[Posted and mailed]

It is often suggested that French wine would sell better and be much
more easily understood if the labels of AoC wines bore a reference to
their constituent varietals. The French say that this ignores the
over-riding importance of terroir. I have always thought the latter
view to be right. To say that a St. Emilion is merlot, bouchet and
cabernet sauvignon is only a tiny, tiny, part of the story — take the
Corbin and Figeac groups, close as they are geographically, without
even considering the differnce between those wines and those of the
low lying vineyards around St. Sulpice & St. Pey. That could be said
to be explained by the relative importance of the proportions of each
and of the wine maker‘s influence although I would still argue when
you look at those who have different chateaux in different places that
terroir is vitally important. Look at the difference between the
Nieppberg chateaux or Ch.Chante Alouette Cormeille and Ch. Gueyrosse
for example.

The reality of the argument has perhaps to be tested with unblended
wines and this was brought home to me last week in a tasting of over
30 different Burgundies. It might be thought that more useful
information, and greater consistency, would be derived from a wine
label which showed only one cépage to have been used so that it was
possible to have the attachment of a single, pure, unblended, varietal
label, in Burgundy, of either Chardonnay or Pinot Noir. However
tasting three different climats of Dom. Coste-Caumartin‘s wonderful
Premier Cru Pommards, both vertically and horizontally, though several
vintages, was a clear demonstration, yet again, of the immense
difference that a few hundred yards can and does make, even when the
same winemaker is responsible for each of the wines under
consideration. Why do apparently knowledgeable people continue to
press for varietal labelling which may be appropriate for nations or
areas producing one or two dimensional wines or those blended from
many hundreds of acres but which would deny the subtlety and interst
of the great wines of France? Can somebody please enlighten me?

Tim Hartley

In article >,
Timothy Hartley > wrote:
>
>It is often suggested that French wine would sell better and be much
>more easily understood if the labels of AoC wines bore a reference to
>their constituent varietals. The French say that this ignores the
>over-riding importance of terroir. I have always thought the latter
>view to be right. To say that a St. Emilion is merlot, bouchet and
>cabernet sauvignon is only a tiny, tiny, part of the story — take the
>Corbin and Figeac groups, close as they are geographically, without
>even considering the differnce between those wines and those of the
>low lying vineyards around St. Sulpice & St. Pey. That could be said
>to be explained by the relative importance of the proportions of each
>and of the wine maker‘s influence although I would still argue when
>you look at those who have different chateaux in different places that
>terroir is vitally important. Look at the difference between the
>Nieppberg chateaux or Ch.Chante Alouette Cormeille and Ch. Gueyrosse
>for example.
>
>The reality of the argument has perhaps to be tested with unblended
>wines and this was brought home to me last week in a tasting of over
>30 different Burgundies. It might be thought that more useful
>information, and greater consistency, would be derived from a wine
>label which showed only one cépage to have been used so that it was
>possible to have the attachment of a single, pure, unblended, varietal
>label, in Burgundy, of either Chardonnay or Pinot Noir. However
>tasting three different climats of Dom. Coste-Caumartin‘s wonderful
>Premier Cru Pommards, both vertically and horizontally, though several
>vintages, was a clear demonstration, yet again, of the immense
>difference that a few hundred yards can and does make, even when the
>same winemaker is responsible for each of the wines under
>consideration. Why do apparently knowledgeable people continue to
>press for varietal labelling which may be appropriate for nations or
>areas producing one or two dimensional wines or those blended from
>many hundreds of acres but which would deny the subtlety and interst
>of the great wines of France? Can somebody please enlighten me?


More information is better. How would it possibly hurt to list the cepage?


Dimitri

> More information is better. How would it possibly hurt to list the cepage?
>
>
> Dimitri
>
My question was not whether it would ”hurt• but what practical beenfit
it would bring to either the experienced, or the tyro, wine drinker
and, indeed, whether it might not convey the impression to the latter
that he/she could expect consistency of flavour simply because the
cépage was the same.

Tim Hartley

Perhaps you might consider that Cabernet labeled as such from some of the
cheapy places in south of france would now be Cabernet for $6.99 USA per
bottle compared to Bordeauxs Chateau Margaux for $299.00 per bottle.

