Fermentation: The Daily Wine Blog

It Is Your Problem..Now Fix It!!

State to resident wine lover: Yes, you may buy wine from an out-of-state winery, but you must first visit that winery.

Wine Loving Resident to State: But, I just want the wine, I don't want to visit them; plus, wouldn't flying to Oregon add a bit of expense to the case of wine that I want.

State to resident wine lover: That's not my problem.

Wine Loving Resident to State: We'll see about that when we meet in Court.

Court to State: Yes, it is your problem! Now fix it.

Thus is a truncated conversation that went on between the State of Indiana, Indiana wine distributors, Indiana wine lovers and a Michigan winery in a case the reconfirmed what a Kentucky Federal court said earlier this year: requiring face-to-face transaction first before a consumer can have wine shipped to them amounts to economic protectionism on the part of the state.

As Judge Tinder described the plaintiff's case, the wineries "contends the rules governing this scheme effectively prevent it, and other out-of-state wineries, from competing in the direct sale market in Indiana. The Consumer Plaintiffs contend they are barred from obtaining many wines they desire because of the impracticality of traveling to out-of-state wineries to purchase these wines or to complete the “face-to-face” transaction needed to place further sales over the Internet, by telephone, or by mail."

The response by the State of Indiana and Indiana wine distributors, again according to Judge Tinder, was to "contend the laws do not discriminate against out-of-state wineries. They assert that the laws are needed to prevent the sale of alcohol to minors and that the State’s interest in protecting its youth outweighs any incidental burdens on interstate commerce."

Judge Tinder agreed with the plaintiffs and struck down the law as an unconstitutional violation of the Commerce Clause and particularly the "dormant" commerce clause that is inferred from the Constitution that  restricts states from interfering in the interstate flow of goods.

The Judge also struck down a provision of Indiana law that barred any out-of-state winery that has distributor representation in any other state from obtaining a direct shipping permit in Indiana. The silliness of this provision goes beyond description.

Judge Tinder order that the Indiana direct shipping law not be enforced, meaning Indiana will eventually have to go back to the legislative drawing board.

There is an important take-away from this ruling by Judge Tinder and it is is observation that:

"Indiana’s current laws are not unique in their general outline...they protect wholesalers from any substantial encroachment upon their hold over the wholesale wine market in Indiana."

"THEIR HOLD OVER THE WHOLESALE WINE MARKET IN INDIANA."

What we have here is another in a growing chorus of judges, regulators, citizens, and politicians that recognize the three-tier system for what it has become: an artificial structure for protecting wine distributors from competition.

The lawyers in this case were Alex Tanford and Robert Epstein, two men who have been involved in the judicial wine wars for many years and who have an abiding appreciation for consumer rights and the constitution. Congratulations to them.

Hat Tip to  WineCanine.com for initial coverage of the decision.

Gary Vaynerchuk Has Some Competition

Gary Vaynerchuk has some competition (though not much):

Exploring The Slime-Factor In Winemaking

In response to Monday's post about how the creation of new grape varieties will enhance winemakers' status as "artist", one dear reader offered this comment:

"How can anything you ultimately excrete be called art?"

This is a darn good question that deserves and answer.

Most often you hear winemaking referred to as both an art AND a science. Technically I think winemaking is clearly more "art" than science, unless you think of winemakers as mainly practitioners of the "fermentation sciences".

You could make an argument that winemakers are not so much artists as they are "craftsmen", in the way that a designer of fine rocking chairs is a craftsman. The difference between the terms "craftsman" and artist seems to come down to the difference between being proficient with particular tools for the purpose of creating a high quality item and being primarily creative for the sake of communicating an idea or perspective.

It turns out that both the craftsman and the artist need to have some general knowledge of and make use of various scientific disciplines in the same way that a winemaker must. But having that knowledge of, say, fermentation sciences, won't get us where we need to be. Where we need to go to call a winemaker an artist is to make the case that a bottle of wine is truly a piece of art.

