Fermentation: The Daily Wine Blog

Tales of the Obsessed

How does one measure the damage done by someone's pursuit of their obsession?

I think inevitably it is a measure of the disregard one shows toward those other parts of the obsessed one's life that suffer as a result of otherwise due amounts of attention being spent on the object of the obsession. This begs the questions, can any obsession be healthy and can an obsession really be termed that if the those other parts of one's life remains intact, functioning or happy.

I think the answers are "no" and "no".

I have to bring this up because I know a fella who is going through a divorce instigated by his soon to be ex-wife. Among her complaints is "an obsession with wine and wine collecting that has disconnected him from his family and created an undue degree of debt attached to the family's finances."

Wow!

If not directly involved, one never know the true extent of claims made in the course of a filing for a divorce.  But knowing this fella as I do, it's unlikely that the claim is untrue and it's further unlikely that he'd ever try to deny this claim.

-He maintains two off-site wine storage facilities.
-I've watched him join three winery wine clubs in a single day
-He has two credit cards devoted entirely to wine purchases
-He will not drink out of anything other than Riedel and he has a different glass for every varietal
-He's always the last person to leave a tasting
-He sold a car to pay for 2005 Bordeaux futures
-He went to Napa for last summer's vacation, while his wife took the kids to Orlando.

I don't know if this tale gives any of my readers pause. It did me.

In fact, it made me examine my own life to make sure my own interests are not in danger of becoming obsessions. I think we slide slowly from an "interest" to "obsession" often without even knowing it's happening. And I think an interest in wine can be particularly prone to becoming an obsession given the variety of wines that exist and the fascination that this variety can breed.

Lesson: If you are going to start a family, make it your only obsession.

Who's Surprised??

If I had a dollar for every time I heard a person say "If you don't charge more for the wine they won't take it seriously" I'd have enough money to fund a research project on why people believe the more expensive it is the better is.

Of course no one does give me a dollar every time I hear such a thing so it's a damn good thing we have the folks over at the California Institute of Technology to do this research for us.

For some of you reading this the following will fall into the category of "duh, tell me something new": Research shows people get more pleasure from a wine when they know it costs more.

The research was carried out by Antonio Rangel and colleagues at California Institute of Technology. Basically they had subjects taste different wines and all the people new was the prices of the wines. However, in some cases less expensive wine was labeled as much more expensive than it really is and vice versa.

"They [researchers] asked 20 people to sample wine while undergoing functional MRIs of their brain activity. The subjects were told they were tasting five different Cabernet Sauvignons sold at different prices.

However, there were actually only three wines sampled, two being offered twice, marked with different prices.

A $90 wine was provided marked with its real price and again marked $10, while another was presented at its real price of $5 and also marked $45."

Folks liked the wines they were told were more expensive.

"Our results suggest that the brain might compute experienced pleasantness in a much more sophisticated manner that involves integrating the actual sensory properties of the substance being consumed with the expectations about how good it should be."

Ya think?

OK...so to those of us who know wine and the wine industry well this isn't much of a shocker, but it's nice to have scientific confirmation of what we already know. But how about this part of the research:

"On the other hand, when tasters didn't know any price comparisons, they rated the $5 wine as better than any of the others sampled."

Why would this be the case? Americans like sweet, smooth liquid and most certainly like their wine that way. That's why inexpensive wine, the kind most often bought, is smooth and sweet.

But here's my favorite part of the article that reported on this research:

"Next step: pain.

Rangel wants to see if people perceive pain differently, depending on their expectations. He hopes to administer mild electric shocks to subjects and measure their reaction when told a shock was going to be stronger or weaker."

Any Volunteers?

The Art of New Year's Eve Excess

The Art of Drinking on New Years Eve

First let's begin from the premise that New Year's Eve is, or at least has become, an accepted excuse to indulge.

Now, let's change the traditional understanding of the idea of "indulging" from meaning excessive consumption of drink and make it mean excessive consumption of good drink.

This change is meaning is important because it's necessary to justify opening absurd amounts of very good wines and spirits and also assumes a certain degree of soberness. The soberness is important under this understanding of excessive because without out a certain degree of soberness we can neither appreciate nor think about the absurd amounts of good wine and spirit that we will be consuming.