Reality I think is the cheapo everyday wines mostly already do the grape
variety. Anyone buying a Margaux is going to know what it is and if not
they are not going to buy because its says: Mostly Cab, some Merlot, blah
blah blah.

The issue hurting French wines is primaritly competition from Austrialia,
Chili, Argentina, NZ and the fact there is some anti french sentiment in USA
towards french wine. Mostly the cheap stuff. I did my fair share of
bashing but DRC and Margaux did not come down :-(.

Today there are more producers and the guy with the largest worldwide share
is always the one that has the most to lose.

I would not change labels on any classified growth. Only the cheap stuff.
I would suggest getting more value into the French wines at the top level.

Sorry.


"Timothy Hartley" > wrote in message
...
>
>> More information is better. How would it possibly hurt to list the
>> cepage?
>>
>>
>> Dimitri
>>
> My question was not whether it would "hurt. but what practical beenfit
> it would bring to either the experienced, or the tyro, wine drinker
> and, indeed, whether it might not convey the impression to the latter
> that he/she could expect consistency of flavour simply because the
> cépage was the same.
>
> Tim Hartley

"Richard Neidich" > wrote in
nk.net:

> Perhaps you might consider that Cabernet labeled as such from some of
> the cheapy places in south of france would now be Cabernet for $6.99
> USA per bottle compared to Bordeauxs Chateau Margaux for $299.00 per
> bottle.
>
> Reality I think is the cheapo everyday wines mostly already do the
> grape variety. Anyone buying a Margaux is going to know what it is
> and if not they are not going to buy because its says: Mostly Cab,
> some Merlot, blah blah blah.
>
> The issue hurting French wines is primaritly competition from
> Austrialia, Chili, Argentina, NZ and the fact there is some anti
> french sentiment in USA towards french wine. Mostly the cheap stuff.
> I did my fair share of bashing but DRC and Margaux did not come down
> :-(.
>
> Today there are more producers and the guy with the largest worldwide
> share is always the one that has the most to lose.
>
> I would not change labels on any classified growth. Only the cheap
> stuff. I would suggest getting more value into the French wines at the
> top level.
>
> Sorry.
>
>
> "Timothy Hartley" > wrote in message
> ...
>>
>>> More information is better. How would it possibly hurt to list the
>>> cepage?
>>>
>>>
>>> Dimitri
>>>
>> My question was not whether it would "hurt. but what practical
>> beenfit it would bring to either the experienced, or the tyro, wine
>> drinker and, indeed, whether it might not convey the impression to
>> the latter that he/she could expect consistency of flavour simply
>> because the cépage was the same.
>>
>> Tim Hartley
>
>
>

Indeed the REd Bicyclette and the like Fat *******'s do mention
varietal's but they are competing at the bottom level. I agree, one does
not need to know the varietal if one is buying one of the Biggies.

--
Joseph Coulter
Cruises and Vacations
http://www.josephcoulter.com/

In article >,
jcoulter > wrote:
>
>Indeed the REd Bicyclette and the like Fat *******'s do mention
>varietal's but they are competing at the bottom level. I agree, one does
>not need to know the varietal if one is buying one of the Biggies.


So the main argument against listing it is, it seems, snob appeal?


Dimitri

In message et>
"Richard Neidich" > wrote:


>
> I would not change labels on any classified growth. Only the cheap stuff.
> I would suggest getting more value into the French wines at the top level.
>
> Sorry.
>
>
I don't think there is anything to be sorry about! I would not
disagree with you about the really basic stuff if it helps the basic
buyer. However French law does not prevent a varietal name on Vin de
Pays or VDQS so there is no need for change. At the AoC level terroir
becomes improtnt and I stand by my original points.


Tim Hartley

I do not disagree that terrior is important and that is why all Cabernet is
not created equal. I think the designate Haut Medoc, St. Emillion, Pomeral
is an important part that needs better marketing.

In fact, All Cab is not created equal and explain what terrior is to the
future generations of wine lovers.

I think its a marketing issue not a labeling issue. If it said Cabernet on
the label of a Chat. Margaux but the bottle sold for $299 the average
consumer is not going to understand the difference without understanding
Terroir and its value.


