No, she’s defensively calling out a marketing campaign that sneers at her style of winemaking and probably affects the all-important critical reception of her wines. Winemakers want to make the wine they love to drink but they also want to make wines that the cognoscenti appreciate. When these two aspirations begin to conflict with one another, then expect either a stylistic tweak or - absent that compromise - some aggravation.
Parr Inc markets the so-called restrained Burgundian style in CA - is that not fair to say? Anyone who’s had a ripe Sashi Moorman-made pinot or a Burg with a rich and structured dark fruit profile may scratch their head at this, but it’s all been argued to death. For me, Merry’s words only imply that she’s being tested by the power of this current marketing and she’d rather enter the fray than make wines she doesn’t love.
Well, my first response is that Parr Inc. didn’t create the “movement”, or the wines. Most of the current IPOB producers existed, and were making wines of this style before IPOB came into being - it was the presence of the IPOB participants that led to the group, not Parr urging on the producers to change their styles.
We can interpret Merry’s words in any number of ways, but the truth is that the much larger majority of California Pinots are made in her style, and not the IPOB style. She is Goliath, afraid of David in this instance.
The pendulum swings every once in a while. Right now it is swinging towards lighter styled (but not light or watery) wines as compared to what came out of the region in the '90s. I happen to appreciate that. I know many folks who do not appreciate it. The wine cognoscenti are a very small group who do not really represent the wine drinking public on the larger scale.
The quote is the usual crap coming from someone who is seeing a sales dip or less enthusiastic critical reception. I am sure she is disappointed that things are not as rosy as they were in 2002 or whenever, but that is business. People buy fewer cheeseburgers these days as well. Shit happens. If she wants to blame Rajat Parr or Napoleon it makes no difference.
One thing I was thinking about when reading this article is not only have the wines ‘evolved’ over time, but our individual tastes have changed for sure.
What once may have been ‘beautifully bouqueted and full of life’ now may be perceived as ‘overripe and just fruity’ . . .
Tough to ‘go back’ these days - our palates change; our perceptions change; our ‘likes and dislikes’ change . . .
I love Merry’s spunk; her wines not so much. And isn’t it ahistorical in reference to the IPOB crew to say “I’m on the opposite side—we’re not in France, we’re in California”?
As I see it, the issue here isn’t acceding to nature by making “California wines” rather than attempting to derive “French wines” from California terror. On the contrary, did not Cali wine styles evolve from a lower Brix, less extracted, lower alchohol style to a considerably riper, sweeter, higher octane and glycerol style that cannot be explained away by global warming? I mean, sunny southern Italy produces vastly different wines than its north of the Alps neighbors, but that never meant Primitivo picked as raisins and watered back to 17%ABV was the natural consequence.
That is to say, a style of winemaking arose due to a deliberate effort to make extreme/gargantuan wines in order to appeal to a certain market, or a certain critical establishment, or even a certain winemaker’s own preferences. Nothing wrong with that, of course. But nothing inherently Californian about it either.
I think you would get some contrary comments on your assertions. For example, I don’t think it is too difficult to find a correlation between the demise of the rather heavy bearing AxR rootstock and the movement to higher brix picking. I am not asserting that this was the case for everyone or the only cause of changes, but to assert that somehow that was a solely deliberate effort is, IMO, going too far.
What’s appropriate for RRV is Zinfandel in many places. Wouldn’t be surprised if much of the PN and Chard is grown in vineyards that used to be mix blacks and whites that are no longer trendy or profitable.
In defense of Merry Edwards. Her 2011 Olivet Lane Chardonnay iwas the best wine I tasted on my recent RRV visit. I also found her place more welcoming then Phelps Freestone.
Wasn’t Merry Edwards the winemaker for Mt Eden before her eponymous label. Aren’t Mt Eden a AFWR fave? If so, were her wines for Mt Eden so drastically different than the ones before or after her?
Incidentally I find her Pinots lush and appealing ( if you can accept lush in pinot) young, but with fairly poor aging ability.
Interestingly and ironically (at least in an Alanis Morisette sense of the word) I beluge she labels many if her Pinots “Methode Ancien” referring to a “traditional” French way of making wine.
She was indeed winemaker at Mt Eden for 3 vintages, 75, 76, and 77, if the internets are to be believed.
I haven’t had any Mt Eden quite that old, so I can’t really say. But the few bottles of late 70s/early 80s Mt Eden that I have had, have been very different critters than the (admittedly few) Merry Edwards wines I have had.
Maybe she’s feeling tested, but would she really feel threatened if she was confident in what she was producing? Raj Parr is a gnat in the big scheme of things.
Hey, wasn’t she the winemaker at Mount Eden at one point? She’s well aware of the legacy of great Pinot Noir in California going back to Paul Masson. She played a little part of it. Then she both witnessed and took part in the style shift. If her sales are slumping, scapegoating won’t help.
She’s well aware of the legacy of great Pinot Noir in California going back to Paul Masson. She played a little part of it. Then she both witnessed and took part in the style shift. If her sales are slumping, scapegoating won’t help.