The Question of Land-Focused vs. Hand-Focused Wines
Today, in nearly any thoughtful discussion of fine wine by knowledgeable drinkers, one finds a near universal bias towards Land-Focused or “terroir-driven” wines over “Hand-Focused” or winemaker-driven wines. This land-focused bias—the belief that wines that accurately depict a terroir are “better” wines—is nothing new. Old World wine drinkers and vintners have held this attitude for generations and have codified the bias into appellation laws.
What I’ve been wondering is this: Is a land-focused fine wine bias a more reasonable or legitimate approach to understanding and appreciating fine wine than a hand-focused bias?
What’s interesting about this question is that neither Land nor Hand focused wines can be said to have a monopoly on authenticity. A wine that is made to depict a style sought by the winemaker is no less authentic than a wine that is made to depict a specific terroir. Both are legitimate choices that can and are made by winemakers to create wines of individual personality. So claims of “authenticity” cannot be reasonably used to justify a determination that Land or Hand focused wines are “better” than the other.
Even more interesting however is that hand-focused wines are always more unique than land-focused wines.
Theoretically, five winemakers using the same grapes and dedicated to a land-focused approach to winemaking should produce very similar wines. On the other hand, if five Hand-Focused winemakers are using the same grapes they should only make similar wines by coincidence and most likely they will all five produce wines that depict different styles—making them more unique and in fact more individual.
Whether a land or hand focused wine is a more legitimate or reasonable approach to the production of fine wine is not a question of quality. That is, it’s not really possible to say whether a land-focused or hand focused wine is objectively better than the other. This is a matter of opinion.
If a winemaker chooses to create a 50/50 blend of stainless steel fermented Sauvignon Blanc and ripe, barrel-fermented/full malolactic Chardonnay, you may not like this wine as much as you like the wine made from the same grapes but both fermented in stainless steel. But from an objective perspective, that preference of yours is just about all you can say about the quality or deliciousness of the wines.
And despite this, there still is no question that the vast majority of fine wine devotees profess to prefer land-focused, terroir-driven wines. It’s something about the current day zeitgeist, isn’t it.
We live in a world where nature has been conquered. Discoveries of new places and new lands are behind us. Landscapes are groomed and manicured closely. The vast majority of the foods we eat and prepare are largely pre-prepared for us…even when we cook for ourselves. The mystery of far off lands is no more. Instantaneous communication and real-time images and video are constantly upon us. We live in a very composed, highly organized, very tiny world.
A land-driven wine seems more real and in contradiction to this tiny world in the same way that a backyard-grown, heirloom tomato sliced open and bit into seems real and uncomposed and timely. This bias toward land-focused wines over hand-focused wine is surely a response to the plastic nature of our lives and world.
But it is certainly true that these land-focused wines we seek out and glorify are in fact themselves highly composed. They are made with grapes grown on carefully pruned vines laid out in very straight, man-made rows. The grapes are harvested at a very particular moment, often determined by exact measurements. And the winemaking is also measured and careful and deliberate, almost as though it was hand-focused.
I too am very interested and drawn to land-focused wines. I’m simply curious what a piece of land will produce on my palate. But I have to admit, I’m equally interested in wine that is driven by the mind, the intellect and creativity of the artisan winemaker who goes at a wine the way a painter goes at a canvas or a sculptor goes at his block of clay. From this kind of effort have come monumentally singular wines that depict determined mind.
I understand the bias toward the Land Focused. But in an age where plasticity is everywhere and discovery rare, the unique creation of a single mind can be very compelling and perhaps an even more legitimate way to express an idea than land-focused wine.
Very astute Tom. It would be really interesting to put together tastings, using both land driven and hand driven wines.
When you say that five different winemakers using the same grapes in a land-made wine get similar results, I presume that sameness means that the grapes are all from the same block of the same vineyard, in which the growing conditions were exactly the same, the soil types were exactly the same, and so forth.
Tom,
Arguably the most prestigious wine made in Australia is Penfolds Grange — a wine not from a single vineyard, or even a small number of adjacent vineyards.
The grape variety percentage and vineyard sources change from vintage to vintage depending on the growing season’s strengths.
The wine defines the “hand-focused” winemaker’s “art.”
Quote:
“Unlike most expensive cult wines from the Old World which are from single vineyards or even small plots (called blocks) within vineyards, Grange is made from grapes harvested over a wide area. This means that the precise composition of the wine changes from year to year; it is the expertise of the winemakers which purchasers value, rather than the qualities of the specific places where the grapes are grown, or the particular vines.”
