Technique Fixations

originally posted by Jonathan Loesberg:
This problem has already been solved by this thread. We are getting rid of the word "natural" as the opposite of "spoofed." My bid for "traditional" seems not to have caught on, so we still need a new one.
Click to expand...

Personally I think "natural" is going in the right direction, because I've always thought that spoof was indicative of artificiality. IOW, spoof is the result of an over-reliance on a process or processes, materials or systems that don't occur naturally... current technology processing equipment, isolated and purified enzyme systems, etc.
Simply relying on sur maturite fruit is not resorting to artifice. Simply employing semi-carbonic techniques won't necessarily yield spoofiness since you only need a container and grapes to get this character (then again, there is the matter of dry ice....).
Both of the above techniques can yield wines that lack balance. But I've never thought "spoofed" and "unbalanced" to be synonymous. Rather, spoofiness suggests a wine unbalanced in a very specific direction.
 
An oak barrel is natural - grows in the forest, isn't synthesized in a lab, and doesn't require doing any high-tech hanky-panky to your wine, but I think most would agree it can be an instrument of spoofulation. In fact, an oak barrel can spoofulate a wine one year and then the same oak barrel can make a "natural" wine a year or a few later! So I don't think natural vs. artificial can be the litmus test of spoofulation.
 
originally posted by Keith Levenberg:
An oak barrel is natural - grows in the forest, isn't synthesized in a lab, and doesn't require doing any high-tech hanky-panky to your wine, but I think most would agree it can be an instrument of spoofulation. In fact, an oak barrel can spoofulate a wine one year and then the same oak barrel can make a "natural" wine a year or a few later! So I don't think natural vs. artificial can be the litmus test of spoofulation.
Click to expand...

OK, good point.
Would a wine that was simply but obviously over-oaked be considered "spoofed"?
 
Maybe I'm being dense but isn't it mostly a semantic argument? We have a word with no approved dictionary definition which various people have used to describe various things. Some of those things can be objectively determined and some are entirely subjective.

Is the quest here to develop an entirely objective definition of spoof which would apply to those wines that are generally considered by a majority of those using the term to be spoofy? Or perhaps to develop any definition which would apply to those wines that are generally considered by a majority of those using the term to be spoofy?
 
originally posted by Bwood:
Ultimately, I think Allemand Cornas is brilliant. Clape Cornas has great "ideology" from everything I read, but - for me - the wines are not even close to being in the same league as Allemand. Whatever Allemand does (and I will bet that a large part of the quality difference with his wines and many merely good wines is in the vineyard), I will argue back from that and will say that his is a great approach for his land in Cornas. If it turned out, which I don't think it will, that he uses every artifice known to winemakers to make his wines, I would approve.
Click to expand...

I'd argue that Clape and Allemand are making different types of Cornas, and I can see the "modern" comment regarding Allemand. I don't believe it's modern in terms of spoofulation, or making wines with obscene ripeness, oak, etc. But, I do think that Allemand is making his wines in a style that allows his wines to show better younger, with less structure, softer fruit, and more young complexity than Clape. I've never had an Allemand wine older than 10 years or so, but I doubt that his 2005s will have the same type of ageability as the Clape from the same vintage. Of course, that may be a good thing...you can drink the Allemands for 15 years and then start opening Clape. Assuming you can afford both, of course.

Marshall
 
originally posted by Marshall Manning

I'd argue that Clape and Allemand are making different types of Cornas, and I can see the "modern" comment regarding Allemand. I don't believe it's modern in terms of spoofulation, or making wines with obscene ripeness, oak, etc. But, I do think that Allemand is making his wines in a style that allows his wines to show better younger, with less structure, softer fruit, and more young complexity than Clape. I've never had an Allemand wine older than 10 years or so, but I doubt that his 2005s will have the same type of ageability as the Clape from the same vintage. Of course, that may be a good thing...you can drink the Allemands for 15 years and then start opening Clape. Assuming you can afford both, of course.

Marshall
Click to expand...

Hey, Marshall, it''s good to read your thoughts about wine again. It's been a while.

I understand your distinction. I hope to taste some '98 Allemand Reynard alongside some '98 Clape in 5 or 10 years and test your theory; I'd bet on the Allemand. There is something more generic and slicker about Clape that puts me off just a little, and given huge price increases I guess I'm no longer a Clape buyer.

I think I jumbled my points a little.

What I care about is how something tastes and not applying a rigid set of rules to determine who is "genuine" or not. I like absolutely everything I read about Clape, and many people who have taste similar to mine love Clape wines. I find them solid but not compelling. at the same time, Allemand is often described as "modern" and a producer of "softer" wines. I would think from the common descriptions I'd prefer Clape. But for me it's Allemand by a huge margin. Whatever the heck he's doing and however you define it, I like it. And, again, I suspect it's mostly an attention to detail in the vineyard, good vines, and good land, but I don't really know.
 
originally posted by Jay Miller:
Is the quest here to develop an entirely objective definition of spoof which would apply to those wines that are generally considered by a majority of those using the term to be spoofy?
Click to expand...

