I’d love to get some experienced feedback on something I’m trying to do with my good friend and winemaker, Jared Brandt, in Berkeley.
We’re both increasingly disappointed in the trend towards big gatherings with upwards of 100 winemakers pouring 3-6 wines with loud music and a rallying-cry that ‘wine shouldn’t be so serious’. And it seems there’s a large festival happening every weekend. It must be exhausting to be a winemaker working events like this.
Jared and I love to geek-out on wine but we also really value how wine acts as a catalyst for community, connection and conversation. And while we don’t think it needs to be ‘serious’, we think details matter, and the more people understand what (and who) is behind a wine, the more they appreciate it. So we decided to create an event that embodies these principles—but striking that balance can be difficult, so I’d like your input to help us refine/rethink/abandon?/celebrate? this project.
Size.
Number of wines and winemakers; we think anything over ~20 winemakers pouring 2-3 wines is about the max we can take in a day without blowing out your palate and encouraging a drunk-fest—something we definitely want to avoid. I’ve also spent quite a bit of time writing individual profiles of each winemaker to draw a stronger connection between the personality and philosophy of the winemaker and their wines as opposed to focussing on their technique and cellar-speak–I’ve left that for the details of each wine description. We have selected winemakers whose wines, for us, clearly reflect their character as people and we want attendees to understand that and approach the table a little differently. The goal is to expand the conversation beyond the ‘organically/biodynamically farmed…hand picked…whole cluster, gently crushed…x days on skin…neutral oak/SS…native yeast…etc.’ I hurt for the winemaker when they have to repeat the same thing 100 hundred times in an afternoon. So we want people to have a program with all that information in it before they reach the table. Sure, the winemaker can go into details, but the basics should be the responsibility of the attendee to grasp. The goal is to encourage a different kind of conversation at the table, and one that will engage others in a dialogue together—as a group. So limiting the winemakers allows everyone to actually focus on them and their wines more carefully while still having enough breadth to feel the benefits of exposure.
Attendees: at 150 we break-even and we think that’s also about the right figure to have intimate clusters around each table. We have an industry-only tasting before the event so journalists, buyers and other industry people can have a more focussed experience before the public enters. Our goal is not to make money, just not to lose it. Importantly, this in not a ‘pay-to-pour’ event, as we select the winemakers and ask them to join at no cost—other than their time and wine.
Panel discussions.
Jared is deeply committed to constructive debate and loves a thoughtful conversation, so we decided to hold talks in the cellar room adjacent to the pouring rooms throughout the day. We landed on three topics: 1) the implications of climate adaptation on natural and low-intervention winemaking, 2) how poorly-made wine flowing under the ‘natural’ moniker is damaging the category and 3) a detailed discussion of the elements of terroir, how to taste it and why it matters. For the first conversation we have Dr. Kurtural, who ran UCD’s experimental vineyard in Oakville for years to study the impact of climate change on viticulture, and Dr. Perez from UCB, whose work focuses on adjusting viticulture to high-climate variability. For the third, microbiologists from UCB will talk about how microbiomes express in grapes while Pax Mahle and other winemakers will discuss terroir from their perspective (one winemaker, a former biologist, believes the music she listens to while pressing influences the outcome, for instance). For the second, Jared has a bone to pick with hipster juice and will lead a discussion about the benefits and drawbacks of low-intervention winemaking.
The idea is to expose the breadth and depth of issues, encourage deeper thought and conversation about them and, through that, connecting directly with other attendees.
The event will take place in three general spaces: the winery, the barrel room and the outdoor patio where people can rest, eat from three vendors, talk and reset.
We will continue events like this on a much smaller scale every week where we combine winemaker pourings with expert-led conversations about some aspect relevant to the wine being poured. So this event is part of our larger effort to elevate the conversations, experience and community.
What are your impressions of a structure like this? What are things you’d like to see in a wine event that are missing? Are there some things that you’ve really loved about other events you’d like to see more of?
I very much appreciate your input here.