Place still matters, I even think consumers grasp the basics, though it's a mistake to talk to them about "terroir" like a wine nerd. Everyone intuitively understands that Napa or Burgundy wine is amazing not (solely) because of the talent of the winemakers there, so then it must be because the grapes grown there are somehow "better". From there, it's not difficult to have them understand that the same grapes taste different depending on where they're grown - while the grape itself is important, it's less important than the place, which may or may not bring out certain varietal charictaristics in the final wine.
Climate, soil types, drainage - it all matters. Whether it matters $40 or $100 worth of difference, that's up to the individual. It's easy to mention a few of these examples and just let them peek at the larger intricacies without boring them.
"Terroir" is largely an obvious concept, more than we give it credit for - things taste at least slightly if not significantly different depending on where it's grown. But the way we tend to romanticize it is something only *some* consumers are going to care about. And that's fine - it doesn't mean terroir doesn't matter, it means the romantic notions surrounding terroir might not matter. Those aren't (quite) the same things. Save the romanticism for the romantics. Talk normal to the normies. If someone's budget is $20, awesome, show them something terroir-driven in that price range. If they ask whether something that costs $150/bottle is really worth it, tell them the truth: it *might* be, to them, personally, though there are authentic reasons for the price, which are varied and at least somewhat esoteric.
I think to get people to understand broader geographic regions such as Tuscany or Napa or Burgundy is easy enough. But how many people are really understanding why this or that vineyard is "better" and more expensive - or at least why should they care/spend the money. I think that's what the German law is addressing. You don't have to know the umlauted vineyard names of Gräfenberg or Hermannsshöle or Krötenpfuhl (!!). You don't even have to know the phrase Grosse Gewächs. All you have to do is look for "GG" and you know this is a vetted top wine.
"Look, I am a committed terroirist. I believe a sense of place is among the most important things in wine. But I also know that it’s not an easy thing for many American wine drinkers to understand."
I work in the wine tourism space, so I'm biased, but I could not agree more with your sentiment here. Place is EVERYTHING in wine. For me, place is the most interesting thing about wine. The intersection of geology, climate, history, culture, agriculture, culinary tradition, local economy, etc.—it all adds up to what makes wine special. Without terroir, who cares? What is there to differentiate wine from other mass market alcohol?
And with the caveat that traveling to set foot in the world's various wine regions is a barrier for many, I think learning about place is actually one of the more accessible ways to appreciate wine. It's much less daunting for your average person to say, read about Burgundy (or even go there), than it is to engage with wine from the WSET kind of technical approach to the genre (and more fun too!).
Yes. this for sure. But I do think a basic knowledge of world geography is something that's been slipping for Americans for years now (well documented). So how does one overcome that?
We are very much into the age of personality once more, especially with younger and natural wines. In a way the very valid focus on ecological standards in viticulture has stripped the romance out of what was a pretty naive, vague, but easily-marketable sense of place: a place needs the right person, with the right message and the right ethos, to pass muster. In fact the right person can pass muster even without anyone really knowing where they're from- how many of the people paying 500 bucks for Ulysse Collin champagnes could say where they're from? I'm not sure!
It is a fine idea in theory. Part of the idea is of course that not only VDP winemakers own the best vineyards. Good as far as it goes. But it can go too far. Inevitably, market and political forces will influence the selection process. Great vineyards will become larger, good vineyards will become more numerous, and it will take a while for the markets to sort out the prices. The greater threat will be the temptation to ease the general quality regulations. Knowing the Germans, there will be endlessly long discussions practically about every vine (It took them years to agree to this law) In the end, you are probably better staying focused on the VDP wines.
All of the comments are great. And Jason's replies. As one of America's monolingual, geographically challenged wine drinkers, all I can say is that it's reading good writing that has taught me to care about terroir (and other things--which, yes, include "natural wine"). At the risk of sounding too critical (of the French), that "terroir" should be the word for place/soil/climate is deeply unfortunate for most Americans. I'm not sure if I've yet ventured to say it aloud to another person (and my anticipation of such a time is an uncomfortable feeling).
But even if "terroir" were not a scarier-than-usual non-English word, wouldn't a good response go something like, "That's a good question, but you don't have to care because good wines are not solely at insane price points." Of course, it would be best to follow that up with action, like handing them a list of good $15-$30 wines or, even better, pouring them a glass of good wine in that range. Or both. This would require one to prepare in advance and always carry a heavy and possibly unwieldy bag (and the list would have to be periodically updated), but the conversion numbers could be big (as long as you're not talking to, say, J.D. Vance).
(https://worldlegame.io/ -- enjoy this game of geography. It's fun because you get about six chances to fail.)