THE COCKTAIL
So, first things first: The Cocktail. Every good evening begins with a fine cocktail, well prepared. The proper cocktail, I think, must be a Manhattan. While Maker's Mark is a great everyday bourbon for Manhattan making and can be used in a pinch on this day of excessive consumption, you should instead reach for the Bookers.

THE OPENING CHAMPAGNE
From the cocktail it's time to move to a fine Champagne. This should be a good one. And it should be served with a very light nibble. This would be the time to open the vintage Champagne. We are still completely sober, our palate is stimulated by the Manhattan and we are ready to indulge. 1989 or 1990 would be perfect. Pay for the good stuff. This is the sparkler you will remember tomorrow.

THE GREAT WHITE
Upon consuming your vintage Champagne you are now ready to move to the great still white wines. This should occur with your first course. Now is the time at least three whites ought be opened and on the table. Make them a well aged White Burgundy, a middle aged Chablis and something disturbingly full and buttery from California. Remember, it's about excess...excess experience. A great Condrieu would be a fine addition. Remember, start with half a glass each, running through them all. Then, choose the one most satisfying and attack the oysters you have ordered.

THE LIGHTER RED
The second course should be a dish that can be paired with a light red such as Pinot Noir or even a rose. I can't seem to move my mind away from the idea of a well spiced salmon tartar to accompany your earthy, funky red burgundy. No matter what you choose remember...it's about excess. Have at least 4 different examples of these light reds on the table.

THE FOIS GRAS COURSE
You must have some. It must be seared so that the outside is just south of crispy while the inside remains between pink and red. We will be drinking a 15 to 20 year old Sauternes. for the squeamish among you, have them bring a small wedge of blue cheese, preferably a Gorgonzola Cremifacato, Stilton or a Blue d'Auvergne.

THE MEAT COURSE
Here's where it gets silly. To truly be excessive you must have a ridiculous selection of fine reds to accompany whatever meat course you choose. The meat really doesn't matter. It's only there to hide the fact that it's really all about the wine. You'll be needing a well aged Bordeaux, an ungodly dense Australian Shiraz, a 1986 California Cabernet, a red blend from Washington State, something older and gamy from Spain's Rioja, and an Italian red, probably something like a '97 Solaia. This might be the time to pull out that big, fat American Pinot you've been carefully keeping in your closet. The red course is also when you pull from your Rhone collection.

HOW ARE YOU DOING?
By now you've sampled upwards of 15 wines and had a cocktail to boot and you are just beginning. Remember, the idea is not to get drunk, but to consume excessively. That means you are not drinking full glasses of any wine. It mans the water is flowing at the table. It means you are seated in the best seat in the restaurant that is also near the restroom and it means you are eating all the time. However, remember, do not eat excessively. If you do, it will make it difficult to continue consuming many numbers of wines.

THE CHEESE COURSE
The cheese course is your opportunity to be silly and pull out any and ever kind of wine you want. This also means that the cheese must be several varieties. You'll need a bloomy rind cows cheese, a semi hard probably of Swiss origin, something stinky and soft from Northern Italy, Chevre will be necessary, a lovely blue should be there on the plate, and of course you'll need a wedge of Constant Bliss from Jasper Hill Farms that has been cut only moments ago.

THE DESSERT COURSE
This is the moment to dig down there to the bottom of your rack and pull out those stickies and sweet things you've not found a time to open previously. If possible try to stay away from the excessively sticky and unctuous wines. You'll be looking to open the Beerenauslese, the old Madeira, the 1963 or 1970 Vintage Port, a Quarts de Chaume from the Loire and an old Tokay from Australia.

RETREAT TO COMFORT
By now you are feeling the effects of your excessiveness and it's time to retreat to a place of comfort. Ideally this should be to the home of a friend, but a quite corner in dark room with excellent jazz will do also. Now we must start in on our spirits and liqueurs. Alternatively this is a good time to return to Champagne and sparkling wine, but not the best. Cognac, Armagnac, Single Malt are all appropriate now. It's time to reflect on your excessiveness. Time to review the ridiculous amounts of wine you've opened that previous to this night have been sitting in your cellar because you could not find just the right time to drink them. It's time to reflect on the year just past and the year to come. This can really only be done well with close friends and a fine after dinner drink close at hand. Cigars and cigarettes are appropriate now also.

