|
Marketing the Romance of Terroir.
|
||
|
|
||
|
|
||
|
In the fifth century BC, the scientist and philosopher Empedocles of Agrigento, a Greek from Sicily , claimed that “it isn’t the differences between vines that cause the differences between wines, it’s those in the land that nourishes them”. This is one of the first references made to the idea of “terroir”. In the ancient world there was no concept of the grapevine as we intend it today and most intellectuals thought that it was the environment that determined not only the characteristics of the wines, but also the characteristics of the plant itself. Modern ampelography was only developed after the fundamental studies of Linneo and his classification of living species, which established, once and for all, the concept, later amplified by Darwin, that environmental factors have no influence on the genotype and only in the occasional case do they affect its exterior expression. The “discovery” of the grapevine as a key element to variability between wines emerges from two schools of thought: that assigning the grapevine the priority in determining the characteristics of wine and that, drawing on the ancient concepts, claiming the superiority of the “terroir” in the hierarchy of the factors. The historical phase in which we live today is right in the middle of this debate. But in actual fact, it’s a debate that risks becoming futile: the grapevines cultivated to make wine, considering only those that have some kind of economic sense, are about a thousand. Most of them are cultivated exclusively on a local basis and only few are internationally successful. So the grapevine-environment link continues to be very strong and hard to break. No grapevine is born “international”; each one is the fruit of a single seed in a single place. If Europe is currently focusing on autochthonous grapevines, this isn’t because they are “better”, but simply because they are different, and while they could be planted anywhere, this never actually happens. From a commercial point of view biodiversity, for high level foodstuffs at least, is becoming a resource, while in the past it was almost a restriction, so much so that we have lost thousands of vegetable and animal species, and as this process is unfortunately continuing, we have to assume that we are wasting a heritage which is not only biological and cultural, but also economic. The defense of the native grapevines is therefore linked with the idea of terroir, even though it is separate. Science and memory Scientific studies of the mesoclimate, geology and pedology, which now benefit from the latest photo interpretation technologies, are an important aid to comprehending various “terroir”: being able to individuate differences, indicate the ripening potential of a grapevine in a given location and even forecast the possible physiological and plant health problems. However, these methods can be criticized of failing to notice the “subtle differences”, i.e.: those that distinguish the “vigna” (in Italian) or the “cru” (in French) from the area average. In other words, they fail to identify and forecast excellence. Experimental zoning tests are difficult and rarely provide satisfactory results from this viewpoint. It’s easier to identify differences on a vast scale than on a small scale. In a traditional European winegrowing area, such as Burgundy or Monferrato, when we compare wines grown in different vineyards to try and characterize “terroir” we run into numerous (maybe too many) sources of error: clone differences, state of health and virosis, planting technique, cultivation technique and the effect of the year’s climate which, over short test periods lasting two or three years, for example, tends to take priority over the “territory” effect. And the differences aren’t constant, because in rainy years, well-drained hill vineyards yield the best quality, while the opposite is true in dry years. Winegrowing in temperate European areas, such as inland France, Germany and northern Italy, is particularly subject to these variables, due to the variability of the climate, considerable intra-varietal genetic differences, lack of irrigation, presence of old vineyards, role of virosis and the considerable variability of the land, even across short distances. Micro-vinifications, i.e.: small-scale vinifications for study purposes, increase the margin for error due to the difficulty in operating under standard conditions. This is possibly why many European technicians have developed a certain skepticism with regard to the concept of zoning implemented using scientific examination instruments. It doesn’t mean that they lack faith in science, but simply recognize some of its limits and have learned to live with them. In actual fact, we Europeans include, more or less consciously, in the concept of vocation, and therefore terroir, not only environmental and cultivation parameters, but also the concept of the collective “memory”, which doesn’t coincide perfectly with that of tradition. Tradition is a way of operating which has been passed down, memory indicates something that “occurs” regardless of our wishes. This means that the superiority or particular character of one “vigna” as opposed to another can only emerge and be confirmed over long periods of time. This doesn’t rule out the possibility that science can forecast it, but the necessary instruments probably still have to be perfected. Going back to reasoning on a large scale, this difference is susceptible to change over time, maybe due to changing market tastes, climatic changes or the consolidation of a vinification technique capable of fully enhancing the grapes grown in a certain territory. Champagne emerged as a prestigious and fashionable wine with the development of re-fermentation, which enhances the “green” notes of a slowly ripened grape, in a climatic band at the very limits of adaptability of the vine, while previous attempts at making red wines hadn’t been particularly successful. On the contrary, the wines of southern Italy and southern France - famous in Roman times, when small amounts of wine were made in stone vats or jars partially embedded in the ground - in modern times were considered as blending wines of average quality. Today they have regained popularity thanks to improvements in viticulture and, particularly, in enology, with the introduction of cold temperatures in the cellar, recreating conditions more similar to those of ancient times. This shows that the concept of “vocation” of a terroir isn’t fixed: it shifts in time and space. The relationship with food and biodiversity For countries which traditionally produce wine, this beverage is the typical accompaniment to food. We don’t have the concept of “food wine”, because it’s implicit. From the marketing point of view, when a terroir is “sold”, it is sold complete with all its contents, which isn’t just the wine, but also, for example, meat, cured meats, cheese, truffles, cuisine and the landscape. A complex of different kinds of knowledge and not just products. Traditional foods, especially those made from ingredients belonging to local genotypes, are remarkable allies of wine communication. Unfortunately, the approval of food, if not in terms of preparation - at least as far as ingredients are concerned, has been even harder than that of wine. Just a century ago, Italian pig-farmers raised about a hundred different breeds of pig, but today there are only three, apart from the occasional resisting “enclave”. If you get the chance to try “Mora Romagnola Ham” or “Vacca Rossa Reggiana Parmesan” as opposed to those produced from the usual Large White Pigs and Holstein Cows, you’ll find it easier to understand, using your nose and mouth, what I mean. In actual fact, the terroir, seen from a marketing viewpoint, is characterized not so much by the container - the combination of physical parameters, climate and soil, as the contents. This is why many Italian winemakers, or production consortia, have decided to economically support Slow Food Presidia, i.e.: groups of companies which continue to produce specialty foods, in defense of vegetable and animal species that risk extinction. Conclusions The relationship between terroir, science, tradition and marketing is decidedly complex. According to some people, “terroir wine”, which seeks to enhance the difference, is the opposite of “marketing wine”, which aims to comply with a set model. In our old mental concepts, the first model was European, while the second was that of the New World. But many elements, including the fact that this convention takes place in America, show that these concepts have been broken down and that the “terroir”, at least for top quality wines, always occupies its rightful place. |
||
|
torna alla lista articoli - Home page - Periodico MilleVigne - Link |
||