"Timothy Hartley" > wrote in message
...
> In message et>
> "Richard Neidich" > wrote:
>
>
>>
>> I would not change labels on any classified growth. Only the cheap
>> stuff.
>> I would suggest getting more value into the French wines at the top
>> level.
>>
>> Sorry.
>>
>>
> I don't think there is anything to be sorry about! I would not
> disagree with you about the really basic stuff if it helps the basic
> buyer. However French law does not prevent a varietal name on Vin de
> Pays or VDQS so there is no need for change. At the AoC level terroir
> becomes improtnt and I stand by my original points.
>
>
> Tim Hartley

In article >,
Timothy Hartley > wrote:
>
>My question was not whether it would hurt but what practical beenfit
>it would bring to either the experienced, or the tyro, wine drinker
>and, indeed, whether it might not convey the impression to the latter
>that he/she could expect consistency of flavour simply because the
>cepage was the same.


If it won't hurt then why not list it? Trying to save ink?


Dimitri

You make an interesting point but the key point on a French wine is the AOC
designation not the variety.

The new world wines from Napa are great but even Napa does not want to be
confused with Central coast Cabernets, or generic cab from AOC California.

They want to be a Cal. Cab from Napa, Rutherford, Calistoga, Stags Leap
District.---why...because terroir matters even here.

If California wine production were 300 years old perhaps you would know if
its red from Stags leap its Cabernet.

I think 100+ years of history means that a Bordeaux left bank/right bank has
different terroir and everyone that enjoys wine understands that if its
bordeaux the grapes are the same but the mix might be different % year to
year.

How about instead of changing the front label there is a label on rear that
simply says: 1995 Lafite Rothchild contains 70% Cabernet, 25% Merlot, 3%
Cab Franc, 2% Petit Verdot. Small label all white no graphics ingredient
type on rear that could be applied.

No change to front of label.



"D. Gerasimatos" > wrote in message
...
> In article >,
> Timothy Hartley > wrote:
>>
>>My question was not whether it would hurt but what practical beenfit
>>it would bring to either the experienced, or the tyro, wine drinker
>>and, indeed, whether it might not convey the impression to the latter
>>that he/she could expect consistency of flavour simply because the
>>cepage was the same.
>
>
> If it won't hurt then why not list it? Trying to save ink?
>
>
> Dimitri
>

(snip)
> How about instead of changing the front label there is a label on rear
that
> simply says: 1995 Lafite Rothchild contains 70% Cabernet, 25% Merlot, 3%
> Cab Franc, 2%
Petit Verdot. Small label all white no graphics ingredient
> type on rear that could be applied.
>
> No change to front of label.

I'm definitely in favour of defining varietal contents on bottles and the
above suggestion sounds very practical and in fact is being practised by
many vintners today.

I agree that terroire is very important, as are the skills of the
viticulturalist and the winemaker. I understand that these factors make one
Chardonnay taste very different from another and experience and my
particular taste (or lack thereof) will lead me prefer one over the other.
The hints provided by the area of origin of the wine, the winemaker, and the
declared bottle contents will provide me with hints as to what I can expect
from the product.

The buyers of plonk really don't give a shit what you put on the label, they
only want price... and perhaps alcohol content. Those who are interested in
the product will appreciate hints as to what they can expect in the glass.
--
Regards
Chuck
So much wine; So little time!

To reply, delete NOSPAM from return address

In article . net>,
Richard Neidich > wrote:
>
[snip!]
>
>How about instead of changing the front label there is a label on rear that
>simply says: 1995 Lafite Rothchild contains 70% Cabernet, 25% Merlot, 3%
>Cab Franc, 2% Petit Verdot. Small label all white no graphics ingredient
>type on rear that could be applied.
>
>No change to front of label.


This is exactly what I am suggesting. Why would anyone change the front?


Dimitri

"Richard Neidich" > skrev i melding
ink.net...
> I think 100+ years of history means that a Bordeaux left bank/right bank
> has different terroir and everyone that enjoys wine understands that if
> its bordeaux the grapes are the same but the mix might be different % year
> to year.
>
100+ years in Bordeaux? I believe they started in 50 A.D. so that would
make it 1950 years...
Anders

Salut/Hi D. Gerasimatos,

le/on Wed, 10 Aug 2005 00:26:39 +0000 (UTC), tu disais/you said:-

>In article >,
>Timothy Hartley > wrote:
>>
>>My question was not whether it would hurt but what practical beenfit
>>it would bring to either the experienced, or the tyro, wine drinker
>>and, indeed, whether it might not convey the impression to the latter
>>that he/she could expect consistency of flavour simply because the
>>cepage was the same.
>
>
>If it won't hurt then why not list it? Trying to save ink?