The art of New Year's Eve drinking is not a casual one. It should be approached with some preparation. But most of all, it must be excessive without drunkeness. This is a very fine line. I don't recommend it to those who have not previously attempted it in more limited circumstances or who have not learned to do it from more experienced types.

HAPPY NEW YEAR!

 

The Wine Czar Has Arrived

Inspired by Paul Gregutt's excellent story on the meaning of wine terms, I began fantasizing about being named the American Wine Czar and being given complete control over wine regulations in the United States. I've fantasized about this before but given the wonderful fantasy it is, the topic deserves an update.

My first set of acts as the American Wine Czar are:

THE OLD VINE" REGULATION
Any wine produced in the United States that carries the term "Old Vine" or "Ancient Vine" or any other derivation of these terms that imply the vines are actually much older than average must have have been made with 100% grapes grown on vines that have been in the ground for 75 years or more.

THE VARIETAL REGULATION
Any wine sold in America that carries a varietal designation on the label must be made with 100% of the named variety.

THE DIVERSITY REGULATION
Any company that sells wine to consumers that is not also a producer must carry at least two wines from no less than five different states.

THE CONSUMER WINE PROPERTY REGULATION
Any consumer that takes legal possession of a wine may ship that wine to anyone anywhere in the United States unfettered by any agency or law of any state.

THE SPINAL PROTECTION ACT
No wine sold in the United States may be contained in a bottle that weighs more than 25oz.

The "HANDCRAFTED" REGULATION
No wine sold in America may carry a back label that asserts the wine was "hand crafted" unless documentation is submitted to the Wine Czar that verifies the wine was actually produced entirely while being held in the hands of one or more employees of the producer.

THE "RESERVE" DISCLOSURE REGULATION
The term "reserve" may be used on any wine label of American-produced wines only if on the back label the producer explains why the wine in the bottle is of higher quality than all other non-"reserve" wines made by the same producers.

THE "100 POINT" ACT
A 100 Point rating scale may only be used to rate a wine or promote a wine or to advertise a wine if the person or company assigning the rating is able to explain the difference between an 88 point wine and an 89 point in purely aesthetic terms.

Help Out With a Great Wine Story: Kids & Wine

We've had this discussion before.

Do you parents let your small children, say 4, 5, 6, 7-years old taste wine? Is it a proper, even healthy, thing to do? If you do, is there a fear in the back of your mind that the agents of the state will break down your door and make an example of you?

Someone else is wondering about this question. In fact, she's writing a story for the Associated Press about parents that introduce their children to wine at a young age.

Victoria Brett would like to speak with any parents out there who do have an opinion on this or have actually given their children sips of wine.

If you are willing to speak with her you can e-mail her here:

victoriabrett@comcast.net

As I mentioned to Victoria, we began allowing our children to take a sip of wine whenever we opened a bottle. Not a glass to swill down, but a sip. Each time they did take a sip we insist they tell us what they think. Good? Bad? Fruity? Yucky? Tart? Sweet? Whatever. The idea was to make them comfortable with wine as an object of interest and pleasure, rather than a forbidden fruit.

You may have a different experience or a different approach. Shoot Victoria an email and let her know your experiences. It will make for a better story.

Or, leave your thoughts in a comment here.

Beezelbub Comes To Utah?

You have to admit, it has to be one of the funniest and weirdest anti-alcohol laws in the country:

No Alcohol will be served or available for purchase on election day or when the polls are open.

Yet leave it Utah.

But wait the spawn of the Devil is on his way to rectify the situation and bring Satan back in control of Utah. State Senator Scott McCoy thinks this law should be repealed:

"This whole notion of not being able to drink on the day you're voting is just archaic. You can get completely liquored up at home and go vote if you want to, or you can have a glass of wine at home while you fill out at an absentee ballot, yet on Election Day you can't walk into a restaurant at noon and have a glass of wine. It seems there's a bizarre inconsistency."

This guy clearly wants out of Utah politics. But he's got a point.

No doubt the political leaders in Utah will point out that Senator Scott is in the employ of Beelzebub and has it in mind to lead all the children and weaker souls in Utah to the gates of Hell, all the while chugging down cheap Chardonnay.

