Tags

At the New York Times there was a recent article about Canadian wines.

http://www.nytimes.com/2015/12/23/dining/wine-ontario-niagara-peninsula-travel.html?ref=dining

Now, I have nothing against Canadian wines. But I do have an issue when the article calls basic physics (gravity flow) an “advanced technique“.

I have done nothing but gravity flow in my winery, and I can honestly tell you it is not an “advanced technique“. One may call it a “traditional” technique. One may call it a “hipster” technique. But from experience I can tell you is it absolutely not an “advanced” technique. Sure it requires more work than sticking a pump hose into a barrel, but that does not mean this method, or the work involved, is “advanced”. In fact, the method is ancient and rather simple to do.

I call this one of those many attempts to falsely increase the mystique and pretentiousness of wine.

Frankly, all I can say is, you should not believe it.

Don’t buy into the false allure and marketing that too many wineries want you to believe: that wine making is a mystic endeavor.

What I can tell you is this: Making a good a good wine simply takes experience. Just like being a good plumber. The price of wine is like the price of a good plumber. It is not mystical, it is simply a matter or proper experience and apprenticeship.

Don’t be fooled by the hype.

Update: I posted a “comment” at “http://www.nytimes.com/2015/12/23/dining/wine-ontario-niagara-peninsula-travel.html?ref=dining” linking my commentary here at this page, but apparently the NY times refused to publish my comment. Says something, does it not? (And, sadly, not in a positive way).

Advertisements