I'm just trying to understand what others mean when the use the word.
I thought I knew (well enough, if not exactly), but after reading some of the responses here I have my doubts.
 
originally posted by Bwood:

I understand your distinction. I hope to taste some '98 Allemand Reynard alongside some '98 Clape in 5 or 10 years and test your theory; I'd bet on the Allemand. There is something more generic and slicker about Clape that puts me off just a little, and given huge price increases I guess I'm no longer a Clape buyer.
Click to expand...

Speaking as a Cornas lover with little exposure (to date) to Allemand's wines, I'd think that the opposition would more logically be Clape vs. Verset as there's a much larger collection of data points to draw from. Side by side, Clape's wines have always tasted to me slicker/cleaner than Verset's, which might be a plus or minus depending on your perspective. I wouldn't call Clape's wines generic by any stretch, as they'd never be mistaken for Hermitage or Cte-Rtie (or for Jaboulet or Chapoutier, either) but if one's vision of Cornas is a Platonic Ideal of rusticity, then Verset wins hands down.

Mark Lipton
 
originally posted by Bwood:
Hey, Marshall, it''s good to read your thoughts about wine again. It's been a while.

I understand your distinction. I hope to taste some '98 Allemand Reynard alongside some '98 Clape in 5 or 10 years and test your theory; I'd bet on the Allemand. There is something more generic and slicker about Clape that puts me off just a little, and given huge price increases I guess I'm no longer a Clape buyer.

I think I jumbled my points a little.

What I care about is how something tastes and not applying a rigid set of rules to determine who is "genuine" or not. I like absolutely everything I read about Clape, and many people who have taste similar to mine love Clape wines. I find them solid but not compelling. at the same time, Allemand is often described as "modern" and a producer of "softer" wines. I would think from the common descriptions I'd prefer Clape. But for me it's Allemand by a huge margin. Whatever the heck he's doing and however you define it, I like it. And, again, I suspect it's mostly an attention to detail in the vineyard, good vines, and good land, but I don't really know.
Click to expand...

Thanks, JB, I occasionally post on various boards, but seem to get complaints on WCWN about being "in the biz" now, so I usually just respond to others posts instead of doing my own notes these days.

Don't get me wrong, I find Allemand's wines to be delicious, and they seem to have the combination of accessibility and complexity when young that only Chave (the real one) gets from the Northern Rhone. But, as I said, I've never had them at an age where they also have bottle sweetness, aged complexity and supple texture as I have with Clape, so it's hard to say how they will match the Clape wines with aging. Either way, I'm not sure if Allemand is doing anything different in the vineyard that hasn't been done by others before him, Clape included.

I agree that the end result is in the final impact of the wine on the nose and palate, but I also value the ideal of a vigneron tending his vines and making his wines in as "natural" a way as possible. Maybe that's a romantic vision, and if it is, so be it, but I'd rather support people who are closer to that ideal, and if it turns out that Allemand (or Chave, Clape, whoever) is making wines via a lab or to some spoofulated ideal, then I'm less likely to support them. Honestly, I don't think either producer works that way, but there are definitely differences between the two producers.

Marshall
 
originally posted by MLipton:
Speaking as a Cornas lover with little exposure (to date) to Allemand's wines, I'd think that the opposition would more logically be Clape vs. Verset as there's a much larger collection of data points to draw from. Side by side, Clape's wines have always tasted to me slicker/cleaner than Verset's, which might be a plus or minus depending on your perspective. I wouldn't call Clape's wines generic by any stretch, as they'd never be mistaken for Hermitage or Cte-Rtie (or for Jaboulet or Chapoutier, either) but if one's vision of Cornas is a Platonic Ideal of rusticity, then Verset wins hands down.

Mark Lipton
Click to expand...

Interesting, Mark. I'm a big fan of Cornas, also, and have loved wines by both Clape and Verset. Verset's wines often have a rusticity, but a lighter, "Burgundian" rusticity as opposed to the deep, almost Bandol-like animal character of Clape. To me, at least, Verset doesn't quite have the depth and raw power of Clape, but seems to get more complex aromatics when young and a less blocky texture. But the Clape wines generally have more depth, structure, and can develop in the bottle longer, at least on average. As with Allemand, there's a place in my cellar for Verset, too, and I appreciate the differences of these excellent producers. In other words, I won't turn down a Clape/Verset/Allemand Cornas shootout any time soon!

Marshall
 
Allemand is often described as "modern" and a producer of "softer" wines..
Click to expand...