Could it be because European legislators don't like being told what to do by
the USA? Just like the USA doesn't like being told by France that they
shouldn't have invaded Iraq. I may think they're wrong, (and you can read
that any way you like) but you have to admit that sometimes "advice" may
well be taken in the spirit it is offered, and again - you can take that any
way you like.

--
All the Best
Ian Hoare
http://www.souvigne.com
mailbox full to avoid spam. try me at website

Ian Hoare > wrote:

[Stating grape varieties on the label]

>> If it won't hurt then why not list it? Trying to save ink?

> Could it be because European legislators don't like being told
> what to do by the USA?

No it could definitely be not. Cool down, Ian, but this discussion
has arosen in France, it's discussed at the INAO and other
circles. It has nothing whatsoever to do with the cause you
mention.

M.

Timothy Hartley > wrote:

> [Naming grape varieties on labels]

The direction this discussion runs is absolutely moot.

The problem does not arise with high-end appellations.

The real problem: Why should a plain AOC "Bordeaux" wine not be
able to mention "Merlot" or "Sauvignon Blanc"? Why should a "Côtes
du Rhône" not be able to say "Viognier" or "Syrah"? Why should a
"Côtes de Provences" not be able to mention "Grenache"?

I don't see any sense in not permitting to mention the grape
variety onj these type of wines.

M.

On Wed, 10 Aug 2005 11:18:39 +0200, Michael Pronay >
wrote:

>Timothy Hartley > wrote:
>
>> [Naming grape varieties on labels]
>
>The direction this discussion runs is absolutely moot.
>
>The problem does not arise with high-end appellations.
>
>The real problem: Why should a plain AOC "Bordeaux" wine not be
>able to mention "Merlot" or "Sauvignon Blanc"? Why should a "Côtes
>du Rhône" not be able to say "Viognier" or "Syrah"? Why should a
>"Côtes de Provences" not be able to mention "Grenache"?
>
>I don't see any sense in not permitting to mention the grape
>variety onj these type of wines.

Absolutely. I was just in the process of formulating a post with an
identical point of view.

I have noticed that some low-end Bx and Burg *is* varietally labelled
in the UK. Someone told me this was illegal, but tolerated for
bottles exported from France. But I have a feeling that it might be
toitally legal now. Anyone with more up to date information?

Until is is accepted practice, Bx producers have a particular problem
in that they have no Vin de Pays alternatives to A0C. Or has that
changed now as well?
--
Steve Slatcher
http://pobox.com/~steve.slatcher

Steve Slatcher > wrote:

> I have noticed that some low-end Bx and Burg *is* varietally
> labelled in the UK. Someone told me this was illegal, but
> tolerated for bottles exported from France. But I have a
> feeling that it might be toitally legal now. Anyone with more
> up to date information?

Afaik, all this is intensely discussed within INAO, but without
definitve outcome yet.

M.

Michael Pronay wrote:
> Timothy Hartley > wrote:
>
> > [Naming grape varieties on labels]
>
> The direction this discussion runs is absolutely moot.
>
> The problem does not arise with high-end appellations.
>
> The real problem: Why should a plain AOC "Bordeaux" wine not be
> able to mention "Merlot" or "Sauvignon Blanc"? Why should a "C=F4tes
> du Rh=F4ne" not be able to say "Viognier" or "Syrah"? Why should a
> "C=F4tes de Provences" not be able to mention "Grenache"?
>
> I don't see any sense in not permitting to mention the grape
> variety onj these type of wines.
>
> M.

I agree with you Michael, the more info, the better. It may be true
that experienced wine sippers (like the people in AFW) don't need to
know more than the appellation. But newcomers need all the help they
can get, particularly here in America, where wine is not really an
ingrained part of the culture. The average American won't know what the
heck "Cotes du Rhone - Villages" means.

Dan-O (just my two cents)

Agreed but does the info have to be on the front label. Why not a small tag
on back of label that says the % of Grapes?

Dick


"Dan The Man" > wrote in message
oups.com...