Source: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Penfolds_Grange
Does its enthusiasts — and they are many and global — denigrate it for not being terroir-focused?
No.
The “acid test” of a bottle of wine is the pleasure found in the glass.
Not some doctrinaire adherence to a narrow (even myopic or superstitious) philosophy of winemaking.
~~ Bob
Even “land-based” winemakers arrange matters differently though. Winemakers who farm or purchase grapes in, say, Chabolle-Musigny Les Amoureuses may use different types of oak barrels and age their wines for different lengths of time, all in the interest, still, of making authentic Les Amoureuses.
I’m presuming your positing a thought on which we can all agree, Tom: that the question of “land” vs. “hand” is a big non-issue.
Apart from the fact that “hands” are very much a part even the most terroir focused wines (wine grapes aren’t self-cultivating, and commercial wines don’t make themselves), the point is moot because of the intrinsic “authenticity” of all artistically crafted wines. Of course wines sculpted to reflect the artistry of a person are no less valid than wines crafted to maximize vineyard, regional or terroir related charateristics — and vice versa.
That’s the beauty of the whole thing: wine lovers have their choices. But let’s not forget that the reason many wine lovers gravitate to terroir driven wines is not usually because they are tiring of artistic, “hand” focused wines, but more because they are tiring of mass production, same ol’ same ol’, commercial brand oriented wines. Wines reflecting less vineyard and vintage peculiarities, and ultimately less “soul” — the latter, a term that might defy concrete definition, but which we all still understand (I think it was Louis Armstrong that once said it about music, “if you have to ask what it is you’ll never know”).
Tom,
Great premise, as usual. Like nature vs. nurture, it’s normally a bit of both with rarely an exception. So, I don’t view the two aspects as opponents, but rather as partners in creating something, ultimately, to be enjoyed.
I really like your art analogy. If five artists interpreted a famous and beautiful landscape, say Mt. Fuji, the Grand Canyon or Half Dome, for examples, one would expect the results to be almost completely different.
While one artist might be a photographer, another might be a sculptor, and yet another a composer. Another artist might include all three landscapes in their work.
While the landscape itself is largely unchanging, each artist chooses their favorite perspective, time of year, narrative interpretation, and artistic approach. In this way, just as with wine, their are infinite choices, and this is what makes wine truly fascinating and compelling.
The difference between what my good wife can do with a filet and what Tom Colichio can do is why we pay Colichio to make our steaks.
No matter how significant “terroir” is, and I am a believer in the notion of terroir, it is the hand of the chef/winemaker that creates greatness of good ingredients.
We know that to be the case with food. I have never understood why the concept should be so radically different with wine. Yes, we can all agree with the notion that the winemaker, no matter how talented, cannot make great wine from inadequate fruit, but it is still the hand of winemaker that makes the transition from good grapes to great wine possible.
People who do not understand that simple concept or who deny it simply do not understand wine and have confused process with results.
I can’t say that this dichotomy is useful. All wine is exceedingly manipulated, starting in the vineyard, as you point out. In the best wine, the hand is invisible, revealing itself only in comparison to the work of other practitioners in comparative tastings. Everything is highly hand-focused. Though the most highly manipulated wine is less so than any beer.
But everything is also highly land-focused. In Appellation America’s Best of Appellation tastings, when we compare grouping from different regions, the regional characteristics come leaping forward despite who makes the wines and how. The nectarines of Arroyo Seco Chardonnay are in stark contrast to the rum and orange peel of the Santa Lucia Highlands or the simple Golden Delicious apple of the Salinas Valley. If you smell lemons in Petite Sirah, it’s from Livermore, whereas Paso Robles always gives you Tootsie Roll and the Russian River gives black cherry.
Your distinction does not respect the paradox that it takes an awful lot of effort to be invisible, and even more to do nothing.
More important (and I think this is your point), the vast energy and attention all winemakers apply is greatly disrespected by the childish myth that the best wine is a product of benign neglect.
I have to come down on the side of their being no sharp distinction between land-focused vs hand-focused wines. Winemakers who seek to preserve terroir nevertheless have interpret what that means and they make countless decisions about when to drop fruit, when to irrigate, sun exposure, when to harvest, not to mention fermentation temps, time to macerate, etc. all in the name of preserving terroir’s signal. Each winemaker will have a different take. In the end, even hand-focused wines are “mind-driven”, a product of the winemaker’s artistic vision.
Tom:
You managed to get me to agree with Randy, Charlie and Clark Smith all at once.
I’m sorry to have to say that this post illuminates more your lack of understanding on the subject of winegrowing and winemaking than it raises as an issue.