Indeed, Senator McCoy has a tough road to hoe ahead of him if he thinks he'll get this law changed. Consider this little nugget found in the middle of the Associated Press story on Mr. McCoy's Windmill Tilting expedition:

"Bobbie Coray, a recent appointee to the state liquor commission and who does not drink for religious reasons, proposed hiding liquor bottles from view in restaurants so those who don't drink aren't offended by the sight of them."

But here's my favorite thing about his entire article. The very next sentence following the revelation that simply seeing a bottle of Cabernet would likely offend folks in Utah is this beautifully understated sentence:

"McCoy acknowledges revising any liquor law will be difficult."

You think?

It's unfortunate that many Associated Press articles don't carry the reporter's name on them and also that I'm too lazy to go searching for the name. At the very least this reporter should get the Sense Of Human Award for Journalism.

Utah happens to be one of those states that we look at from afar and think, "what pretty mountains...let's go ski." But upon closer inspection of the state and its inhabitants' proclivity to legislate the fun out of living, we almost always end up heading to Nevada. After all, if you are going to do the Devil's work, you may as well do it in his back yard.

Where Healthcare Meets Wine Shipping

I admit to being entirely curfuddled (sp?) by what we've come to call the "healthcare crisis" here in America. Basically, all I know is that I'm probably going to die because I don't have healthcare coverage that will pay to have my head removed from my ass or pay to have the correct procedure administered when I need to be treated for Emuthropopolititus - aliabosisalia...or something like that.

But, folks are working on the problem. Those folks are usually presidential candidates.

Today I read Senator John McCain's approach to fixing healthcare. What was startling about his approach was that it happened to include one element that would also work to correct what I like to call "The Wine Shipping Crisis" here in America.

Among McCain's proposals was:

"Allowing people to buy health insurance nationwide instead of limiting them to in-state companies, and permitting people to buy insurance through any organization or association they choose as well as through their employers or directly from an insurance company."

Applied to the the wine shipping crisis you'd only need to change a small portion of this part of McCain's healthcare proposal:

"Allowing people to buy wine nationwide instead of limiting them to in-state companies, and permitting people to buy wine through any means they choose as well as through wineries or directly from a retailer."

Read how the Associated Press (and hence McCain) characterizes his healthcare plan:

"John McCain proposed an overhaul of the nation's health care system Thursday, aiming to give people more control, encourage greater competition and lower costs."

Let's try this again:

"Tom Wark proposed an overhaul of the wine shipping laws Thursday, aiming to give people more control, encourage greater competition and lower costs."

Now, I'm not trying belittle the importance of healthcare, nor suggest that consumers being able to get the wine they want without special interest, monopolists getting in their way for profit's sake is more important than people being able to have heads removed from asses without going into bankruptcy.

I'm only suggesting that some folk's plans for fixing other industries might apply well to fixing the wine shipping business.

Babies Like Wine Too

Doesn't it seem like their is an attitude of zero tolerance for the idea of placing minors even in the very proximity of alcohol?

Many schools will send a child home or make them wear a school sweatshirt if they come to class with wearing winery schwag. We are constantly told that if any amount of alcohol hits the lips of a person under 21 they will die a terrible death and take others with them. Hell, the very idea that a minor looks at an advertisement for alcohol seems to set off some people.

I've long held that a minor's solid, responsible introduction to and education in the merits and downside of alcohol is a good thing. I've tried to do just this with my children. Interestingly, my son LOVES to sip and try wines at the dinner table or when we just open a bottle to drink. He's 14. My daughter simply hates the taste of alcohol.

Nevertheless, there does exist in this society a seeming zero tolerance when it comes to minors and alcohol.

That's why I like what Tyler Colman over at DrVino.com is doing with his "Kids At Wineries" Photo Contest. It's subversive. It's fun. And it sends the message that children won't shrivel up into little balls of goo if they get close to wine.

THE VOTING FOR BEST PHOTO OF KIDS AT WINERIES HAS BEGUN AT DRVINO.COM

I recommend you go over there and check out the cut baby shots. Vote. Be Subversive.

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.

The Future of Wine Labels--What Fun!!