Michael Pronay wrote:
> Timothy Hartley > wrote:
>
> > [Naming grape varieties on labels]
>
> The direction this discussion runs is absolutely moot.
>
> The problem does not arise with high-end appellations.
>
> The real problem: Why should a plain AOC "Bordeaux" wine not be
> able to mention "Merlot" or "Sauvignon Blanc"? Why should a "Côtes
> du Rhône" not be able to say "Viognier" or "Syrah"? Why should a
> "Côtes de Provences" not be able to mention "Grenache"?
>
> I don't see any sense in not permitting to mention the grape
> variety onj these type of wines.
>
> M.

I agree with you Michael, the more info, the better. It may be true
that experienced wine sippers (like the people in AFW) don't need to
know more than the appellation. But newcomers need all the help they
can get, particularly here in America, where wine is not really an
ingrained part of the culture. The average American won't know what the
heck "Cotes du Rhone - Villages" means.

Dan-O (just my two cents)

"Richard Neidich" > wrote:

>>> The real problem: Why should a plain AOC "Bordeaux" wine not
>>> be able to mention "Merlot" or "Sauvignon Blanc"? Why should a
>>> "Côtes du Rhône" not be able to say "Viognier" or "Syrah"? Why
>>> should a "Côtes de Provences" not be able to mention
>>> "Grenache"?
>>>
>>> I don't see any sense in not permitting to mention the grape
>>> variety onj these type of wines.

>> I agree with you Michael, the more info, the better. [...]

> Agreed but does the info have to be on the front label?

Yes!

> Why not a small tag on back of label that says the % of Grapes?

Because Dourthe, Barton & Guestier, Caves Baron Philippe de
Rothschild might want to market a wine called "Le Sauvignon du
Baron Rothschild, AOC Bordeaux". Because French supermarket buyers
see - and buy! - Sauvignon Blanc from Italy, Australia or New
Zealand.

This is a totally diffenrent question - and the one that burns
under the fingernails! - from the discussion of listing the
percentage of cabernet, merlot etc. on the back label of Chateau
Lynch-Bages or Flim Flam.

M.

> The average American won't know what the
> heck "Cotes du Rhone - Villages" means.
>
> Dan-O (just my two cents)
>

In which case how is the cépage information going to help
him?

My point is simply that, even with a single varietal, its identity
only sets very broad boundaries of taste: terroir, winemaker and his
method, including use of oak, temperature of fermentation and degree
of extraction, maceration, use of triage, defeuillage, green
harvesting, all have such a massively marked effect so that the less
experienced are more likely to be misled into thinking that, for
example, the French Pinot Noir labelled wine they liked last week will
be the same as the one they are offered this week from a different
grower and/or place. That is why I have such grave doubts about the
benefits of varietal labelling — it is not informative to the less
experienced — it is in fact a likely snare and a potential delusion.
(You will note I have asssumed that the unwary inexperienced buyer is
looking for another French Pinot Noir — a fortiori, the argument if he
strays outside national boundaries.) Once you get into blended wines
the arguments are stronger still that mere percentage blend
information is even less helpful.

Tim Hartley

Greetings Tim;

In terms of the continental wine scene I would certainly count myself as
REALLY less experienced (perhaps a little less so when it come to my native
Niagara wines) and I must say I have never considered myself terribly anal
retentive... certainly not to 2 decimal points at any rate.... Never the
less, I am interested in information on the contents of the bottle as a
useful tool to give me an INDICATION of what I can expect in the bottle. I
don't think one need drink much wine to quickly realise that not all wines,
blended or "pure" varietal, from all winemakers are created equal. I rather
tend to believe that to most wine drinkers (even in Europe?) Chateau Flim
Flam on the label tells them less than nothing about what the hell is in the
bottle.
Hey, you want the worlds money? Figure out what will attract the worlds
wine drinkers...... Sorry, for me, Flim Flam aint it! Just the facts
ma'am.
--
Regards
Chuck
So much wine; So little time!