We could have a lively debate as to what constitutes "art". In fact, the commenter who provoked this post had something to say about that: "Either the word "art" is definable, or else anything you want to call art, is art."

I think art is definable in a way that isn't just applied to particular subject matter or materials. For me, "art" has always been something that attempts to convey a particular idea about the nature of reality and about the perspective of the artist and that was created from scratch for just this purpose.

Wine is created from scratch. But in its finished form does it convey the winemaker's perspective on an idea about the nature of reality? I think so. The winemaker surely has an idea in mind when they create the  wine. They have an idea about style, texture, longevity, aroma, and color. But what's important is that they have a myriad of choices as to how they can approach each of these aspects of a wine. And more important, as technology gives the winemaker the tools to achieve just about any style and character they want in a wine, what make the difference is the idea of the wine in the winemaker's head.

But my commenter makes another point that is cogent: If it's consumable, is it art?: "I've stood in front of great paintings, and i've maybe had a coupla glasses of great wine no comparison and when i came back from the men's room, the painting was still there, on the wall, not on its subterranean trip to the sewage treatment plant."

The suggestion here is that it one must be able to repeat their experience with an object in order for it to be art. That is, we need to be able to visit the restroom, then return with ever expectation that the art will be around to be experienced. This is very different than the idea that the wine must be consumed in order to be experienced because once consumed the experience cannot be repeated, at least it can't once all the bottlings of a particular wine is gone. I guess my response is that since when can art only be experienced through our eyes, ears and touch? Why can't it be experienced through out mouth and nose?

My commenter ends with a reiteration: "As for winemakers being artists, once again, PUUHLEEEZZE! don't make me choke on my Conundrum. Bartenders are more worthy of the title. Winemakers and lawyers are basically equivalent on the slime scale-—just below writers and above married senators who cruise airport mens rooms."

I haven't thought much about the "slime scale". It's an intriguing concept. The problem with my commenter's depiction of this scale is that we don't know what falls at the lowest end of the Slime Scale, that end of the scale that indicates what possesses the least amount of slimishness. But I don't think my commenter means to say that winemakers and lawyers occupy that position.

Not a Bad Place for a Wine Film

My little little corner of the world appears to have been transformed into Hollywood North.

The cast and crew of the film "Bottle Shock" have invaded Glen Ellen. The ubiquitous movie trailers are here, the cranes, the porto potties and the minor traffic jams caused by rubberneckers have all found there way in to my little unincorporated town in the middle of Sonoma Valley.

The filming today appears to be focused on what we in Glen Ellen refer to as the "London Bar". "London" as in "Jack London". The bar is something of a dive and a poor reminder of Glen Ellen's heyday when it supported upwards of 5 or 6 watering holes. I've spent some time there in the past, usually after a late dinner when everything else close to home has shut down and we all were not ready to stop for the night. But the wood paneled, scraggly old bar with its stale popcorn is probably a pretty good place to set a scene or two.

But I know what you are looking for. Celebrity sightings. Well, I'm pretty sure I had a such a sighting. Coming of the Glen Ellen Market, located opposite from the Jack London Bar, I'm positive I walked passed Rachel Taylor, who is cast as an intern at Chateau Montelena in the film about the famed 1976 Paris Tasting that put California on the map. That girl definitely needs to put some meat on her bones.

Glen Ellen is a pretty cool little town. There really isn't much here. A few restaurants, some specialty food shops, a grocery store and a few other things. You can drive through the town in less than a minute. It used to be a resort town. Two creeks converge in the town and they made for great swimming and fishing around the turn of the century when city folk would venture up in the summer to hang out on Sonoma Creek. The town of course drew most of its fame from the fact that Jack London made his home here. But by and large the town survived as a result of the "State Home for the Feeble Minded", which is still operating today as the "Sonoma Developmental Center". This large hospital for developmentally handicapped drew hundreds of workers to the town.

