History of Burgundy

C

Cliff

Cliff Rosenberg
Greetings all,

I thought some of you might find this interesting. I only just came across the review and haven't seen the book myself.
 
Yes, looks interesting.

Although one wonders why he avoided doing in-depth local archival research, given all the side benefits of more firsthand time in the region!
 
Looks interesting enough to call it up in a closed-stack library but not really worth much of a detour, in the end. I link it here with the hope that it can provide some context and useful references. I agree -- if you're going to risk your academic credibility by working on a topic few university professors consider serious, why on earth would you avoid the pleasures afforded by local fieldwork, esp. as that local work is crucial here? Have you, or others, seen good work on the politics of the creation of Burgundy's AOC system?
 
Just on a quick scan, it sounds like neither the book's author nor the reviewer really knows very much about the history and have relied upon academic models that have forced their views. French academics often think that all they need do is consult printed sources, and it appears that may have been the case here. Comte Laffon (spelled that way twice)? Clearly, these guys aren't very close to the ground.
 
I think it's more that they don't know much about wine. Certainly, Lafert's advisers at the EHESS are archivally oriented historical sociologists, but they come from a Marxist tradition in France that looks down on wine and cuisine as too bourgeois. This looks like a monograph about French regionalism that happens to deal with wine, but, as you point out, the kinds of mistakes the author and reviewer make do not inspire confidence.
 
Speaking of getting up to speed in this area, Claude, or others, what do you recommend? The early modern period is covered pretty well by Thomas Brennan, but the books I've read on the modern period, especially from the Third Republic on, have been spotty. I've read Kramer, Coates, Hanson, and Leo Loubere's general study. With the exception of the latter, a generalist book that covers France and Italy, they understandably concentrate on the vinous characteristics of the different villages and styles of different producers, some of them going into detail about winemaking practices. They typically speed through developments in landholding; evolving relations between producers, local lords, the Church, and negociants; and the emergence of the AOC system at warp speed. Hanson provides the fullest treatment of these broadly political questions I have seen, but even his is rather cursory, given all the other material he covers.

Do you have any tips on resources to follow up? Hanson cites what looks like an old thesis (1947) by a J. Capus on the AOC system. Given the complexity and importance of those decisions, I would think there must be more out there.
 
Language isn't a problem here. I'm a French historian. I can't say I've looked too closely, but I have never come across anything remotely as sophisticated for the modern period as Brennan's work on the Burgundy trade or Pierre de Saint Jacob's thesis, Les paysans de la Bourgogne du Nord au dernier sicle de lAncien Rgime (1960). In glancing through the Athanaeum site -- which is great, thanks -- I see a gulf between the hyper-legal versions of the AOC code and rather superficial, nostalgic accounts of the old days. Rural history dominated French historiography in the middle of the twentieth century, when it celebrated the formation of the nation in the "modern," or, in American terms, early modern period. (In France "contemporary" history starts after the Revolution.) It seems to me that people who study rural politics these days don't know much about wine, and the people interested in wine are, understandably, mostly interested in wine and not rural politics or bureaucracy, or the historical development of the wine trade. The Lafert book seemed like it might fit the bill, though it is hard to see how he could do justice to the subject he set without doing serious archival work.

For what it's worth, the French description makes the book sound more appealing than the review, at least to me:

contre-pied de l'image aristocratique des vins fins dveloppe la fin du XIXe sicle en Champagne et dans le Bordelais, de grands propritaires viticoles bourguignons initient dans l'entre-deux-guerres un folklore rgionaliste commercial pour promouvoir leur vin comme un vin de vignerons, un vin authentique, un vin de terroir contre le vin du ngociant, de la ville, artificiel. En faonnant ce folklore selon leurs intrts, les propritaires puisent dans un lment canonique du rpertoire culturel, touristique et officiel de la construction nationale moderne et rpublicaine sous la Ille Rpublique.
Il faut inscrire le retournement marketing des vins de luxe dans le conflit politique et juridique que se livrent sur le march des vins, propritaires et ngociants pour l'appropriation de la plus-value, ces derniers se dchirant entre l'origine du raisin ou la marque comme critre premier de la qualit des vins. C'est une vritable enqute historique dans les lites modernisatrices de la Ille Rpublique que cet ouvrage nous convie. Les propritaires et ngociants propritaires de Meursault et Nuits-Saint-Georges, multipliant les alliances indites avec les lites politiques, universitaires, rudites et industrielles autour du rgionalisme culturel et conomique, russissent dfaire cette hirarchie du march en s'attribuant politiquement et culturellement son contrle.
Ce modle d'un marketing traditionaliste fait alors cole la Libration pour embrasser l'ensemble de l'conomie alimentaire de luxe: un bon produit se doit d'tre de terroir, traditionnel. Ce n'est que trs rcemment que cette trajectoire traditionnelle de la qualit franaise s'tiole sous la pression de la concurrence internationale diffusant un modle alternatif, plus technologique, autour de la notion de cpage contre celle d'origine.
 
originally posted by Zachary Ross:
"marketing,"...c'est un mot particulirement Amricain.
Click to expand...

I don't see that. "Marketing" is no more particularly American than "sauce" is particularly French.

Both were codified in certain countries because of specific historical economic developments but the concepts and applications are universal. In both cases.
 
I guess I agree, although "marketing" as a concept has been taken to its pinnacle in the U.S., especially in the culture of corporations and Madison Avenue ad agencies, where in many ways marketing itself dwarfs all other virtues a "product" may have. And besides, etymology matters, doesn't it? "Sauce" is ultimately more French than "marketing" is. Certainly the French take these things seriously, with absurd words like "balladeur" invented by the government to preclude the encroachment of foreign neologisms like "Walkman".

("Shampooing" is my least favorite French word)
 
originally posted by Zachary Ross:
I guess I agree, although "marketing" as a concept has been taken to its pinnacle in the U.S.

"Sauce" is ultimately more French than "marketing" is.
Click to expand...

I don't know what you mean by "pinnacle", because that sure sounds like the end of history and I don't think we're done just yet.

Your second sentence here about "sauce" being more French than marketing also seems to undermine your claim about the U.S. and pinnacles.
 
I'm with you, but I still think I'm right about "marketing". Besides, the French don't know shit about it, they don't even put the name of the grape on their wine labels!
 
originally posted by Zachary Ross:
I still think I'm right about "marketing". Besides, the French don't know shit about it, they don't even put the name of the grape on their wine labels!
Click to expand...

As someone who likes neither hyperbole nor overgeneralizations, I'm not sure what "French" people you are talking about. Maybe you mean certain peasant farmers in the Languedoc. But there are a bunch of good French marketers hanging out in Champagne and the Medoc. Lots of strong French marketers have opened thriving businesses in gastronomy, fashion, perfume, and other luxury goods.

On these shores, the Americans haven't done a very good job of marketing their vision for world peace and prosperity in the past decade. Despite the fact that I understand the Madison Avenue folks have been dripping their pearls of wisdom into Washington on occasion.

I think the capitalist consumer-driven economy clearly developed further in the US than in France over the past fifty years. For many complex reasons. Which created opportunities to market all sorts of garbage consumer goods.

But I think that is a far cry from saying Americans are 'better' at marketing or that marketing has reached its 'pinnacle' here.

The world will continue turning.
 
Sorry if it wasn't clear that my tongue was planted in my cheek in my last post. No point in suffering my foolishness any longer.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top