Reader, PeterD posted this question:
To the experts: is an “industrial” product, by definition, adulterated? Is it possible to have an “industrial” wine that is pleasing to the palate and not a chemistry experiment? Serious question folks.

Peter,

Thanks for your question. Oreo Cookies have pleased my palate over the years, but I wouldn’t make an argument in favor of their “quality.” In the same manner, Ragú tomato sauce has pleased many a palate, but shouldn’t be confused with a real marinara sauce made from small-farm tomatoes.

The “implied contract” between a producer or merchant of wine, is that wine is special; the product of careful, artisan farming, and craft – worthy of special attention, and even celebration.

An “industrial” wine, breaks this contract. The same could be said for “luxury goods” of any kind that have been transformed into mass-market phenomena. At one point, for example, a Jaguar was a hand-made automobile – now it’s a Ford Tata with a high price and a bad service record.

Wine, culturally, and historically, has always had a tension between mass-production and artisan, but it’s the only “product” in Western civilization to have been the result of 1,000 plus-year experiments in farming which proved a direct relationship to a “terroir,” and the finished product.

The Phocaens who planted the first vineyards in France weren’t concerned about “planting merlot for the Paris market,” they were concerned that they’d have something to drink that wouldn’t kill them (the water would), and the wine provided another source of calories, which was critical in a time of primitive agriculture.

Along the way, grapes were nurtured that made wines that tasted good with the other foods these diverse communities “could” grow, which is why, in the “Old World,” there are so many different agricultural traditions and wines. In the “New World,” wine is largely a business opportunity, and unfortunately one which has quickly become “commodified,” and “dumbed-down,” much like the aforementioned Ragú “tomato sauce.”

Independent of one’s preferences (just as few reasonable people would describe a McDonald’s hamburger as the “ne plus ultra” of “good” food), these industrial wines (just like my Oreos), are not “good.” They contribute nothing to our culture, and succeed only in fooling enormous numbers of consumers into believing they’re partaking in the long, and “special” tradition of wine.

And in direct answer to your particular question: is an “industrial” product, by definition, adulterated? Is it possible to have an “industrial” wine that is pleasing to the palate and not a chemistry experiment?

Not that I’ve ever seen.

In order to produce the prodigious amounts of “wine” necessary to cover the “brand” needs, the fruit must come from multiple sources of high-yielding vines. I don’t believe that the few really interesting vineyard sites in the world – all together – could produce 1,000,000 cases of wine, let alone the multi-millions which are produced of Woodbridge, Turning Leaf, Yellowtail, and Santa Margharita.

Thanks for asking, and for sending the email. Good to know someone’s paying attention.
Posted by David Moore