Today the wine industry and the attending tourism is what Glen Ellen is probably best known for. The Benziger Family, many years ago started a brand they named after the town, did a great job of marketing it and all of a sudden the name of my town was on bottles on nearly every table in America.

But through all this, the town really hasn't grown much. It's unincorporated. But if you count those who live in the hills on either side of the town as well as those who live in the flats there might be about 3,500-4000 folks who live here.

Because of this the town has stayed rather quaint. That makes it a fine place to film a wine country-based film. To say the least, it will be fun to watch "Bottle Shock" and see what they've done with the raw material that is Glen Ellen.

The Winemaker/Artist Rejoices

So it was French and Italian researchers who have assembled the first complete genome of the grapevine. That seems apropos to me.

It also seems to me that this kind of research will eventually lead to a variety of things. Not least among them is that in time grapes will be grown in more places than they are now as varieties are created to produce usable wine grapes. That means more books being published. More seminars on wine regions. More sections in the wine stores.

But most importantly, what this new breakthrough means is that the winemaker will in time become even more the "artist" as more tools will be at their disposal for the creation of the wine they have in their imagination. I can't think of a reason why this is anything other than good. The notion of the winemaker as the person who "is just a caretaker for what the land gives me" always struck me as modest, to say the least. While they can be this, they can certainly be more.

One wonders, however, if, down the line when so many new and human created varieties are in the market and proliferating, if there will be wineries that still use the old "heirloom" varieties that, they explain "once proliferated in California's vineyards way back in the 00s when winemaking was in its first heyday"?

Razor Blades & Drinking

I've always been a "Gillette Man", thinking their razors are far better and more effective than the Schick variety. This last Saturday would have been the perfect opportunity to test out my preference. Had I possessed one of each variety, I would have happily tested them on my wrists as I sat through eight hours of Traffic School.

My ass and head still ache from sitting on a hard chair for the day as I listened to a middle aged man fervently preach the saving graces of using windshield wipers when it rains. However, I did learn something intriguing.

You know that little chart that shows you how many drinks you can have in an hour or two hour or three hours before you are supposed to be legally drunk? Everyone has seen it. It's a grid. In the column of boxes on the far left is your weight range, running across from each range is a series of different colored boxes (1 box for "OK", boxes for "impaired" and a different shade of boxes for "drunk". Inside each box is the number of drinks before hitting that level of impairment.) There is an example of one such chart in this post.

Well guess what I learned. When putting this chart together they define a "glass of wine" being 4 oz. AND being 12% alcohol or less.

I honestly don't remember the last time I bought a bottle of wine that was dry AND 12% alcohol or less that wasn't a German Riesling or a very sweet wine.

By my calculation and based on this chart, I can have 3/5 of a bottle of German Riesling over two hours before I'm officially drunk, at that point should not get behind a wheel of a car and, according to my not-funny "comedy driving school" instructor, have identified myself as a very bad person because I actually left my house in a car and with the intention of drinking—but that's another story that came out of my 8 hours is a rock hard chair, listening to a middle aged, non-drinking man lecture that also lead me to think about the possibilty of testing the effectiveness of my favored brand of razor blades.

The point, of course is that if anyone actually does follow these informative government produced charts that tell us what can be drunk before we are in danger of being a danger is that you better skew them downward if your drink of choice is wine. Because chances are you aren't drinking the kind of wine the government thinks you are.

Elitism & Wine: Keep It Coming!!

The wine industry takes a lot of heat for being elitist. It's the way we talk about wine, the way we seem to revere it and it's the trappings of the industry that cause this impression.

One of trappings of the wine industry that can't be disputed is that we all tend to surround ourselves with what many would call "high culture". The kind of music that tends to find its way to wine industry events and into wine country in general is what I'm thinking of here.

Take Jazz for example.

This is not a popular form of music in America. Relatively few folks listen to Jazz. And yet, the music seems to ooze out of wine country helping to cement the impression that wine, wineries, the wine industry and wine country is filled with a bunch of elitists.

My thoughts on this relationship?

KEEP IT COMING!!!

