Wine as an art or wine as a science?

[groovaman]

Last week I drank a wine that told me a story. It was made by a winemaker who runs a small basic vineyard, making wine in very much the traditional way.

What I liked about this wine is that in the true tradition of wine making, it's was the fruit that was being allowed to tell the story. The winemaker has had very little intervention in the development of this wine, ensuring the wine presents itself as nature intended and provided for. When visiting this vineyard I was surprised and romanced by the simplicity of the wine making process and the sheer rawness of the vineyard. So basic was the vineyard to taste his Botrytis Semillon we ventured to a vat in the open air under a big gum tree.

I have been to many vineyards, but this one more than any showed me the romance of wine making, and most importantly, wine appreciation.

Drinking this wine I start considering that a battle maybe brewing between the concept of wine making as art versus wine making as science.

I have recently been concerned about the apparent development of winemaking as a science. It appears to me that we maybe crossing a line that is all about interfering with the winemaking process to clinically produce a wine in the search of "consumer driven perfection". Look at all the high scores being provided by wine reviewers. Is this because nature is providing us with a greater product or because of our ability to take winemaking into the lab? Yes, we do get consistent wines that are well balanced, present the fruit, and are tailored to consumer needs, but is that what wine is about?

In the other corner we have winemaking as an art, using what nature has provided to create a wine that allows the winemaker to tell the story or paint a picture that is unique, imperfect and most importantly, compelling. As I sit down to experience the wine, I want to be taken on a journey that starts back many years ago when the vines where first planted.

I want a wine that allows me the honour of experiencing the evolution of the wine through it's diversity of seasons, its struggle against the elements, that expresses the passion and commitment of everyone within the winery, from the owners who have committed their life in pursuit of a dream, the picker who has struggled through a hot summers day to get the fruit of the vine and into the crate, the winemaker who on inspection of grape starts creating in their mind their next piece of art.

Have you noticed how many salespeople in the wine shops know what the main structure of a particular wine is, yet know very little about the winery it came from, in other words, the story of the wine? I want to know about the wine, what’s in the bottle is only part of it.

In the end, I want to be privy to a unique experience (good or bad), never to be repeated and I will never forget. Isn’t that what wine appreciation is all about?

I am no expert, far from it, I am still learning about the world of wine, but one thing does stand out to me, and that is we need wine that tells a story not just provides us with a pleasant drink.

[TORB]

Have you noticed how many salespeople in the wine shops know what the main structure of a particular wine is, yet know very little about the winery it came from, in other words, the story of the wine? I want to know about the wine, what’s in the bottle is only part of it.

..... and exactly what/where is that region called South East Australia?

Its bloody difficult to give you the sort of information you would like when the wine is a blend of grapes that have been purchased in, and that takes care of the majority of the wine produced in Oz today.

Even many top wines like Rockford Basket Press, that is made in a "traditional" way are made up of parcels of grapes from a number of growers in the Barossa.

The making of wine by definition is an interventionist process, the only question is how much intervention is used.

The vast majority of people just want to drink "good fault free wine" at a reasonable price.

I want to be privy to a unique experience (good or bad), never to be repeated and I will never forget.

The problem here is that most serious wine lovers will not buy wines that are "bad" just so they can "experience" them. From my perspective, life is to short to drink bad wine and whilst the "romance" of drinking a single vineyard wine where I well acquainted with the "process" is great and adds to the experience, the quality of what is in the bottle is the main factor.

[Maximus]

Wine is art and science. To create great wine, you can't have one without the other.

[Roscoe]

Totally agree with Max. I think it is primarily an art, but an art that should draw heavily from science in order for the artist to reach his/her highest expression. A winemaker and viticulturist that make a great wine without the benefit of the available science are lucky and/or have inherited a well established process. Similarly if they make a faulty wine under the same circumstances, they are incompetent. If they make great wine using all nature gave them and the relevant scientific knowledge to preserve this, they are true craftsmen/artists.
My two bob's worth.

[kirragc]

Even an artist uses science to his benefit.

The flvours available to the wine maker are almost infinite yet science onlky allows for the manipulation of a few of them. So even the most scientific winemakers are artists until they start withdrawing flavour from the wine.
And like all good art there are workaday examples and masterpieces.

That is the wine.



Then there is the wine experience, this is much broader, this too is part science in the form of marketing and part art in the storytelling.

Groovaman, you have told of a wine experience that you enjoyed and indeed you express that you would pay a premium for that experience.
When we deal with wines that are not altogether different the ditinguishing feature may be the story, the great chat with the winemaker, the hot girl behind the counter.

I think there is a lesson for all the cellardoor operators in what you say.
They can replicate the bottleshop. Or they can create a wine experience.

[Ratcatcher]

Great philosophy.

Problem is (as Ric said) the public won't buy 4000 cases of the bad wine when the vintage is poor.

So as much as you want to support this type of maker, they have to make some concessions to sell their wine.

