Heroic

O

Oswaldo Costa

Oswaldo Costa
There is a fine winemaker in Brazil called Marco Danielle who struggles to be as natural as possible under difficult commercial conditions and a retarded cultural environment. He just released a Pinot Noir using manual harvesting and destemming, no fining or filtering, and minimal SO2. The only unavoidable "sin" was inoculation, unavoidable because the purchased grapes were not organic (there is no quality organic pinot available), so there are essentially no indigenous yeasts to do the job.

Weve been drinking so much Loire that, to have some sort of paradigm fresh in hand, we drunk it after a young (but not natural) NSG.

2007 Dufouleur Frres Hospices de Nuits NSG 1er Cru Les Vignerondes Cuve Bernarde Delesclache 13.5%
After initial reduction goes away, exotic plum/berry aromas with cloves, gunpowder and light oak vanilla. Good texture and balance, stemmy mid palate, finishes a bit sweet. Solid, if unexceptional. Worked well with food.

2009 Tormentas Fulvia Pinot Noir Encruzilhada do Sul (Brazil) 12.14%
990 bottles made. Lovely pinot raspberry and stems, after light reduction goes away. Smells like Burgundy spirit. Balanced, but needs more body/texture; finishes short and a bit bitter. Improved with food.

Most southern cone pinots are alcoholic, over-extracted, acidified messes, so this is, relatively speaking, an admirable achievement. In intent and aromas, despite the shortcomings.

On p. 236 of Adventures, Kermit talks admiringly about a certain Burg being discretely chaptalized to just 12%, instead of 13.0 or 13.5%. I wonder if the Dufouleur had the "benefit" of chaptalization, while the Brazilian simulacrum was penalized by being as close to "natural" as the winemaker can make it.
 
Wasn't he talking about Beajolais? Would be interesting to see some Brazilian wines up here. Wonder why there isn't the same fuss about them that we see lavished on Argentinian and Chilean wines?
 
originally posted by Ian Fitzsimmons:
Would be interesting to see some Brazilian wines up here. Wonder why there isn't the same fuss about them that we see lavished on Argentinian and Chilean wines?
Click to expand...
lack of volume and good wines would be my guesses.
 
I consulted a little bit for someone who was going to bring Brazilian wines into the country. Boston, with two little pocket neighborhoods of Brazilians (you do not want to live nearby during the World Cup, especially if they're winning, but otherwise it's pretty cool...though I wish they'd open more restaurants), was going to be an introductory test market.

The wines were, mostly, hopeless, and the PR was worse. The PR could have been fixed, but the wines...I'm not so sure. It wasn't the same as the ocean of Chilean or Argentinian supermarket dreck, which is more or less competent. This was really, really poor quality stuff. And if they have some sort of signature on which to rely (carmenre, malbec, tannat, torrontes) no one was showing it; just a lot of the usual grapes, plus off-dry sparkling wines that reminded me of the cheap Georgian stuff that ends up in those immigrant communities here.

So: low quality, nothing on which to sell themselves as an alternative to pretty much anything, and no sales strategy. Not exactly destined to be successful, and I don't think the wines ever actually hit these shores. Or if they did, it wasn't here. But I wish them luck.
 
Yes, but why? Immigrant tradition? No good vineyard territory? No local market for fine wine? Brazil is a pretty amazing place in a lot of ways, why is wine-making not in the game?

Just curious.
 
originally posted by Ian Fitzsimmons:
Yes, but why? Immigrant tradition? No good vineyard territory? No local market for fine wine? Brazil is a pretty amazing place in a lot of ways, why is wine-making not in the game?

Just curious.
Click to expand...

No terroir.
 
1) No monks doing legwork.
2) Immigrants settled wherever the crown granted them land, and grew vines there regardless of soil/climate adequacy.
3) Most of the country is too hot.
4) There is no reason no #4.
5) Portuguese not as wine driven as other European colonizers.
6) Envy of Argentine and Chilean success and inability to emulate high altitude desert climates that might produce similar delectable nectars.
7) Coffee, sugar cane, soybeans much more profitable.
8) Stupid wine stores attuned to lifestyles of the rich and famous.
9) There is no reason no. 9.
10) No snarky message boards to provide super-ego function.
11) General belief that Michel Rolland is the bee's knees.
12) Little craft/artisanal tradition.
13) Little small producer & peasant tradition.
14) No Huguenots or Cathars.
15) No city states; weak local identities.
16) Stupid wine critics attuned to points and myths and icons.
17) Climate too hot to drink red wine at room temperature.
18) Outrageously high consumption and import taxes restrict wine to the rich.
19) Bad conscience of most Brazilian producers, who consult with someone like Henry Marionnet when they need help making a Gamay.
20) Coming from a culture of Scotch and Cachaa, only 15% wines doen't come off as wimpy.
 
originally posted by Oswaldo Costa:
The only unavoidable "sin" was inoculation, unavoidable because the purchased grapes were not organic (there is no quality organic pinot available), so there are essentially no indigenous yeasts to do the job.
Click to expand...
This is somewhat strange, Oswaldo. I know a lot of vineyards that are not cultivated organically, yet the grapes are not devoid of yeasts. At most, some contact fungicides would cause the yeasts to be less active and retard the start of fermentation. I guess it would take a huge amount of those fungicides to impede fermentation altogether.
 
originally posted by VS:
originally posted by Oswaldo Costa:
The only unavoidable "sin" was inoculation, unavoidable because the purchased grapes were not organic (there is no quality organic pinot available), so there are essentially no indigenous yeasts to do the job.
Click to expand...
This is somewhat strange, Oswaldo. I know a lot of vineyards that are not cultivated organically, yet the grapes are not devoid of yeasts. At most, some contact fungicides would cause the yeasts to be less active and retard the start of fermentation. I guess it would take a huge amount of those fungicides to impede fermentation altogether.
Click to expand...

My understanding is that the combination of herbicides, pesticides, fungicides and non-organic fertilizers not only kill the soil life but also reduce/eliminate the native yeast population to the point where it canot be relied on to carry out its duties. In the Loire, at least, it seemed a premise that reliance on native yeast require, at the very least, lutte raisone. Perhaps there are other inhibitors beside fungicides?
 
originally posted by kirk wallace:
originally posted by Ian Fitzsimmons:
I would say that 18 is a silly number, in this context.
Click to expand...
You are entitled to your opinion, but not your own facts.
Click to expand...

This is the second time I've read this quote in the last couple of days. Did someone just write an article somewhere about Daniel Patrick Moynihan that I missed? Or is it just the moment for this line to get another 15 minutes of fame.
 
A book of his letters has just been published, so there have been a number of review-related discussions of Mr. Moynihan in the press lately.

The epigram Kirk stealthily quotes is cool, for one thing, because it applies equally to speaker and hearer alike.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top