To reply, delete NOSPAM from return address


> My point is simply that, even with a single varietal, its identity
> only sets very broad boundaries of taste: terroir, winemaker and his
> method, including use of oak, temperature of fermentation and degree
> of extraction, maceration, use of triage, defeuillage, green
> harvesting, all have such a massively marked effect so that the less
> experienced are more likely to be misled into thinking that, for
> example, the French Pinot Noir labelled wine they liked last week will
> be the same as the one they are offered this week from a different
> grower and/or place. That is why I have such grave doubts about the
> benefits of varietal labelling - it is not informative to the less
> experienced - it is in fact a likely snare and a potential delusion.
> (You will note I have asssumed that the unwary inexperienced buyer is
> looking for another French Pinot Noir - a fortiori, the argument if he
> strays outside national boundaries.) Once you get into blended wines
> the arguments are stronger still that mere percentage blend
> information is even less helpful.
>
> Tim Hartley
>

Timothy Hartley > wrote in
:

>> The average American won't know what the
>> heck "Cotes du Rhone - Villages" means.
>>
>> Dan-O (just my two cents)
>>
>
> In which case how is the cépage information going to help
> him?
>

In 1969 I had a friend who was examining my likes and dislikes in wine, he
said, "you will like beaujolais." He was right, He might have said "You
will like gamay" but he didn't. I also knew at the time that I liked
chianti classico, though I did not know that I liked wines made from
Sangiovese. It is largely what you learn. Had I learned varietals I might
be on that bandwagon, but I learned AOC's and blends and to this day it is
how I think of wine. For those of us who have learned this way the varietal
litany seems silly since even in my favorites there huge difference from
year to year based upon the growing conditions etc. You could try to
convince me to drink brand X shirazGrenanche blend but it would be easier
to blend something and call it Goats do Roam in Villages, I would know
instantly what it would be (or should be) like.


--
Joseph Coulter
Cruises and Vacations
http://www.josephcoulter.com/

All of these arguments for and against varietal labeling are
fascinating. But I do want to make one more point - a beginning wine
drinker's tastes (and income) will tend to change over time. In other
words, today's $4 per bottle plonk drinker might (someday) see a
substantial increase in his/her paycheck. But the habit of shopping by
varietal will likely be set in concrete by then. In that case, the name
Chateau Margaux (one of France's most famous) will mean diddly - the
drinker in question will want to know what is inside. And this person,
who might now have $104 to spend, will be inclined to look for
something else.

Dan-O

Michael Pronay > wrote:

> Why should a plain AOC "Bordeaux" wine not be able to mention
> "Merlot" or "Sauvignon Blanc"?

Btw, I just found a label reading "Bordeaux Sauvignon":

<http://www.chateau-
ziltener.com/z_weine/angebot.php?show=show_next&id=107&lang=de>

or

<http://snipurl.com/gw87>

In theory, this should be illegal?

M.

Michael Pronay > wrote in
:

> http://snipurl.com/gw87

theoretically illegal, and just plain weird as most white Bordeaux are
Semillion/SB blends and Sauvignon by itself is a tad more confusing than
informative since the web page but not the bottle indicates the white thus
SB of the wine.

--
Joseph Coulter
Cruises and Vacations
http://www.josephcoulter.com/

jcoulter > wrote in
:

> Michael Pronay > wrote in
> :
>
>> http://snipurl.com/gw87
>
> theoretically illegal, and just plain weird as most white Bordeaux are
> Semillion/SB blends and Sauvignon by itself is a tad more confusing
> than informative since the web page but not the bottle indicates the
> white thus SB of the wine.
>

And note the suggested serving temp of 9C or 48F chill that sucker.

--
Joseph Coulter
Cruises and Vacations
http://www.josephcoulter.com/

On Fri, 12 Aug 2005 12:02:46 +0200, Michael Pronay >
wrote:

>Michael Pronay > wrote:
>
>> Why should a plain AOC "Bordeaux" wine not be able to mention
>> "Merlot" or "Sauvignon Blanc"?
>
>Btw, I just found a label reading "Bordeaux Sauvignon":
>
><http://www.chateau-
>ziltener.com/z_weine/angebot.php?show=show_next&id=107&lang=de>
>
>or
>
><http://snipurl.com/gw87>
>
>In theory, this should be illegal?