If being happy to associate Jazz music with wine and wine country is "elitist" then give me a walking stick and top hat. I'll wear the top hat with pride and keep my pinky extended as I grip my cane of arrogance.

Best of all, it turns out that my very own Sonoma County is turning into a hotbed of Jazz. Consider this:

-A couple weeks ago Chuchita Valdes played a free concert in the Sonoma Plaza sponsored by the Sonoma Jazz Society

-Dave Brubeck is playing a benefit concert for the Sonoma Country Day School

-Sonoma's Ledson Hotel has started a Jazz series that is bringing Taylor Eigsti and Jamie Davis to town.

-The Annual Healdsburg Jazz Festival has in the past two years put McCoy Tyner, Delfeayo Marsalis, Dave Holland and Roy Hargrove within my reach.

Until some great Jazz Diva comes along who chooses to sing about her tits and ass, to sing half naked and to makes videos that feature ripped gents and scantily clad female associates, Jazz is going to stay well off the mainstream radar and be perceived as elitist.

But as long as there is a wine industry and a wine loving set that feel there is an affinity between the art of wine making and high art, I'll be sitting pretty here in Sonoma.

A Chance To Take Down The Munchkin

One of the very best (meaning fun) winery events I've ever attended was the Roshambo Rock-Paper-Scissors World Championships. As Virginie Boone at WineAbout Blog points out, there was fear that Roshambo would not be able to carry on with this contest of skill, wit and intuition after having sold their winery to Silver Oak.

Naomi Brilliant wouldn't let that happen.

The 5th Annual Roshambo Rock-Paper-Scissors World Championships is set for October 6th at the Flamingo Hotel in Santa Rosa, Sonoma County, California.

I've competed in this event before. I even trained for it...a little. When it came my time to throw my fist into the fray I was soundly defeated by what appeared to be a 10 year old boy with some sort of supernatural intuition. I did not think it possible that he would know my plan to always throw paper. The little savant however threw scissors every single time. I was outwitted by a munchkin. THAT WON'T HAPPEN AGAIN!

Despite that setback, it turned out that getting a little tanked up on Roshambo Zin and SB and competing with a ten year-old on the Rock-Paper-Scissors battleground turned out to be loads of fun. I recommend this event highly.

The folks at Roshambo have not lost their edge after selling their amazing facility to Silver Oak. Anyone who knows Naomi never thought she would. It struck me she'd either get out of the business altogether or carry on valiantly, slashing her way through the sometimes mind-numbing baroqueness that can be the wine industry.

The other good news is that Roshambo has joined a co-op tasting room right here in my own Sonoma Valley. Roshambo wines can be found at Cornerstone Gardens, a very cool stop at the entrance to the Valley that includes not only a tasting room but some very cool and weird shops, not to mention a smart cafe.

So, put it down on your calendar:
5th Annual Roshambo Rock-Paper-Scissors World Championships
October 6th
Flamingo Resort Hotel
2777 4th Street, Santa Rosa , CA

Keirkegaard & Self Medicating with Wine

Even more depressing than finding one's self embracing Kierkegaard's aesthetic life of jumping from transitory experience to transitory experience in an attempt to stave off a life of boredom, is the somewhat similar strategy of dealing with the boredom of life by pretending that self-medication with wine is actually the act of connoisseurship.

Every now and then you meet a person who at first glance appears to have all the signs of being a genuinely curious wine person who simply wants to experience the intricacies of wine; who wants to learn and learn through tasting. Yet you quickly discover that this person is merely using the idea of loving wine and what it represents as an excuse for regular consumption of alcohol without the appearances of being a full blown, card carrying alcohol.

It's a very depressing encounter. And, it's an encounter one surely has more than once if you regularly run in wine circles.

I had another such encounter the other day when I ran into an old acquaintance at a wine store. I went to school with this fellow. He was browsing through the high-end side of the Domestic Merlot category when our eyes met and we instantly recalled each other from another time. Lunch was demanded we both agreed.

