at AOC level really that these differences show up, but that may be as much to do with the blending and general messing around that is often carried out at "lower" levels as anything, but which is illegal at AOC level. There's some truth in that - as winemaking is at present carried out. But I don't think that's necessarily true in all circumstances nor in all countries.

However, my main problem with the classing of wines by cepage is that it can mislead almost more than it informs. For example, one of the best white wines I've ever drunk was Marcel Deiss' Altenberg de Bergheim. Despite recent (post 50s) legislation in Alsace which seeks to limit Grand Cru vineyards there to monocepage, (thereby disallowing the use of the name of the cepage, because it's implicit) he goes back to ancient tradition there and co-plants several cepages. His wine is sold as "Altenberg de Bergheim" and the amount of the grape varieties present will vary from year to year. "Varietal minded" types may very well dismiss the wine saying "It's a blend." I don't give a XXXX for the fact that it's a blend, I care about the fact that it's a great wine, from a great area and a great grower. That's what matters, not the information which anally retentive varietal freaks seek, that it's 57.32% riesling, 21.03% sylvaner and 12.43% gewurztraminer and 9.22% Pinot Gris. Their obsession with varietal purity has completely blinded them to the fact that there's more to wine than the grape variety from which it's made.

The two classic mixed cepage areas in France are Bordeaux and Chateauneuf-du-Pape, and their wines aren't going to be better or worse because you know what's in it. And in the case of Merlot based wines, I suspect that as far as the great American unwashed is concerned, their experiences of flabby merlots from the USA would prejudice them against brilliant Merlots from the "other side" of the Gironde if the cepage were given.

So although I would agree with those who insist that the overall character of a wine is more determined by the grapes that make it than anything else, in the case of wines from some of the most ancient and largest wine producing areas in the world, there's not a lot of point in insisting on it being shown.

What I _do_ think is ludicrous is that European legislators seem to need to be so blessed directive all the time. What isn't obligatory is forbidden, it seems to me, and I don't think that kind of thinking is good at all.

I meant the variety is being declared on the main label BTW.

This is only legal in those few appellations that allow it, namely Alsace.

Otherwise varietal is not allowed on the main label of AOC wines.

See the file on how to read french wine labels on the ONIVINS site:

I agree with you Michael, the more info, the better. It may be true that experienced wine sippers (like the people in AFW) don't need to know more than the appellation. But newcomers need all the help they can get, particularly here in America, where wine is not really an ingrained part of the culture. The average American won't know what the heck "Cotes du Rhone - Villages" means.

Dan-O (just my two cents)

Agreed but does the info have to be on the front label. Why not a small tag on back of label that says the % of Grapes?

Dick

Michael Pr>

I agree with you Michael, the more info, the better. It may be true that experienced wine sippers (like the people in AFW) don't need to know more than the appellation. But newcomers need all the help they can get, particularly here in America, where wine is not really an ingrained part of the culture. The average American won't know what the heck "Cotes du Rhone - Villages" means.

Dan-O (just my two cents)

No.

Both.

No.

It does, but it's still nice to know the cepage. I don't see the problem with listing the cepage on the back of the label.

I guess so.

Dimitri

This is exactly what I am suggesting. Why would anyone change the front?

Dimitri

Cause I am a snob?

Considering that the worldwide market for French wine is declining, and the average age of consumers of high end French wines are going up, I'm sure French viniters are taking note, probably with alarm. If they feel like alienating younger drinkers, eventually, they will have no market. The smarter ones will realize that marketing is more important than snobbery (and tradition). I guarantee this attitude will not be forever.

Agreed that its declining but isn't that what happens when there is competition on price side primarily.

I don't think France has the issues with Top Classified wines have decline of share. Its with the lower end stuff and much of that does show the grape variety.

It marketing and price that is the key issue not the front label. I am not opposed to rear label that is informative as to cepage just not the front label.

Yes traditi>

"Richard Neidich" skrev i melding news:2scKe.3198$ snipped-for-privacy@newsread3.news.atl.earthlink.net...

In which case how is the cépage information going to help him?

My point is simply that, even with a single varietal, its identity only sets very broad boundaries of taste: terroir, winemaker and his method, including use of oak, temperature of fermentation and degree of extraction, maceration, use of triage, defeuillage, green harvesting, all have such a massively marked effect so that the less experienced are more likely to be misled into thinking that, for example, the French Pinot Noir labelled wine they liked last week will be the same as the one they are offered this week from a different grower and/or place. That is why I have such grave doubts about the benefits of varietal labelling — it is not informative to the less experienced — it is in fact a likely snare and a potential delusion. (You will note I have asssumed that the unwary inexperienced buyer is looking for another French Pinot Noir — a fortiori, the argument if he strays outside national boundaries.) Once you get into blended wines the arguments are stronger still that mere percentage blend information is even less helpful.

Tim Hartley

Greetings Tim;

In terms of the continental wine scene I would certainly count myself as REALLY less experienced (perhaps a little less so when it come to my native Niagara wines) and I must say I have never considered myself terribly anal retentive... certainly not to 2 decimal points at any rate.... Never the less, I am interested in information on the contents of the bottle as a useful tool to give me an INDICATION of what I can expect in the bottle. I don't think one need drink much wine to quickly realise that not all wines, blended or "pure" varietal, from all winemakers are created equal. I rather tend to believe that to most wine drinkers (even in Europe?) Chateau Flim Flam on the label tells them less than nothing about what the hell is in the bottle. Hey, you want the worlds money? Figure out what will attract the worlds wine drinkers...... Sorry, for me, Flim Flam aint it! Just the facts ma'am.

