For the last year, I have had a difficult time reconciling the natural wine movement – the notion that a wine that is manipulated by something as innocent as inoculated yeast can somehow be bad, and if not bad, at least less good than a wine that is made “naturally.”
It is this zero-sum mentality, the notion that there is a morality involved, a right and wrong, a winner and a loser, which troubles me.
I do not live in a world governed by unyielding principle. Instead, I live in a world in which the guiding light that I follow is a flexibility underpinned by the knowledge that life is not black and white, it is shades of gray and inherently good.
Perhaps I am in a philosophical mood having seen a stage production of “To Kill a Mockingbird” this weekend, thematic elements of the essential good in people and, ultimately, equality.
This natural wine notion of intractable principle and dogmatism by some in the wine world likewise came to mind as I read a recent a blog post (unnamed here to protect the innocent) in which the author vigorously indicated that the wines he wanted to drink had the following attributes:
• Yielding less than 5 tons per acre
• Grapes harvested before sugar levels reach 24 brix (unless you are creating a late harvest wine)
• Fermentation started naturally
• No additives
• No alterations
• Minimal So2
• Family owned and operated
• Farmed with a respect for the land
• Minimal oak influence
• Owner involved in all aspects of wines life
The problem I have with the stated desirable attributes related to wine is that it eliminates fully 99% of the wine produced in the U.S. Heck, the yield, fermentation and brix are enough to eliminate 98.5% of the wines made in the U.S.
If you know and understand that the grand majority of wine drinkers who come to wine initially drink vino that is domestically produced, and you know that the natural wines you are a proponent of represent a micro percentage of the wines produced in the world, then it seems to me that advocates of such strident natural wine are endorsing a wine world that is exclusionary; exclusionary of not only a significant percentage of wine, but also the people that drink wines that are outside the so-called “natural” realm.
By analogy, being a proponent of natural wine is akin to golfing exclusively at Augusta, unaware not only of the exclusivity of your surroundings, but unaware of the impenetrability of your environment, duffers and denizens of the links not welcome.
If given a choice between having the opportunity to drink the kind of wine I want everyday for the rest of my life, or having a U.S. wine culture that is growing, healthy and embraces the differences, I would choose altruism and a healthy wine culture for all. That’s my morality.