This fellow knew wine. He loves wine. He loves wine so much that as our cars arrived at the restaurant together and parked he first directed me to his back seat, open a briefcase, and pulled out a chilled, half drunken bottle of Montrachet from a very good producer. He offered me a clean Riedel right there in the parking lot, poured me a glass and made me try it. NO...He made me drink it:

"Hey, it's Montrachet, we're not spitting."

This guy hadn't spit since 1999.

At lunch he ordered three bottles of wine because, "they don't pour the interesting stuff by the glass."

He drank most of them.

I got a call from him a few days later asking if I wanted to accompany him to the Family Winemakers of California tasting: "If you go toward the end of the tasting they'll pour more of the 'under the table' bottlings'"

I'm not totally against the idea of self medicating...especially with Montrachet. But there is something altogether creepy about camouflaging one's dependence on alcohol to get through the day with a veneer of connoisseurship.

Kierkegaard's argument that most people's lives are a struggle against boredom by jumping from encounter to encounter has the ring of truth to it. That's depressing enough even without delving into the man's observations of how to overcome this situation. What's worse is when one person's dismal and alcoholic-laden strategy for dealing with this dilemma makes your own legitimate interest in wine appear to be something just north of pitiful; something that could turn you into an old acquaintance if you aren't careful.

The Wierd Case of Palate Synchronization

I like counting. I like the simple, elegant, structured and definite results you get from counting.

Combine this counting fetish I have with my appreciation for criticism and you can understand why I like valuating various rating systems and results of wine rating systems.

Today for some reason I started thinking about the highest rated recently released wines in the world. That though brought me to The Wine Spectator Magazine where, using their database of wine ratings, I learned something I think is remarkable and that I did not know:

Kosta Browne is clearly one of the greatest wineries in the WORLD...according to the wine spectator. KB wines released from the 2000 to 2006 vintage have received 95 points or higher from the Wine Spectator no less than 13 times. 13 TIMES!! 13 DIFFERENT WINES

Only four other wineries in the world have achieve this or better: Chapoutier, Guigal, Kracher and J. Wegelen Erber.

I'd had Kosta Brown wines before. I just never formed an impression about them. So I went out and bought one: 2005 Kosta Browne Amber Ridge Pinot Noir--Russian River Valley. This wine as ranked 95 points by Jim Laube, who wrote:

"Dense and backward, this is tightly wound and structured, yet the core of earthy cherry and wild berry is deeply concentrated, and the flavors keep unfolding on the palate. Ends with firm tannins, but also a burst of espresso-laced fruit. Drink now through 2011."

Now, I don't know about 2011, but this wine tastes EXACTLY like Mr. Laube describes it. I wouldn't have given this wine 95 points. But as many of you know I don't review wines on this blog. So my score is another matter.

But what's really interesting is this: Upon writing down my notes for this wine in my handy-dandy notebook, I went to the Wine Spectator site to look up the review printed above. Then I went back to my review in my note book. Check this out:

"Dense", "Tight" "heavy earth notes", "ripe cherry", "blackberry shell", "Tannic", "Coffee-finish"

Now compare those snippets from my notes with Mr. Laube's....Is that weird or what?

I've actually never noticed my notes being SO perfectly aligned with those of any critic. Frankly it startled me and I started to consider notions of "base flavors", palate synchronization, and coincidence. I've met and spoken with with Jim Laube a number of times, but it's not like we taste together on a regular basis, something that can result in palate synchronization.

I'll be going back and looking at the notes I've taken for a number of other wines I've reviewed  and compare them with reviews for the same wines by Laube and other critics. My initial suspicion is that I won't find anything like this kind of identical description. But imagine if I did.

How amazingly useful would it be if one's palate regularly tasted the exact same characteristics in a wine that a particular wine critic  tasted? It would not matter at all if you APPRECIATED the same characteristics. Just being able to read a critics review and understanding it completely would be an enormous advantage when it came to buying wines you've never tasted yourself.