A recent bottle – COS Nero di Lupo 2020 – sparked a question about what I call ‘post-modern’ red wines:
We can generally categorize ‘modern’ red wines as full-bodied, low acid, dark-fruited, high alcohol. There has been a long-running complaint that this style has become somewhat generic, and that the wines have no characteristics of the place in which they are made – a modern red wine from Chile tastes like a modern red wine from California or Italy or wherever.
In reaction to the perceived generic character of the modern style, a new generation of winemakers (which includes, perhaps, some old dogs who are willing to learn new tricks) are making red wines that are light-bodied, high acid, red-fruited, low alcohol. These wines share some of the characteristics of so-called ‘traditional’ wines, but they are not the same.
I like the ‘post-modern’ style, and I enjoyed the COS wine – I found myself drinking it much more quickly than I usually drink red wines. But as I drank it, I wondered if the post-modern wines weren’t also in danger of becoming somewhat generic. That is, the COS wine, from Sicily, seemed to be much more a wine of its time than of its place. Perhaps I’m ignorant, but I couldn’t discern anything distinctively Sicilian about the wine, nor even anything that would tell me that the wine was 100% Nero d’avola. I thought, as I drank it, not of other Sicilian wines, but of other wines of the same style from Mendocino and Navarra and Jura. I may have enjoyed all those wines (okay, maybe not all of them), but it seems to me that the ‘post-modern’ style in red wines could become just as generic as the ‘modern’ style.
There will be different reactions to a trend that runs its course.
Some will go the natural route, with varying success from brilliant to undrinkable filth
Others will return to tradition, be that grapes pushed to one side, clay pots for fermentation or ageing, or other winemaking methods
I’m sure some will still be pursuing the ‘bigger is better’ principle, of trying to use intensity to make the wines stand out from the crowd
There are certainly plenty that are embracing acidity and lower alcohol
There will be successes and failures across the board. Hopefully with the variety of wine styles growing.
I don’t see much changing in the mainstream / mass market. Whilst the concept of natural and low alcohol wines will have strong appeal, the reality is they’ll have too many misses at this level, so the reliability of the big brands in delivering soft fruity wines will continue to succeed.
I’ve had Nero di Lupo a number of times and I think it is distinctly Sicilian Nero d’Avola, but in the lighter and fresher style that COS and others are now making. I very much like this style, as well as Cerasuolo blends with Frappato. I certainly prefer it to the chewier, darker, lower acid style in which I first encountered the grape. Looking back at my notes on the COS Lupo I found that holding onto them for awhile they showed a bit more traditional Nero character. I find that many wines show rather generic when they are first released, whether generically juicy or generically heavy, depending on style.
As for whether “post-modern” wines can fall into a trap of sameness, that is often a complaint leveled at natural wines. A venn diagram what you are calling post-modern wines and natural wines would certainly contain a lot of shared real estate. Certainly with the whites there can be a tendency towards cider notes that tend to result in a sameness, whether one likes the style or not. I can see some sameness in the reds as well; very fresh, bright, and juicy, but less reflective of grape or place. As with anything, there is a range of expressions. As for whether that style could be come “just as generic” as the modern style, I suppose some likely are very generic, but given the choice between generically fresh, light, and bright or generically heavy, oaky, and alcoholic, I know which I would choose.
I’d rather hold up an ideal - so apply the term to that. It is what we’ve been seeing with a lot of the pioneering Italian winemakers bringing back forgotten varieties from brink of extinction. It’s using the best of traditional and modern knowledge and equipment to best show what the grape and site have to give. A lot of these grapes are truly unique, so retaining and showing off those novel aromatics is a goal. You don’t want brett. You don’t want to lose those volatile aromatics in aging. You often don’t want oak influence.
From personal observation, the wines we fermented (and often aged) in cement tanks were more intense in aromatics. Very pure, expressive wines. I’m absolutely sold on using those for certain wines.
Just like there are many flavors of postmodern literature, one could argue that there’s a ton of different trends that could be called “post-modern” beyond just the natural/low alcohol trend. One thinks of Carmes HC (amphorae and whole bunch in bdx), EDWC (mad scientist red-white blends), Raul Perez in Bierzo and Bernabeleva and Comando G in Gredos (Grenache with finesse, but not necessarily low alcohol), and even Bedrock (applied wine science 2.0), etc. and then there’s those that have dialed back the modern overkill, like Aymeric de Gironde at Cos and Troplong Mondot. Those are very different from the modern monsters, but are a far cry from light and low alcohol. Once could perhaps call them neo-classical but I’m not sure that quite fits either!