Is wine the journey or the destination for you?

I am addressing the questions posed by Brian about intervention, which may not be the right word to express what I think is behind his questions--manipulation fits it, to me. I don't think the discussion veered in that direction, but more in the direction of personal likes and dislikes, which I am aware is the hallmark of geekism, but it doesn't address his questions.

Gotcha.

I suppose I should not have tried to address Brian's questions while also trying to stay with the confines of the veered discussion, but how do you get people to stay on track???

Thread drift? Shock, horror. What we're all guilty of is not jiggering the subject title to reflect the change in topic, although it's an almost empty gesture anyhow since this new-fangled PHPBB software doesn't give you threaded discussions.

Anyway, I am in fact a lover of regional character but, your opinion notwithstanding, rather than an idealist I am a realist; as such, I wonder at what point introductions of new grape varieties into a region create dishonesty--or untrue to regional character? Is it within one's generation or is it within the overall scope of wine's place on earth? Believing in the honesty strictly from a personal outlook seems more to me like idealism.

Sorry if you thought that I was accusing you of idealism. I was actually thinking of those unnamed partisans who most vocally champion "natural" winemaking. We're all realists on this bus, Thomas (honk, honk).

Secret motives? I thought my motives were right out there--to tweak for debate.

Huh? I hope that I didn't imply in any way that I was accusing you of secret motives. Far from it, Thomas. I get where you're coming from but just thought that you were preaching to the choir, to use another cliché.

Mark Lipton

p.s. Maybe the problem is that I've been reading too many of Thor's posts. I got downright juridical the other day sparring with Brian Loring over the meaning of "control." Time for a vacation sans Internet access...

Technically speaking, oak is an adulterant, just like adding lemon to your tea. It just has a long history behind it and people seem to accept it. Does that make it right, and other additives 'wrong' or unacceptable, and if so, how do you distinguish between good and bad adulterants?

I think that every time you 'interfere' with nature by trellising the vines, or pruning, you are imposing your will on the so-called 'natural ' process. So allowing for such interference is a given, and the question is just how far do you go before it is too far. Pesticides? Irrigation? Or only when you come to the winemaking process and start adding things - chemicals?

Bill, I think you and I are on the same page as to the questions that I am trying to get at within myself. As noted by David Creighton I think that there is so much that happens in the vineyard that impacts the final product that is not even questioned. Things that I have no plans to change such as my choice of trellis, vine spacing, root stock, leaf pulling, hedging, fungicides, etc. These are for most people are acceptable practices (well maybe not my fungicides since I am not organic) but have more impact to the final product than some of the other winemaking process choices.

. Decide on your ideal of non-intervention and deviate from it if you must, but do so in full knowledge of the ideal and intervene because you have to, not just because you can.

This is probably the best description of where I think I am headed. In the vineyard I am already herbicide free and have been able to be pesticide free this year and hopefully in the future as well. But being on the East Coast, there are always going to be sprays for mildew and rots. It just has to be that way in most years. Rarely do we have a year like we did in 2007 where sprays can be minimal. I believe a similar approach when making the wine makes sense. Attempt to be as minimalist as possible but understand that it is not always possible.

. And if you can't make anything drinkable without intervening all the time, maybe your vineyard is in the wrong place.

This is a very real possiblity. Luckily this is not a commercial venture. Sometimes one has to work with what one has available so unless other things in life take me away from Maryland it will likely have to do.

And in answer to the original question: wine is the destination for me. I can't drink the journey.

Thanks. I appreciate all the responses. I really am interested in how others view this. I understand it is a topic that elicits many different opinions. But the different opinions expressed are exactly what makes wine differnt than most beverages. I can not imagine having this discussion about 7-Up but now that I have said that someone will surely point me to a discussion board on it.

I am addressing the questions posed by Brian about intervention, which may not be the right word to express what I think is behind his questions--manipulation fits it, to me. I don't think the discussion veered in that direction, but more in the direction of personal likes and dislikes, which I am aware is the hallmark of geekism, but it doesn't address his questions.

I knew that while the question was aimed at where one draws the line between valid intervention and manipulation that I would more likely veer in the direction that it did. No worries. The thread was still very enlightening to me and gave me much more to consider

Mark Lipton

p.s. Maybe the problem is that I've been reading too many of Thor's posts. I got downright juridical the other day sparring with Brian Loring over the meaning of "control." Time for a vacation sans Internet access...

Mark,

I saw that Therapy thread. I have a theory about the Ca. Pinot Noir crowd that appears online...

Thanks for your clarification. My final reaction was based on your use of the word disingenuous the definition of which is, having secret motives; insincere. The former, maybe sometimes, although not here; the latter--never!!!

Brian,

I'm glad something came through to you from the thread. I suppose I got carried away. One of the drawbacks to having been in the grape growing and production end of the biz, and I fully admit this, is that I dig into the subject in ways that
1. consumers may not be interested
2. consumers may not really understand
3. consumers may not need to know

But I do know that you are growing grapes and that you asked the question not as a consumer and so...

Brian,

Please note that my signature block does not imply expertise in this area. Millcreek Vineyards is what I have instead of a small front lawn.

Brian said:

If one is only concerned about the final product (destination) than any practice is acceptable as long as the outcome is better due to the use of said practice. If on the other hand, wine is intended to speak of the place, the weather, and tell the story of everything that was faced during the year (the journey) than any practice that alters that story even somewhat can be considered an issue.

I think considerations of this sort are reasonable for the artists among professional vintners fortunate enough to work with an exceptional vintage from great terroir. I would argue that for most of the wine made, the definition of "the journey" should be broadened to include the challenges faced by the grower/winemaker; whether the weather was partner or foe that year, maybe the place being spoken of is difficult... The wine speaks of

the place, the weather, and tell the story of everything that was faced during the year

Everything that was faced during the year by the partnership of the grower and the plants.

The goal for me is to be able to serve a dinner guest a dish that pairs spectacularly with a glass of wine that we grew in the front yard and made in the basement. This puts me in your destination category, but I don't really see that as diminishing the journey. We're just trying to apply fairly standard techniques to a very small vineyard, and making small amounts of the best wine we can with our harvest. Our wine will speak of our clay, the weather and an over-scheduled suburban couple...

You said you were just starting to make wine from your own fruit, but you didn't mention your level of experience. My wife and I had never made any wine when we harvested our first crop, and still have only made wine using our own fruit. We also knew nothing of trellising, pruning or disease management; all these have provided educational experiences... If you are a true beginner, as we were, your first many years are likely to be spent trying to make reasonably good wine; we are still (5-6 years) just trying to manage the vineyard properly, get grapes with pretty good sugar/pH/acid numbers and make red table wine. Artfully expressing our terroir is just not yet a concern.

Our terroir is rather alkaline clay which I'm going to aggressively modify before I plant the rest of the newly-expanded vineyard. We trellis, prune, spray, weed and cultivate. We then process our grapes using all the financially reasonable tools available to home winemakers. We chapitalized our really bad first vintage, and would do so again if conditions dictated that we do so in order to make wine that year. So I'd have to say for me

any practice is acceptable as long as the outcome is better

I'm quite certain I could evolve a more balanced opinion if I inherited some top-end dirt in Bordeaux.

Jim,

There ain't no perspective better than the one gained through practical experience. Your post--and your little dream about that Bordeaux dirt--prove it well.

The trouble with trying to put forth in the bottle the exact expression of that year's idea of nature smacks you right in the face when this year's expression will get you the equivalent of last year's waste product unless you do something to help things along...

My problem with a lot of wine production is when default methods take over the process, removing the chance that regional or local weather conditions will make much of a difference.