And if you click the "Next" link on that URL you will see an illegally
labelled Burg. These are not uncommon in the UK.
--
Steve Slatcher
http://pobox.com/~steve.slatcher

Steve Slatcher > wrote in
:

> On Fri, 12 Aug 2005 12:02:46 +0200, Michael Pronay >
> wrote:
>
>>Michael Pronay > wrote:
>>
>>> Why should a plain AOC "Bordeaux" wine not be able to mention
>>> "Merlot" or "Sauvignon Blanc"?
>>
>>Btw, I just found a label reading "Bordeaux Sauvignon":
>>
>><http://www.chateau-
>>ziltener.com/z_weine/angebot.php?show=show_next&id=107&lang=de>
>>
>>or
>>
>><http://snipurl.com/gw87>
>>
>>In theory, this should be illegal?
>
> And if you click the "Next" link on that URL you will see an illegally
> labelled Burg. These are not uncommon in the UK.

Hi, I have a question, then. Is this "legal"?

http://www.louisjadot.com/vins/pinot_uk.html

I have to say I don't remember what this is like, it's been a while since
I tasted it...

enoavidh > wrote in
. 40:



>
> Hi, I have a question, then. Is this "legal"?
>
> http://www.louisjadot.com/vins/pinot_uk.html
>
> I have to say I don't remember what this is like, it's been a while
> since I tasted it...
>
IIRC a rather mediocre PN for the price. the similarly labeled Chardonnay
is fairly oaky as opposed to their non varietal labeled white Burg which is
superior at a slightly lower price. It seems that varietal also describes a
style of manufacture in some peoples minds. if it is Chard it must be oaky,
if Burgundy it is allowed a certain native elegance.


--
Joseph Coulter
Cruises and Vacations
http://www.josephcoulter.com/

Salut/Hi Timothy Hartley,

le/on Tue, 09 Aug 2005 23:37:06 +0100, tu disais/you said:-

>It is often suggested that French wine would sell better and be much
>more easily understood if the labels of AoC wines bore a reference to
>their constituent varietals. The French say that this ignores the
>over-riding importance of terroir.

[snip]

>possible to have the attachment of a single, pure, unblended, varietal
>label, in Burgundy, of either Chardonnay or Pinot Noir. However
>tasting three different climats of Dom. Coste-Caumartin"s wonderful
>Premier Cru Pommards, both vertically and horizontally, though several
>vintages, was a clear demonstration, yet again, of the immense
>difference that a few hundred yards can and does make, even when the
>same winemaker is responsible for each of the wines under
>consideration.

This is a subject that has come up here before and with the possible
exception of DG's replies which have more to do with provocation than
anything else, most of the valid points have been covered again.

As it happens - serendipity, if you like - we've got a "Courtier" from
Burgundy staying here for a few days, and the subject came up - before I
read your article and the replies to it.

I agree absolutely with what you say about the sometimes amazing differences
that a few hundred yards can make in the difference between two wines made
by the same grower, from the same clones of the same grape variety in the
same year - especially in Burgundy, though I could perhaps more accurately
say "with the Pinot Noir grape" as I think this is the cepage which seems to
be most affected by terroir. Perhaps that's why some Oregon growers are now
giving almost more weight to vineyard than to cepage!! (Shades of Burgundy).

However, as I said to Jean-François, take some P-N grapevines from Nuits to
Pomerol and take some Merlots from Pomerol to Nuits, and you won't get a
bizarre pomerol and an atypical Nuits. So the taste and overall character of
a wine ARE indubitably much more dependant upon the cepage than upon the
terroir, even if _when tasted against eachother_ the same cepage can show
amazing differences from different parcels.

You point out that it's only at AOC level really that these differences show
up, but that may be as much to do with the blending and general messing
around that is often carried out at "lower" levels as anything, but which is
illegal at AOC level. There's some truth in that - as winemaking is at
present carried out. But I don't think that's necessarily true in all
circumstances nor in all countries.

However, my main problem with the classing of wines by cepage is that it can
mislead almost more than it informs. For example, one of the best white
wines I've ever drunk was Marcel Deiss' Altenberg de Bergheim. Despite
recent (post 50s) legislation in Alsace which seeks to limit Grand Cru
vineyards there to monocepage, (thereby disallowing the use of the name of
the cepage, because it's implicit) he goes back to ancient tradition there
and co-plants several cepages. His wine is sold as "Altenberg de Bergheim"
and the amount of the grape varieties present will vary from year to year.
"Varietal minded" types may very well dismiss the wine saying "It's a
blend." I don't give a XXXX for the fact that it's a blend, I care about the
fact that it's a great wine, from a great area and a great grower. That's
what matters, not the information which anally retentive varietal freaks
seek, that it's 57.32% riesling, 21.03% sylvaner and 12.43% gewurztraminer
and 9.22% Pinot Gris. Their obsession with varietal purity has completely
blinded them to the fact that there's more to wine than the grape variety
from which it's made.

