Ah, I see. A very different and more manageable task.
I would be interested to see if/when some kind of hospitality designation might get appended to their winery ratings – might be a useful way to tie the winery “ratings” or reviews to their more traditional travel-related content…
Esther Mobley has a good (in my view) and long article about this in the SF Chronicle. Links: The Michelin Guide is coming for wine. Here’s what it means and https://www.sfchronicle.com/food/wine/article/michelin-grapes-guide-ratings-21218932.php
I’d agree with that, though I believe that sustainable choices in farming are extremely necessary.
My biggest question with regards to this is, who is doing the evaluation? The critics are overworked already and viticulture is not their area of expertise. I mean that most of them are excellent writers, extremely experienced tasters, but I don’t know any critic who has really significant experience in horticulture or farming. I may be wrong here but it hasn’t shown up in any of my conversations with reviewers.
I’d speculate:
A lot of the vineyard health information will be coming from the producers. I really can’t see this any other way. The vineyards are private property, and just walking around in them on a surprise visit isn’t terribly likely. I understand Europe may be different, but even if a horticulturist takes a walk it’s not like they can tell superior genetic material just by looking at it. Most people would look for which vines are the healthiest looking, but green growth doesn’t actually make the best wines (IMO).
At some point this also risks there being a “best practices” list for farming. Given the diversity nature of sites, viticultural decisions need to vary between vineyards and vintages. The same is true of clonal choices and vine genetics.
The other issue with a checklist is that as that checklist becomes known, farming will adjust to check the boxes. The same way that wineries moved their style to Robert Parker’s preferences once he became hugely influential (and many absolutely did change to try and appeal to his preferences). This could lead to further homogenation and narrowing the band-width of wines-not across the board but certainly among a sizable range of producers.
It also seems to me that “best” viticultural techniques seem to change generationally. The frequency with which some new producer or new generation is doing some ground breaking new type of farming happens more regularly than one would expect for a 7000 year old industry. And I definitely think some of those changes are for the better. But what happens when we suddenly discover the best new thing in viticulture and farming? It’s important to remember that critical reviews are a form of journalism, and journalism needs to be able to renew it’s vibrancy. We already broadcast checklists of farming more than we do experience with the vineyard.
One of the issues I have with the wine industry at the moment is how “story” driven things are. The idea that wineries need to “tell the story” comes up constantly. But ultimately, I think most consumers really want interesting and exceptional wines, and if the winery has a good story then that’s a bonus. From my, admittedly curmudgeonly, point of view the viticultural part of the review will be hard, and expensive, to do in a really meaningful way. Which most likely means it will be based on whichever winery tells the best farming stories, true or not.
6 Likes
Ditto. I have really serious “story fatigue.” At work I do a lot of research on wineries and bottlings. Hit enough websites and they all seem to plagiarize each other. Boilerplate. Maybe there’s no alternative but it wipes me out.
2 Likes
This 1000%
The challenge is that producers will tell whatever story they want, regardless of whether fact checks are done. Lots to say that wineries aren’t honest, but . . . Many wineries simply aren’t honest.
Cheers
1 Like