It appears that the future of wine labels may include a hefty dose of Ugly.

A little "ugly" never hurt anyone, but a hefty dose of ugly is just down right....ugly.

It appears there is a serious move to force nutritional labels on alcohol bottlings, including wine. It's a Bush Administration proposal that is supported fully by The Center For Science in the Public Interest...the folks who spent time particularly in the 1990s explaining to us all why we will all die very quickly if we eat Movie Theater Popcorn, Alfredo Sauce, and any other food that is not made of pure fiber.

If you want a good look at what the proposed nutritional labels will add to a pretty package of wine, go here to the WineLoversPage, where I stole the label on the image to the left. Behold, the future of wine packaging.

I know.....consumers NEED this info. According to Diageo, one of the largest alcohol beverage companies in the world that supports this initiative, it is "a giant and very positive step in the right direction...Overwhelmingly people want this kind of information on the package."

Perhaps. Who am I to say what consumers want and what constitutes giant steps. I do know that designing labels and packaging for clients of Wark Communications will me much less enjoyable than before. But who am I do determine what's enjoyable?

Are You Drinking Your Bourbon??

Today is my annual check up. And I don't mind.

It's the day I get to hear an expert say to me, "Drink your bourbon every day, Tom."

My doctor's read on the literature is that the moderate consumption of alcohol, not just wine, is connected with a number of good things things that promote longevity. A few years ago when he asked about my alcohol intake (he was naturally concerned since I work in the wine industry), I told him "no, I don't drink daily." He was surprised, again, because I work in the wine industry.

"No, not daily, Doc. I do like to have a bourbon more often these days, though."

"Well, Tom," he said looking me in the eyes quite seriously, "I recommend you drink a glass or two of bourbon every day."

This kind of advise really does make up for the poking and prodding that accompanies your general medical examination of a man.

This kind of recommendation was not the case 20 years ago, before the 60 Minutes "French Paradox" broadcast and before there seemed to be 5 to 10 news stories a year about how moderate consumption of alcohol would prevent everything from heart disease to warts.

Twenty years ago, when I first started monitoring closely the news on alcohol, the big news was Fetal Alcohol Syndrome. It seemed to be talked about everywhere and not a few folks in the wine industry worried that between strict calls for not a drop of alcohol during pregnancy and constant calls for hasher drunk driving laws as well as lower BAC levels for drunk driving, that the wine industry could be put in a tail spin as folks just decided that alcohol was too much trouble to deal with.

Anyone reading this who was in the wine industry in the late 1980s and early 1990s, just think about the difference in attitude between then and now as it concerns alcohol.

As I get older (I'm 44), I've found that the affects of alcohol come on me faster and with less intake. I'm not a big fan of drunk or tipsy. It's just a feeling that never appealed to me. This surely has something to do with my desire to see alcohol levels in wine come down. But it also accounts for my lowering intake of alcohol in general. What I can't explain, and neither can by doctor, is that the "tipsy" feeling I'm liking less and less as I age does not seem as pronounced when I have a glass of bourbon versus when I have a glass of wine.

"Mad Men" is a great new series that debuted on AMC. It depicts the men and women who work in a high powered New York ad agency circa 1960. One of the appeals of the show is their attempt to get the attitudes, lifestyle, and accoutrement of the era correct. One thing that stands out is the drinking. These guys drink during lunch, have bars set up in their offices that get lots of use and they tend to have cocktails, usually more than one, between the time they are seated and the time the orders are taken.

I can't figure out how they could have possibly lived that way. But even if the show over does this aspect of the pre-social revolution era when men were men, men were drinkers and men who weren't drinkers weren't real men, there would still be too much drinking for me to imagine as part of my life.

That said, I still like the fact that later today a doctor, a good doctor, will look me in the eyes and tell me (after I'm instructed to exercise more and smoke less) that I should drink bourbon every day. Despite my lower alcohol intake, I really do like having a professional's recommendation that I enjoy my Maker's Mark daily.

Teen Spirit

Morbidity and Mortality Weekly (YES, that is the name of a publication. Wouldn't you have liked to be in on the meeting when the powers that be over at the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention who publish it all got together and decided on that name!) is reporting that Spirits is the drink most often chosen by teenagers.