If it's a hobby or a retirement folly and your financial wellbeing doesn't depend on it then go for it, and if you make one great wine then you will have achieved your goal. Or if you want to make something unique in amongst your commercial wines. But I'm not gonna drink your bad wines.

[Ian S]

I'm pretty much in agreement with Ric.

Nature is incapable of producing a Penfolds Grange or Petrus on it's own without significant human intervention. Nature doesn't take care of ideal pruning or trellising, nor does it protect from disease. Frankly any sort of fermentation needs a little intervention. I don't intend this to be an insult to groovaman, but I do find some of the "romance" angle of wine to be grossly abused by some ITB and we ourselves can get a little too caught up in it.

However on the flip side, I also have an issue with overly manipulated wine. Imitations are rarely as good, when the shortcuts offer only a superficial resemblance to the original.

So somewhere in the middle of this, there's a balancing point (or in truth, many balancing points). At one extreme, there's a future IMO for well-made bulk wine, which doesn't try to be something it's not (e.g. essence of wood chips), but offers clean enjoyable drinking at a good price from whatever grapes can do well in the blend.

At the other extreme, there will be interest in well-chosen single vineyard plantings, made into wine in a consistent (and for some preferably in a traditional) manner, with sensible, pragmatic intervention by viticulturists and winemakers.

Room for everyone I guess.

regards

Ian

[Roscoe]

All wines tell a story. Some stories are more romantic than others. Some stories have a sad ending. I prefer an unromantic story with a happy ending than a romantic story with a sad end.

[Michael McNally]

Ah, the beauty of markets! (sorry, too political?!?!)

[Ian S]

Wine is a business, people need to make a living from it (or be completely crazy and flitter away their retirement).

You can either make the best you can with what you have got and live with the consequences of poor vintage, that's unique in its expression and artful but be extremely variable and hard to sell / market.

Or you can minimise your risks by taking fruit from a larger area, use higher percentages of new oak, picking overripe and have customers at your door.

Which would you do if you're livelihood depended on it?

There's only a few with both the money and the balls to take the risk!

Very fair comment

[kirragc]

Capital Partner wanted

Must have cash
Winemaker has balls and grapes.

Apply within

[Wine Girl]

I will probably pour petrol on the forum fire with what I am about to say, but I simply must reply...

Groovaman, what a load of twaddle. There is very little "romance" in winemaking. It is a long, unpredictable, unglamorous, expensive, stressful, tiring, stinky, sticky and dirty process. Contrary to what glossy magazines and marketers would like you to believe, winemakers do not stand around all day, wistfully gazing into a glass of wine held up to the sunlight. When a winemaker sees a crate of grapes he/she is more likely to be praying there is tank space left in the winery to hold it, than pondering the piece of "art" that will be sculpted from it.

I respect your right to have an opinion on what drinking wine should be, but I think it is rubbish such as you have written that stops a lot of sensible, everyday people from becoming interested in wine. I have been involved in the wine industry for several years, and when I hear people like you crapping on about wine as though it is some sacred liquid, I have to leave the room.

Regarding your concerns about "the apparent development of winemaking as a science", too late. It is infinitely more science than art already, and yet so much is still unknown about the whole process. Would you prefer we blindly continue to apply hit and miss band-aid remedies to wine faults and problems? Can't you see that the more we educate ourselves on the chemistry and microbiology of grapes and wine, the better equipped we will be to provide you with a "unique experience" that is enjoyable?

[Red Bigot]

Welcome Wine Girl, nice incendiary first post.

As Len Evans said: Wine is just a bloody drink! (But drink only good wine).

[Scanlon]

An interesting thread, but unfortunately i don't have enough time right now to post in depth.

Just wondering how many people went to pinot south - terroir reloaded. A number of their experiments were quite applicable to this topic, esp the use of wild vs cultured single strain and commercial 'wild' mixes. Nature certainly knew best in that instance.

[GraemeG]

I will probably pour petrol on the forum fire with what I am about to say, but I simply must reply...

I think what you say is pretty reasonable. I'm always wary of the view that accepts certain processes as natural but draws the line over something which must not be crossed. So, classically, a warm, foot-trodden ferment of low-yielding, chaptalised grapes, bled of a little free-run juice, liberally dosed with sulphur, barrel aged and bottled is a terrific example of terroir, but a cool ferment, with tartaric & powdered tannin added, pumped over, minimally filtered and left to complete ferment in barrel is a hideous commercial construct. This is crap. I don't think there's a line you cross from art to science, or vice versa. Rather, there's just one long continuum; at one end grapes from an untrained bush vine chucked in a neutral vat and left for a week will need drinking in three days lest they turn to vinegar; at the other mass-produced beverages based on grape juice; Blue Nun, Mateus, Jacob's Creek Chardonnay and Beringer White Zin. At every point on that spectrum there are good and bad examples of the breed. Artificial constructs concerning 'art' and 'science' are merely attempts to dignify one's own prejudices with the mantle of legitimacy...
cheers,
Graeme

[Michael McNally]

Artificial constructs concerning 'art' and 'science' are merely attempts to dignify one's own prejudices with the mantle of legitimacy...
cheers,
Graeme

Graeme

What a beautiful sentence. So much meaning in so few words. That I agree with the sentiment expressed is a bonus.

