Would varietal labelling of French wine serve any purpose?

"Max Hauser" wrote in news: snipped-for-privacy@corp.supernews.com:

Well, I guess I was confused when I saw it on Jadot's site, on the French side...I've certainly had the basic Bourgogne before, but I think they have changed the label somewhat. I know the words "Pinot Noir" weren't red before...I'll have to snoop around and see what I can find.

I understood that, and yes it is true.

In the Languedoc the rules on the use of the front label are the same as anywhere.

Agree, but this came not from Brussels nor Paris. It was a collective decision by the winemakers of France, as represented by INAO.

Now the accent is on collective. ;-) Yes, in the end what gets approved is what the MAJORITY of winemakers want, and you know well what that majority is like. If the majority wants to acidify wines in the south (and that is definitely the case) and their northern majority of colleagues in the North want to chaptalize (and that is true even for swet wines as you know, shudder), then that is what is going to happen. So people that are in the definite minority like Mireille or Francis, who just make wine, have no say.

Please note that there is now a serious attempt to reform the INAO, and that people like Mireille, Francis, Patrick and the usuals are now together under an association called SEVE, you must know about it, if not I can send you their manifesto... With Renou at the helm of INAO there is hope.

Cheers Ian, a "bise" to Jacquie !

Ian;

I understand that this is a frantic time of year for you but, take a pill man...... Using disparaging terms such as "obsession" and "anal retentives" to counter what in the end is merely an opinion with which you disagree is far beneath the poster I have come somewhat to know on this forum.

When one can't muster a good argument to counter a proposition, the age old tactic is to attack the proposer. Not conducive to the exchange of ideas/opinions in this group.

Kindest Regards

Salut/Hi Chuck,

le/on Sat, 13 Aug 2005 15:21:18 -0400, tu disais/you said:-

Grin! I have been reading this NG for - goodness me - 6 or 7 years, and believe me, the expressions are mild for some of the more extreme views I've read here.

Read back over my post and you'll see that I've given several excellent reasons why the over emphasis on grape variety can often mislead badly.

If you also read further, you'll see that I agree and accept that the overall characteristic of a wine is more down to the cepage(s) used than anything else. Can you cross your heart and promise me that by tasting alone you can tell the difference between the proportions of Merlot, Cab Franc, Cab Sauvignon in different vintages of any single Médoc Chx? So what possible USE is it to give that information? As I said, it is as likely to mislead the uninformed than inform them, and the informed know how to find out the information and mostly don't care anyway.

I don't use ad hominem arguments and certainly not to try to prove a point. That said, once in a while I might allow myself the pleasure - normally just to provoke.

Chuck, if you REALLY care whether a wine from Ch Fortia has or hasn't got 5% of Mourvèdre with amongst the 12 other authorised varieties in Chateauneuf du Pape, then we are not really on the same oenological planet. I see no useful purpose to putting these on the bottle except as a marketing tool. The only circumstances when it MIGHT just be of interest, is if someone like Ch de Beaucastel either uses an unusually high proportion of Mourvèdre for the region, or else _doesn't_ for one particular year. Equally, if someone is going to pay $50 or $60 for a bottle of decent Burgundy or Willamette Valley wine then I think it reasonable to expect them to know already what grape it's made from. So why bother to religiously trot out the "Pinot Noir" information. Of course it's PN.

I'd also argue that middle order or lesser wines are so liable to be messed around during winemaking, that the characteristics of the cepage are quite likely to be more or less heavily masked - so yet again the _emphasis_ on cepage as being all important (as is the case in many new world wines) smacks more of catering to a kind of snobbish anal retentiveness than anything else. I suffered for WEEKS here reading about pretensious films in which the relative merits of different cepages seem to have been the only point of importance.

In fact, the only REAL use IMO of generally labelling wines with their cepage is to allow ignorant and/or lazy wine shop staff easily to group their wines by cepage without looking it up. (Tongue in cheek time).

Apparently this used to be the case, but from 2000 it is no longer the case.

There are now "Obligatory terms" and "Optional but regulated terms", Anything not covered by these categories may be added to the label providing they do not mislead consumers."

See

Sorry, that should have read "2002"