Forty Percent of those participating in the study identified spirits (meaning bourbon, vodka, etc.) as their preferred drink. Beer came in second.

But here's the news: ONLY AROUND 2% OF THE TEENS SURVEYED IDENTIFIED WINE AS THEIR ALCOHOLIC BEVERAGE OF CHOICE.

Surely this has implications for policy making. Surely this finding has implications for policymaking on the issue of the direct shipment of wine.

Hat tip to Megan at Wine & Spirits Daily for identifying the story.

Sound Familiar?

"Supporters of prohibition say that the cost, no matter how high, is worth the price to save families torn apart by the scourge of alcoholism. Despite a cultural ideal that frowns on drinking, alcoholism is a major problem at every level of society. The consequences are particularly severe among the working classes, where men often spend large portions of their meager daily wages on booze while their families go without adequate food or shelter."

Sound familiar?

It should, this could have been written word for word in a newspaper somewhere in New England or Indiana or Georgia circa 1916.

It comes from a recent UPI story out of India.

India appears to be considering the same noble experiment that America undertook over 80 years ago.

Recently Prohibition was instituted in the Indian state of Haryana. In April, the state of Kerala banned the production and sale of Arrack, a traditional brew made from the sap of palm trees.

India has a population of more than a billion people and a fast growing economy. It, along with China, is one of the great export markets many wine producers in America and elsewhere are looking toward for real growth in sales.

It seems to me the unfortunate affects of alcohol abuse have to be pretty bad to consider, let alone implement, Prohibition in a state or entire country. By all accounts, the abuse of alcohol was pretty ugly in parts of the United States prior to 1919 and the installation of national prohibition here.

One tool to combat alcohol abuse that exists today that didn't exist in 1919 is the mass media. Delivering a message and promoting a message is much more efficient today than it ever was. But even with this and other modern tools to combat societal problems, enacting a total prohibition on alcohol must be pretty tempting particularly for a politician. Leaders make names for themselves with with bold steps; by putting in place plans of action; by responding to the needs of many people.

Were more states in India to ban alcohol it's quite clear that crime and corruption would increase. Criminals, like politicians, are adept at answering the call of a citizenry.

It will be fascinating to watch the course of events in India and to see if their experiment can take a different course than America's.

The Battle To Define Down the Meaning of Abuse

A new study shows that at some time in their lives "30.3 percent of adults have abused alcohol or suffered from alcoholism at some point in their lives."

That's all? Just 3 in 10 have abused alcohol? I find that hard to believe. But wait, what does "abuse" mean?

According to those who wrote up the study over at the  "National Institute on Alcohol Abuse and Alcoholism", the term "abuse" is defined as "those whose excessive drinking leads to personal and professional problems." Bridget Grant, the lead researcher on the study, also defined abuse thusly:

"The hallmarks of alcohol abuse are interpersonal problems, financial problems and problems in daily living due to excessive drinking."

There's nothing I like more than a crisp, clean, obvious, unambiguous definition of a word or phrase. They keep you out of trouble and they make communicating much easier and more efficient.

In my world, a "personal problem" related to "excessive drinking" would be having a harder time getting out of bed after an evening of sampling through one too many new French Rose imported by Kermit Lynch. I would also consider it a "problem in daily living" that I had to choose to stay the night at a friends house because  after sampling more than 15 wines with a seven course meal I just didn't feel like it was safe to drive home.  These are definitely problems of a personal nature to me.

Despite my somewhat dubious perspective on this survey, I do find this statistic an interesting one:

"alcohol abuse and alcoholism rates were more prevalent at higher income levels. Of those making less than $20,000 a year, rates of alcohol disorders were 23.9 percent. For earners of $70,000 and above, the rate was 41.4 percent."

Does this mean that low income folks simply can't afford to buy alcohol? Does it mean they that low income affects negatively one's appreciation of alcohol?

In any case, I'm not concerned with folks like me who sometimes drink enough to find themselves impaired. I'm really not. And to lump folks like me or others, who very occasionally drink enough dry rose at a 4th of July picnic to find themselves impaired enough to ask someone else to drive, into the harshly and judgmentally negative category of "abusers", is really not very useful. 