Yes, but all of this is relative and in my opinion the Allemand wines are still recognizeable as Cornas, definitely not goopy gobby anonymous international wine, and therefore not deserving of the term spoof.

However, I find the comment by Marshall interesting that Clape and Allemand do similar work in the vineyard. I find that hard to believe since the wines are so different?
 
originally posted by Jay Miller:
Maybe I'm being dense but isn't it mostly a semantic argument? We have a word with no approved dictionary definition which various people have used to describe various things. Some of those things can be objectively determined and some are entirely subjective.

Is the quest here to develop an entirely objective definition of spoof which would apply to those wines that are generally considered by a majority of those using the term to be spoofy? Or perhaps to develop any definition which would apply to those wines that are generally considered by a majority of those using the term to be spoofy?
Click to expand...

If it were merely a syntactical argument, I'd abandon it. It's because it's mostly a semantic argument--an argument about whether there's a meaning there and what the meaning is--that it matters.

I don't think the quest is to develop a definition that objectively separates kinds of wines without possibility of disagreement (definitions themselves are agreed upon conventions and neither objective nor subjective but intersubjective). It is, by seeking a definition, to see if there is an agreed upon category. Look at the interchange between Bruce and Keith that, alas, went astray. Bruce reproprosed natural and said, as a consequence, that he was willing to stipulate that practices involving ripening were not matters of spoof. Let's assume that we could solve the problem of "natural" and "oak" that Keith raised (by arbitrary limitation of "natural" perhaps), the problem Bruce raised is non-arbitrary precisely because semantic. Do we want to distinguish between practices that produce wines we don't like and practices that have some added quality to them of producing a kind of wine to which we have semi-ideological objections (in which "ideological" has its root meaning of "pertaining to or about ideas"). If we can't even agree on that, then we should just abandon the term. Given the direction of this thread, against my own desires, I am moving in that direction.
 
originally posted by Marshall Manning:
In other words, I won't turn down a Clape/Verset/Allemand Cornas shootout any time soon!

Marshall
Click to expand...

Well, if you can make it to NC next Saturday, it's on.

As for Clape, the 1995 was the last vintage I bought as I didn't really take to subsequent vintages. Verset I last bought in 1999 simply because of availability.

I actually think that Cornas doesn't make really old bones in general. We'll see about some more recent vintages, but the 1988s and 1991s are as good as they are going to get. I've had my last 88s from Clape and Verset and didn't have many 91s, so they're gone.

The vintage we'll do is 1995, and John will report on it. It would be nice to get some Juge or Voge for comparison. John?
 
originally posted by Jonathan Loesberg:
It's because it's mostly a semantic argument--an argument about whether there's a meaning there and what the meaning is--that it matters.
Click to expand...

Precisely.

It is, by seeking a definition, to see if there is an agreed upon category.
Click to expand...

Or identifiable type of thing.

Do we want to distinguish between practices that produce wines we don't like and practices that have some added quality to them of producing a kind of wine to which we have semi-ideological objections (in which "ideological" has its root meaning of "pertaining to or about ideas").
Click to expand...

I'm less interested in whether the processes produce wines I do or don't like than in defining a set of processes that are tokens of the type spoof. I could then call a wine spoofulated, a modernist Barolo say, and instead of someone thinking I mean overoaked, they know that I mean roto'ed.

If we can't even agree on that, then we should just abandon the term. Given the direction of this thread, against my own desires, I am moving in that direction.
Click to expand...

Well, I hope that the term is salvageable because it is the zeitgeist of our current wine world.
 
Can't we accept that spoofulation is unknowable and undefinable but all-encompassing, precise and scientific?

I love the dialectic!
 
originally posted by Hoke:
"But to call "spoof" seems to me to connote tricked-out manipulation of a technical sort. The individual manipulations might not necessarily lead one to deem a wine spoofulated, but if a bunch of technical tricks were used with the intent of creating a rich, fruit-forward, "hedonistic" style, the term would fit."

Would the same apply if a bunch of technical tricks were used with the intent of creating a lean, mineral and acid-driven, fruit-supressed, 'anti-hedonistic' style (assuming you're assuming that hedonistic can only refer to gobby stuff; some hedonists may differ with you, a hedonistic masochist, for instance. Or Kane.)?

Relativistically speaking, I mean. Or irrelativistically speaking.
Click to expand...

If the technical tricks are used with the intent of creating a lean, mineral, acid-driven wine, I might call the style "manipulated" but not "spoofy." Spoofulated wines are trying to recapture the "hedonistic," "gob-centric" aesthetic of the archtypal 1947 Cheval Blanc, or some such. There are all sorts of manipulations, as in the carbonic cases in the south, that may produce wines that seem contrived and out of step with the local traditions and yet still not earn "spoofulated" status.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top