Mondovino

[chin]

I just watched this 2-hour documentary about wine.

It's not about wine tasting, not general introduction of wine making, buying, drinking. Rather it's a study and stories of conflicts of globalization, diversity vs uni-cultural, etc... with specific focus in the wine making and marketing.

The story starts with a fight in Burgundy where a large American wine corporation, the Mondavi, tried and failed to take a large parcel of forest/land in Burgundy. On one side there was the traditional, small vineyard and winemaker who believe the wine should reflect the terrior - the flavor or characteristic of the land where the vine grow, and the care and labour of the wine maker. Their more traditionally made wine require longer time to mature thus much slower turnover of stocks.

On the other hand, there was this formidable of "modern market forces" typified by the Rolland/Parker/Mondavi combination. Michel Rolland is the "flying winemaker" who is consultant to hundreds of vineyards. In the documentary, he would tell the vineyard owners how to make their wine, or rather how to make their wine to get higher critic scores. He would tell the owners what to do but not why. Robert Parker (and other well known wine critics who rate wines numerically) would rate wines according to his own taste, with the understanding that their rating can and will move the demand and prices. Mondavi represents the capital and market distribution component of this combination.

The result of this combination is that the wines are made to the same Rolland style, being judged through the Parkrt standard, and marketed via big corporate distributions. Consumers are being guided by the monolithic thinking and standard. One of the example in the documentarty is that one Italian wineyard was taken over by Mondavi, then the next year was rate as the world's no 1 wine by the critics.

Since I am a true amateur in wine, this documentary is an interesting eye opener. But if look outside the wine trade, and compare the other industries, this is just another familiar story. Where globalization brings cheap product/food, it also destroys diversification, tolerance and traditions. And with the lost of tradition, also the lost of knowledge not yet fully understood or verifiable by present day science.

Yet as an amateur in wine, I fully understand the magic and attraction of ratings to consumers. When your taste preference in wine (or anything that's subjective) is not yet strongly developed, or when there is no way to try everything, we want to find safety and comfort and conformity in high ratings. Do ratings serve me right in finding high quality products? Maybe. But ratings certainly help the marketer pushing sales. (I was recently looking at a bottle of 2005 Lascombes, among the first thing the sales person said was that it has a 95 Parker score. And I did made the purchase.)

(I ordered two sets of Mondovino DVD. One appears to be a film length documentary and one appears to be a series. I just watch the film one, and one episode of the series. It looks like the film one is a much condensed version, or the series one expanded version.)

[hangchoi]

Thanks for sharing.......

As you know, I prefer traditional wine. So I don't want wines being changed from varieties to unity. Rolland did a lot of work as a consultant for a number of vinyards. His statment is partly right that he would tell the owners what to do but the most problematic point is what he thinks that are good are all subject to his palate. In contrast, most owners in fact knew what they should do to make a good wine but they may lack of the science behind them so sometimes they are out of control of some winemaking steps. A funny example: I have watched an interview of a Spanish wine maker, he said that, after the wine finished its fermentation, he would move the wine into barrel in the winery to a store room (where is a bit hotter) for 3 days and then he would move them back to wineries. He did not know why as his deceased father told him so to do. In fact, this move initiates an important step for mellowing the wine but he lacks of such knowledge, tho he did that right. So, some winemaker really needs some understanding there but it should be based on diversified knowledge / theory, not on personal's taste and palate.

Generally, if you look at the Bordeaux's wines with high RP score now, you will find most of them have quite a similar character: robust, fruit driven, overly concentrated with powerful tannin. These are all like a new world wine. Some characters of individual commune are really losing. This may not be his own fault. Some chateau owners, in order to boost their sales, did employ Rolland to give advice on their winemaking, especially on blending. This is because he knows the palate of those wine critics like RP.

My view is that RP's palate is also changing too......If you compare his Tasting note 15 years ago and now, he is giving similar tasting notes now. In addition, sometimes I compare my tasting notes with his, my impression is that he likes robust wine more then ever. You hardly see him giving a high score to those delicate and elegance wine now.

When I was a newbie in wine, I use to refer to the RP score. But now, I only use it to persuade people that this is at least a quantitative measure of its quality, and nothing more. Those who tell me that a wine has high score cannot persuade me to buy but the one who can tell me its character does. After all, it is all about my own palate in choosing wine.