Now, if we are talking about chronic over indulgence, then we have an issue. Then we have something that if it isn't treated or reversed you can really have some problems.

Now...where's that bottle of Rose! Damn it. I can't find it. I can't find my glass either.

Pitching Advertising Services to Ernest Gallo

When I was growing up mine was a "Sebastiani House", rather than a "Gallo House". That's not to say my mother and father were wine drinkers, but just that the jug of wine my mother always kept on hand was Sebastiani. However, there are some people, many people (millions?) in fact, that were and are "Gallo Homes". I suspect its not just the folks in the wine industry who stopped for a moment of reflection at the news that Ernest Gallo died at the age of 97. I suspect a whole lot of people felt like they lost someone very familiar to them...if only because his name was constantly in their home.

Ninety-seven years old! Do you think it was the wine?

Over the years of being in the wine business I have been in close proximity to Ernest Gallo on a number of occasions. However, I only spoke with him once and this encounter resulted in my only "Ernest Story".

Very early in my career I was tasked with creating and producing a very large "industry-party" for a client that had opened a brand new winery facilty in Sonoma County. I was working at a PR agency at the time and the client was the best known personality I'd ever worked with . Organizing one of these events really amounts to getting the guest list together, creating invitations, taking RSVPs, designing the pace of the event and dealing with vendors. I hadn't done much of this sort of thing before, but really it's not brain surgery.

Ernest Gallo was on the guest list. About 2 days before the event a secretary "from the office of Ernest Gallo" calls and says, "Mr. Gallo will be coming to the event and wants to let you know he'll need to arrive by helicopter. Any patch of concrete or grass on the property can accommodate the helicopter."

Now, one would want Mr. Gallo at your big event. The idea was to have an event that demonstrated that the person giving it was in VERY good standing with industry mucky mucks. Ernest Gallo was Chairman Emeritus of Mucky Mucks. However, I had a vision when the secretary gave me these instructions: A large helicopter invading the party, everyone turning to look and listen to it and the Chairman getting out of the helicopter and making a grand entrance, thereby way overshadowing my client, putting the focus on him instead of my client and me and my firm getting fired.

"I'm sorry, we can't accommodate a helicopter on the property," I said. There was a bit of silence then, "please hold for a moment." A few minutes later a man got on the phone. To this day I don't know who it was. He said to me, "Mr Gallo will be at the party and would like to land his helicopter somewhere on the property". It was as though the previous conversation never happened, as though I was mistaken in my response to the secretary and that this mistake only needed to be cleaed up.  "I'm sorry, we can't accommodate a helicopter on the property," I repeated.

"Thank you". They hung up. Later the secretary called and simply said, Earnest Gallo is RSVPing for the party.

I really didn't like saying no to Ernest Gallo. You have this idea if you can do something for someone like Ernest Gallo maybe it will pay off in the future so you want to accommodate them. But, I thought keeping the client was more important.

Later at the party all was well. I was simply mingling, walking, keeping an eye out. I finally spied Ernest Gallo. He was standing outside on the landing of some stairs, holding a plate in his hand putting food in his mouth like everyone else. He was alone too. I thought I may not have another chance so I walked straight up to him and introduced my self.

"Mr. Gallo, my name is Tom Wark. I just wanted the opportunity to introduce myself to you," and I extended my hand. The expression on his face was nearly a blank.

No shake.

"What do you do, Tom," he asked without putting any expression on his face.

"I work for Gracelyn & Burns. It's a small firm that provides public relations and advertising to the wine industry."

Nothing. No expression. Then he said, "Hmm. Advertising. We do a little bit of advertising."

I didn't know if he was being sarcastic or that's just how he tended to describe multi-million dollar advertising efforts. I assumed he was being sarcastic and realized this wasn't going well for me. So I decided to go for broke: "And I'd love to talk to you about your advertising." That's when he finally cracked the smallest of smiles.At least I think it was one. The last word I heard from him before he slowly walked away from me and toward another old gentleman was, "Hmmmmm".

So when people asked if I knew Ernest Gallo I always tell them, "Know him? I had a private meeting with the man to pitch him on advertising services."

It's a lie, of course.  But there's a half truth to it.  Maybe an 1/8 truth.