Michael

PS An excellent first post Wine Girl. The word twaddle is underutilised!

[n4sir]

I will probably pour petrol on the forum fire with what I am about to say, but I simply must reply...

Groovaman, what a load of twaddle. There is very little "romance" in winemaking. It is a long, unpredictable, unglamorous, expensive, stressful, tiring, stinky, sticky and dirty process.

A very warm welcome to the forum Wine Girl.

I think you've brought up some pretty good points from an insider's view here. I agree the most romantic aspect to do with wine happens to be the drinking side of it; the actual making/marketing of it can be quite a different experience.

As to the question of if/where science is going too far, to me that's a little more blurry, especially where things such as spinning cone and reverse osmosis are involved.

Cheers,
Ian

[roughred]

Why stop at art and science?? Let's really stir the pot and throw religion into the mix....

I think it unlikely that we would find any blanket consent on this one. Those closely involved from a production point of view may see wine as an increasingly scientific pursuit, whereas the further down the line we move towards the end user, the more the sales and marketing machine kicks in and the artisan references begin to flow thick and fast.

However I think it a bit rough to refer to Groovaman post as crap and rubbish and twaddle. The mere fact that he posted and expressed his thoughts confirms that their is a section of the market out there who put great stock in the 'story' behind the wine. It doesn't mean that they are entirely naieve to the scientific, commercial and often industrail realities of the industry, it means that for them purchasing wine is an involved decision making process, and takes into account a number of considerations.

I too have been in the industry a number of years and consider myself an informed consumer, but still love to hear the story behind the wine. I may not consider winemaking a particularly artistic pursuit, but I know that more often than not when I buy wine I am buying more than just the wine in the bottle.

LL

[Sean]

deleted

[Red Bigot]

It is a long, unpredictable, unglamorous, expensive, stressful, tiring, stinky, sticky and dirty process.

Some years ago, my parents were at a small family-owned winery in the Hunter Valley. They were doing a tasting and getting the speil from the winemaker's wife.

Then a young fellow wandered in from out the back. He was soaked through in red wine, his hair, his shirt, his trousers, even the muddy boots he still had on.

He broke into an emotional tirade against his fellow workers, who had just initiated him in his first vintage by chucking him in a vat full of fermenting wine. The wife suggested he take a shower and was looking suitably embarrassed.

Dad made a bad joke about whether "young lad with muddy boots" would be on the tasting notes when that wine got bottled. Probably not.

From some of the Hunter reds of yore that must have been a long-established practice.

[Ian S]

Regarding your concerns about "the apparent development of winemaking as a science", too late. It is infinitely more science than art already, and yet so much is still unknown about the whole process.

In fact art itself has often had a very great understanding of science (e.g. Michaelangelo and many others of his era). It's quite sad that we want to call art and science opposites (but that's a debate Ausart.com ).

Personally I reckoned your words were a little harsh on groovaman (I was worried mine might be). However taken as more of a general attack on wine marketeers and wine mags, then I can very much empathise with your opinions.

So what's the best use of art in wine? Some of the wineries? Label Art? Galleries attached to wineries? Bottle (shape) designs?

regards

Ian

[Gasman]

I will probably pour petrol on the forum fire with what I am about to say, but I simply must reply...

When a winemaker sees a crate of grapes he/she is more likely to be praying there is tank space left in the winery to hold it...

... I think it is rubbish such as you have written that stops a lot of sensible, everyday people from becoming interested in wine.

So wine girl, the winemaker utilising his outhouse to ferment grapes 'cause there's no tank space left is more likely to interest people in wine than Grooveman's romantic twaddle???

In honesty, I think your cynicism probably reflects the reality of the difficulties facing the industry at the moment - oversupply, pressure from overseas markets etc. As a consumer, I don't really give a rats arse about whether the winemaker has enough tank space, or how dirty a job it is. Most of the time, I just want well made wine. But on occasions, I want to be wowed by what's in my glass - and if there's a bit of romance associated with the bottle and it's contents, where is the harm? Not every winemaker out there is producing accountants wine.

[smithy]

A big warm welcome to Wine Girl.
Tell it like it is (hell I do!) and maybe we can get a bit of commonsense rather than emotional back label twaddle about the "Art" of winemaking.

To me its a big slice of Science a lick of Artistic flair and a bigger part of luck! Or to put it another way

3 drops of Essence of Terror
5 drops of Sinister Sauce

Cheers
Smithy

[kirragc]

ROFLMAO

I thought wine WAS sinister sauce