Place still matters, I even think consumers grasp the basics, though it's a mistake to talk to them about "terroir" like a wine nerd. Everyone intuitively understands that Napa or Burgundy wine is amazing not (solely) because of the talent of the winemakers there, so then it must be because the grapes grown there are somehow "better". From there, it's not difficult to have them understand that the same grapes taste different depending on where they're grown - while the grape itself is important, it's less important than the place, which may or may not bring out certain varietal charictaristics in the final wine.
Climate, soil types, drainage - it all matters. Whether it matters $40 or $100 worth of difference, that's up to the individual. It's easy to mention a few of these examples and just let them peek at the larger intricacies without boring them.
"Terroir" is largely an obvious concept, more than we give it credit for - things taste at least slightly if not significantly different depending on where it's grown. But the way we tend to romanticize it is something only *some* consumers are going to care about. And that's fine - it doesn't mean terroir doesn't matter, it means the romantic notions surrounding terroir might not matter. Those aren't (quite) the same things. Save the romanticism for the romantics. Talk normal to the normies. If someone's budget is $20, awesome, show them something terroir-driven in that price range. If they ask whether something that costs $150/bottle is really worth it, tell them the truth: it *might* be, to them, personally, though there are authentic reasons for the price, which are varied and at least somewhat esoteric.
I think to get people to understand broader geographic regions such as Tuscany or Napa or Burgundy is easy enough. But how many people are really understanding why this or that vineyard is "better" and more expensive - or at least why should they care/spend the money. I think that's what the German law is addressing. You don't have to know the umlauted vineyard names of Gräfenberg or Hermannsshöle or Krötenpfuhl (!!). You don't even have to know the phrase Grosse Gewächs. All you have to do is look for "GG" and you know this is a vetted top wine.
"Look, I am a committed terroirist. I believe a sense of place is among the most important things in wine. But I also know that it’s not an easy thing for many American wine drinkers to understand."
I work in the wine tourism space, so I'm biased, but I could not agree more with your sentiment here. Place is EVERYTHING in wine. For me, place is the most interesting thing about wine. The intersection of geology, climate, history, culture, agriculture, culinary tradition, local economy, etc.—it all adds up to what makes wine special. Without terroir, who cares? What is there to differentiate wine from other mass market alcohol?
And with the caveat that traveling to set foot in the world's various wine regions is a barrier for many, I think learning about place is actually one of the more accessible ways to appreciate wine. It's much less daunting for your average person to say, read about Burgundy (or even go there), than it is to engage with wine from the WSET kind of technical approach to the genre (and more fun too!).
Yes. this for sure. But I do think a basic knowledge of world geography is something that's been slipping for Americans for years now (well documented). So how does one overcome that?
We are very much into the age of personality once more, especially with younger and natural wines. In a way the very valid focus on ecological standards in viticulture has stripped the romance out of what was a pretty naive, vague, but easily-marketable sense of place: a place needs the right person, with the right message and the right ethos, to pass muster. In fact the right person can pass muster even without anyone really knowing where they're from- how many of the people paying 500 bucks for Ulysse Collin champagnes could say where they're from? I'm not sure!
Tom! We are not going to blame this on natural wine!
Ok ok who can we blame then?!
It is a fine idea in theory. Part of the idea is of course that not only VDP winemakers own the best vineyards. Good as far as it goes. But it can go too far. Inevitably, market and political forces will influence the selection process. Great vineyards will become larger, good vineyards will become more numerous, and it will take a while for the markets to sort out the prices. The greater threat will be the temptation to ease the general quality regulations. Knowing the Germans, there will be endlessly long discussions practically about every vine (It took them years to agree to this law) In the end, you are probably better staying focused on the VDP wines.
I too am afraid it may go too far, with too many vineyards and it will become meaningless.
All of the comments are great. And Jason's replies. As one of America's monolingual, geographically challenged wine drinkers, all I can say is that it's reading good writing that has taught me to care about terroir (and other things--which, yes, include "natural wine"). At the risk of sounding too critical (of the French), that "terroir" should be the word for place/soil/climate is deeply unfortunate for most Americans. I'm not sure if I've yet ventured to say it aloud to another person (and my anticipation of such a time is an uncomfortable feeling).
But even if "terroir" were not a scarier-than-usual non-English word, wouldn't a good response go something like, "That's a good question, but you don't have to care because good wines are not solely at insane price points." Of course, it would be best to follow that up with action, like handing them a list of good $15-$30 wines or, even better, pouring them a glass of good wine in that range. Or both. This would require one to prepare in advance and always carry a heavy and possibly unwieldy bag (and the list would have to be periodically updated), but the conversion numbers could be big (as long as you're not talking to, say, J.D. Vance).
(https://worldlegame.io/ -- enjoy this game of geography. It's fun because you get about six chances to fail.)