The two classic mixed cepage areas in France are Bordeaux and
Chateauneuf-du-Pape, and their wines aren't going to be better or worse
because you know what's in it. And in the case of Merlot based wines, I
suspect that as far as the great American unwashed is concerned, their
experiences of flabby merlots from the USA would prejudice them against
brilliant Merlots from the "other side" of the Gironde if the cepage were
given.

So although I would agree with those who insist that the overall character
of a wine is more determined by the grapes that make it than anything else,
in the case of wines from some of the most ancient and largest wine
producing areas in the world, there's not a lot of point in insisting on it
being shown.

What I _do_ think is ludicrous is that European legislators seem to need to
be so blessed directive all the time. What isn't obligatory is forbidden, it
seems to me, and I don't think that kind of thinking is good at all.
--
All the Best
Ian Hoare
http://www.souvigne.com
mailbox full to avoid spam. try me at website

Ian Hoare wrote:
>
> What I _do_ think is ludicrous is that European legislators seem to need to
> be so blessed directive all the time. What isn't obligatory is forbidden, it
> seems to me, and I don't think that kind of thinking is good at all.
>

Now that is the most intelligent statement in this whole thread
(because it happens to agree with my position).

I don't really feel strongly one way or the other if the grape
varieties should be on the label, although I probably lean more toward
yes since knowledge is good. If you don't care what grapes are in the
bottle, don't read it.

What I can't understand it what is to be gained from forbidding the
information on the label? I say leave it up to the grower/winemaker.

Andy

On Wed, 10 Aug 2005 17:55:18 +0200, Ian Hoare >
wrote:

>What I _do_ think is ludicrous is that European legislators seem to need to
>be so blessed directive all the time. What isn't obligatory is forbidden, it
>seems to me, and I don't think that kind of thinking is good at all.

Apparently this used to be the case, but from 2000 it is no longer the
case.

There are now "Obligatory terms" and "Optional but regulated terms",
Anything not covered by these categories may be added to the label
providing they do not mislead consumers."

See http://tinyurl.com/dro73 and the links from this page for details.
Get that cup of coffe first though!
--
Steve Slatcher
http://pobox.com/~steve.slatcher

On Mon, 22 Aug 2005 14:57:57 +0100, Steve Slatcher
> wrote:

> but from 2000 it is no longer the case.

Sorry, that should have read "2002"
--
Steve Slatcher
http://pobox.com/~steve.slatcher

I haven't read yet the whole vast flurry of responses to this query, so I
apologize if the following was covered already. Here is a little history.

The "varietal" labeling now taken for granted by some US wine consumers was
a new idea proposed after the repeal of Prohibition in the US. Schoonmaker
and Marvel in their seminal 1941 book _American Wines_ (Duell, Sloan and
Pearce, New York) advocated varietal labeling as a pragmatic alternative in
the absence of the established and understood place-based naming common in
other, older wine-producing regions. (Elin McCoy in her recent book
mentions Schoonmaker and Lichine's coinage of the term "varietal" .) If
honestly used, this could also build respectable US wine identities, unlike
the very loose "generic" marketing names then routine on US table wines.
(Note also that when Schoonmaker and Marvel wrote, only one quarter of US
wine consumption was tables wines; three-quarters was sweet fortified wines
at 18-21 percent alcohol, a residue of tastes during Prohibition.)

Even varietal labeling had its limitations at the time, as those authors
pointed out:

"A label is submitted and approved for a California wine made from Riesling
grapes: the Federal Government does not know and is apparently in no
position to find out, whether this wine was made from Riesling grapes or
from Thompson's Seedless. If not made from Rieslings, the wine may have been
made and the labels ordered by a grower who is convinced that his grapes are
Rieslings ("Father always said that the grapes in the north forty acres were
Rieslings") or by a grower who is committing a deliberate and conscious
fraud. The Treasury Department apparently believes, and far too many lay
citizens also believe, that it is possible to make people honest and
intelligent and well-informed by publishing a book of regulations or passing
a law."

-- Max