No matter what you think of Gallo wines, the Gallo way of doing business or Ernest Gallo the man it's hard to argue with the fact that this was a person of enormous importance to the American wine industry and American culinary history. Hopefully you'll find others writing about their experience with Ernest. The stories abound.

Does A God Of White Grapes Exist?

What is moral?
Does free will exist?
Is there a God?
Why are there white grapes?

Thanks to geneticists it seems we have an answer to the last question. But I wouldn't be surprised if it was geneticists that answered the first three questions, with perhaps a little help from theoretical physicists.

According to research conducted by CSIRO (Commonwealth Scientific and Industrial Research Organization) white grapes developed 1000s of years ago only after the rare occurrence of two genes having mutated to create a mother plant that produced white grapes.

According to Dr Mandy Walker from CSIRO Plant Industry’s Adelaide laboratory, "Our research suggests that extremely rare and independent mutations in two genes produced a single white grapevine that was the parent of almost all of the world’s white grape varieties. If only one gene had been mutated, most grapes would still be red and we would not have the more than 3000 white grape cultivars available today."

The implication of this discovery is that the future creation of new grape varieties will be much more highly controlled. It appears we are moving closer to the day when geneticists and plant breeders might be able to create new varieties of grapes that can produce wines of very specific characters.

Again, Dr. Walker: "The discovery also has great potential for producing interesting and exciting new varieties with novel colours in the future, through genetic modification. One of the areas of future study is to determine if these two genes control the amount of red pigment made, so the colour of grapes can be improved.”

Wine drinkers and winemakers don't take too readily to new varieties. We have newer ones. Many of them in fact. But they don't really take off. Clearly this has to do with marketing. But what if plant breeders in league with geneticists created a grape that produced a wine with remarkably deep color, with the mouthfeel of Cabernet and the aromatics of Pinot Noir and that at peak ripeness delivered only 12% alcohol?

I'd like this! A lot!

However, one can't help but wonder if such a grape would ever make its way past the anti-GMO contingent. But that's another post.

Suffice to say, it appears we live in an age when the geneticist is the groundbreaker, the source of hope on many fronts. I'll be rooting for them to create me a 12% alcohol, full bodied red wine with the earthy, bacony, raspberry aromas I love so much. And along the way, if they help cure cancer or find a way to retard the progression of Alzheimer's, or confirm that there is or is not a God, that too would be very very nice.

The Wine News I've Been Waiting For

THIS is the information I've been waiting for.

Wine Business.com reports that sales of red wine have increased significantly since the release of the results of a Harvard study that demonstrates that out of shape mice fed high doses of Resveratrol don't seem to suffer from their unfit state. Resveratrol is a naturally occurring compound found in grapes and wine.

The report of this study showed up EVERYWHERE, including the high circulation newspapers and magazines. It follows a more than decade-long stream of medical studies that show an apparent link between wine consumption and healthy living. However, this is the first report since the 60-minutes show on the "French Paradox" back n 1991 that really gained steam in the media.

Whether folks understand that you'd have to drink yourself to death in order to take in the same amount of resveratrol as the mice were fed is beside the point. What readers took away from the news was a simple message: Wine, and red wine in particular, is good for you.

The result: in the four weeks since the results of the study have been out we've seen significant sales increases in red wine in nearly every measurable category according to AC Nielson statistics. The Santa Rosa Press Democrat also reports that local wineries have reported their best November sales in history. Now, we are not talking about the monumental kind of sales increases that occurred after the 60 Minutes airing. However, we are seeing the kind of sales increases that gets everyone's attention.

Here's my question: has this turn of events gotten the attention of those who promote wine generically?

It should be clear, after a decade and a half, that news of wine's relationship to good health is a significant driver of sales. Believe it or not, there are not very many organizations out there that promote wine in general or even CA wine in particular. The California Wine Institute and Family Winemakers of CA, the two largest trade organizations for CA wineries, are primarily lobbying organizations. They don't engage too much in the general promotion of drinking CA wine.

Someone should.

And that someone should find a way to beat the wine and health issue to death. I mean really
smack it!

There are of course legal restraints that prevent wineries from making health claims about wine. But isn't that really a bump in the road toward continuing to disseminating this news that consumers clearly respond to?