BTW, would you lend me the DVD later?  

[chin]

This conflict is not new, nor only limited to wine.

E.g. in Puer tea, you have producer who does not historically appreciate aged tea. The expertise of how to age is in HK and sort of in TW. But now the producers are trying to control the standard and education to new consumers.

The same thing is happening to food. Are we increasingly fed standardized food, in the name of safety and low cost and blind by advertisements? When the last live chicken vendor died out, do we all left with the only choice McNuggets?

It's certainly an irony that the Internet seemed to democratize information dissemination but actually equally empower disinformation and concentrates greater influence in the hands of a few. (Like Google, like Parker.)

When do you want to see the DVD? The series is longer but explains the message clearer. The 2-hour documentary is too concentrated and shortened, thus sometimes confusing.

[hangchoi]

When do you want to see the DVD? The series is longer but explains the message clearer. The 2-hour documentary is too concentrated and shortened, thus sometimes confusing.

No hurry....anytime when you are convenient to bring me the DVD.....in July at least.....Thanks

[chin]

I just watched 2 of the 10 episodes of the Series (not the 2-hour film.)

The Series has more about wine, the people, and ideas behind the wine making. Sofar the focus has been following the Montilles, who strongly believe in the purity of terrior. See the following screen captures.

The father, in his 70s, was a lawyer, and the son was a banker. At one point he say, "Corporate lawyers aren't lawyers. They're law clerks for corporations. For banks and insurance companies."  

The 2-hour film is really excepts of the Series with focus on the Rolland/Parker/Mondavi influence on the wine business.

[hangchoi]

The father, in his 70s, was a lawyer, and the son was a banker. At one point he say, "Corporate lawyers aren't lawyers. They're law clerks for corporations. For banks and insurance companies."  

Can't agree more......

[hangchoi]

The Series has more about wine, the people, and ideas behind the wine making. Sofar the focus has been following the Montilles, who strongly believe in the purity of terrior. See the following screen captures.

Someone may say that it is not important about the concept of "Terroir" as long as a good wine is made, but I do not agree that, with respect.

In fact, anyone with proper sense of tasting can distinguish the terroir of different wines, though the degree of difference varies a lot. I like the concept of Terroir, as it reflects the style of a particular wine under a defined set of enviornment.

A funny thing is that if you ask the wine maker the meaning of "terroir", each of them will give different answer. 

To me, terroir is the history and evolution of the viticulture in a defined set of environment and practice. Anyhow, I never had a good Pommard.....some of them are too rustic, some of them are too soft.

[chin]

I cannot tell the wine "terrior" maybe because I have not develop the palate.

But in tea, I can taste the difference of tea made from difference places, although I cannot blind taste and name them. E.g. the Yiwu 易武 tea we are ordering now had it's own unique aroma/taste/feel/character. It taste light when young, getting fuller when aged a bit more.

However, in the case of Puer tea, the really old antique tea (>80 yrs) are too rare to tell if they are blended or single terrior. But the good classic ones made in 1950-1980 are all blended. So in Puer, the judge is still out whether blending is better or single terrior.

BTW I watched the 4th episode before I slept this morning. In the interview, the neighbour of Mouton was effective saying Mouton is using chemical in their vineyard. There are quite a few grower, mostly smaller growers, claimed not to use any chemicals in the vineyard. The Montilles was supposedly going biodynamic.

[hangchoi]

Your Yiwu example tells the point.....Why the tea has such an distinctive aroma/taste/feel/character?......It is given under a set of environment / practice.

In fact...the concept of terroir is evolving......like wine, some regions traditionally had more different grape varieties planted but now they usually reduced to a certain types. It may be due to the climate there, their practice, their adaptability to the soil of that area, etc.....I think this will apply to tea well.

In fact, most of the vineyards are still using chemical, artificial chemical. They need that mostly for dealing with mildew and rot.

Organic viticulture does not generally use chemical. Biodynamic vineyard is using chemical too, but to a lesser extent. Organic viticulture and Biodynamic viticulture are two different things.

[chin]

My comment about the Montilles should be "in addition to not using chemical, they are supposedly also going biodynamic."