Timothy Hartley wrote in news: snipped-for-privacy@dd30.orpheusnet.co.uk:

In 1969 I had a friend who was examining my likes and dislikes in wine, he said, "you will like beaujolais." He was right, He might have said "You will like gamay" but he didn't. I also knew at the time that I liked chianti classico, though I did not know that I liked wines made from Sangiovese. It is largely what you learn. Had I learned varietals I might be on that bandwagon, but I learned AOC's and blends and to this day it is how I think of wine. For those of us who have learned this way the varietal litany seems silly since even in my favorites there huge difference from year to year based upon the growing conditions etc. You could try to convince me to drink brand X shirazGrenanche blend but it would be easier to blend something and call it Goats do Roam in Villages, I would know instantly what it would be (or should be) like.

I haven't read yet the whole vast flurry of responses to this query, so I apologize if the following was covered already. Here is a little history.

The "varietal" labeling now taken for granted by some US wine consumers was a new idea proposed after the repeal of Prohibition in the US. Schoonmaker and Marvel in their seminal 1941 book _American Wines_ (Duell, Sloan and Pearce, New York) advocated varietal labeling as a pragmatic alternative in the absence of the established and understood place-based naming common in other, older wine-producing regions. (Elin McCoy in her recent book mentions Schoonmaker and Lichine's coinage of the term "varietal" .) If honestly used, this could also build respectable US wine identities, unlike the very loose "generic" marketing names then routine on US table wines. (Note also that when Schoonmaker and Marvel wrote, only one quarter of US wine consumption was tables wines; three-quarters was sweet fortified wines at 18-21 percent alcohol, a residue of tastes during Prohibition.)

Even varietal labeling had its limitations at the time, as those authors pointed out:

"A label is submitted and approved for a California wine made from Riesling grapes: the Federal Government does not know and is apparently in no position to find out, whether this wine was made from Riesling grapes or from Thompson's Seedless. If not made from Rieslings, the wine may have been made and the labels ordered by a grower who is convinced that his grapes are Rieslings ("Father always said that the grapes in the north forty acres were Rieslings") or by a grower who is committing a deliberate and conscious fraud. The Treasury Department apparently believes, and far too many lay citizens also believe, that it is possible to make people honest and intelligent and well-informed by publishing a book of regulations or passing a law."

-- Max

All of these arguments for and against varietal labeling are fascinating. But I do want to make one more point - a beginning wine drinker's tastes (and income) will tend to change over time. In other words, today's $4 per bottle plonk drinker might (someday) see a substantial increase in his/her paycheck. But the habit of shopping by varietal will likely be set in concrete by then. In that case, the name Chateau Margaux (one of France's most famous) will mean diddly - the drinker in question will want to know what is inside. And this person, who might now have $104 to spend, will be inclined to look for something else.

Dan-O

"Dan The Man" in news: snipped-for-privacy@o13g2000cwo.googlegroups.com: | | ... the more info, the better. It may be true that experienced | wine sippers (like the people in AFW) don't need to know | more than the appellation. But newcomers need all the help they | can get ... The average American won't know what the heck | "Cotes du Rhone - Villages" means.

What ???

The "average American" doesn't know either what the heck Cabernet Sauvignon means, until learning the phrase. The line of argument here seems to presume, without saying it or examining it, that US newcomers learn only about varietal naming when learning about wine, and that this is OK. Yet it has always been in the newcomer's *own interest* to learn some cross-section of wine names, not just one sub-set of them. Probably most of the separate wine labels available in the US are from outside the US and use their own, much longer-established nomenclature. If there is no interest in learning some range of wine names, then is this effectively an argument about catering to ignorance, or laziness? (I don't think that's the whole story in international varietal naming, but I am referring to the remarks above.

"Dan The Man" in news: snipped-for-privacy@g47g2000cwa.googlegroups.com: | | ... today's $4 per bottle plonk drinker might (someday) see a | substantial increase in his/her paycheck. But the habit of | shopping by varietal will likely be set in concrete by then.

Why?

| | In that case, the name Chateau Margaux (one of France's | most famous) will mean diddly - the drinker in question will | want to know what is inside.

Château Margaux is inside. Precisely. (Next question?)

| And this person, who might now have $104 to spend, | will be inclined to look for something else.

Has this become an argument now for catering to nouveaux-riches? If so let us address it in those terms, and in depth. I think that could be interesting, and more meaty than some of these discussions..

-- Max

I think what opponents are missing is that even serious wine drinkers sometimes have trouble identifying what varietals are in many French wines. As someone else stated, the blend (in blends) can even vary from year to year. It's not catering to ignorance or laziness to put the varietals on the label. Some very knowledgeable people are sometimes wrong about the varietals in even Bordeaux (there are some left bank merlots and right bank cabs), let alone 'complicated' wines like Chateauneuf Du Pape.

The real question is whether it is relevant and informative to list the cepage on the (back of) the label. Many (most?) California wines (that are blends) do just this. Those that are not usually list the varietal on the front. I, personally, find this interesting. As I said earlier in this thread, some wine drinkers do not care at all what's in the bottle as long as they like it. Given that some people care and others do not, it seems to make sense to me to list the cepage somewhere on the bottle.

In Robert Parker's review of the esteemed 2000 Chateau Margaux, he relates that the wine is 90% cab and 10% merlot and most profiles of Margaux's vineyards do relate the number of acres under vine of each varietal. Therefore, it is not just neophyte wine drinkers who are interested in this information. It would be much nicer to have the information printed on the bottle than to have to research the composition, which is sometimes difficult for more obscure wines. Those who don't care don't have to read the back label and those who do can have the information at their fingertips.

Dimitri