The two vocabularies of quality: region and grape varietal
Two main vocabularies have emerged in worldwide wine production to indicate quality. The first, common in the New World countries (basically the world ex-Europe), indicates the grape varietal on the label. The second, common in Old World countries (Europe), indicates the growing area. Fluency in each vocabulary is essential as both are on the rise.
In Europe, particularly France, quality has been traditionally been rooted in place. Bordeaux, Burgundy, Champagne, and the Rhone have all indicated quality wine for centuries. The English and Dutch middle classes that imported Bordeaux wines in the 19th century, for example, knew them mainly as quality wines and wines from Bordeaux. What the place name disguised, however, was the component parts of what makes Bordeaux, namely, the grape varietals of Cabernet Sauvignon, Merlot, and Cabernet Franc.
In the United States, quality production came quite late. Only in the late 1960s did American growers and wine makers start a wholehearted focus on quality. While they were acquiring winemaking skills through trial and error as well as scientific research at the University of California (Davis) they lacked a vocabulary for transmitting that quality. Some winemakers took the place names from France making “hearty burgundy” or “champagne.” However, the French producers cracked down on these pale imitations through asserting their right to the name claims.
The 1980s solidified the American approach to varietal labeling. Kendall-Jackson, among others, started a line of Chardonnays in the $4-7 per bottle range. These “fighting varietals,” as they came to be known, were made in a clean, contemporary style and in vast quantities. They soon had a wide following, which reinforced consumer preferences for varietals not necessarily tied to a place.
At the same time American producers were carving out the varietal niche, there were signs of mutual learning and comprehension between the two vocabularies. The Americans introduced a framework in the late 1970s for region with American Viticultural Areas. Although not as strong as French appellations, the AVAs were a first step toward emphasizing the growing area. Terms such as “Napa Valley” hence had legal meaning. In a dual strategy, varietals could accompany growing areas on the label (although neither claim had to be completely fulfilled as producers were allowed 5 – 25% of the grapes used to come from other varietals or growing areas).
The French appellation winemakers have not implemented a dual strategy as varietals are prohibited on appellation labels. While this may work for the top growing areas such as Bordeaux or Burgundy, the proliferation of appellations (they have more than doubled to more than 400 over the past 30 years) means that the less well-known appellations have had an uphill struggle to build their identities. An indicator that it is working, however, is that appellation vineyard land can easily sell for three times the price of non-appellation land in Languedoc, an area where appellations have increased over the last two decades.
The French also adopted a dual strategy but not for the appellation wines. The class of vin de pays (literally, “country wine”) identifies both the region and the varietal. This category has had tremendous success since its creation two decades ago and now accounts for 25% of French annual production. While the regional claims are diffuse (the pays d’oc, a leading area, is vast) the varietal claims are strong. A Chardonnay must be 100% Chardonnay.
The corporate brand can be a third indicator of quality, but as a vocabulary, the brand is much more limited. I will save a discussion of brands for a future posting.
Thus it is clear that space remains for both vocabularies. A Sauvignon Blanc from New Zealand tastes quite different than a white Bordeaux, which is likely to have a lot of Sauvignon Blanc.
