The Ethical Pursuit of Winemaking

I saw an interview last week between Gary Vaynerchuck and guest winemaker Michael Twelftree of Two Hands in Australia's Barossa Valley. Gary was discussing with Twelftree if the current backlash against bombastic fruity Aussie Shiraz ever causes him to reconsider his wine's style. The winemaker indicated that he always makes a consistent style, since his first vintage, because he designed his style after what appeals to him. He thinks the brand must continue with its style and that tastes and trends will come back around. It is very evident to me that higher end wine drinkers, or wine culture, are very trend focused. Huge oaky, buttery Chardonnays sold for lots of money through the 90's and are now looked down upon. Cult-like Napa Cabernet Sauvignon producers were heralded and chased after, only to run into some backlash with words thrown around like 'Parker wine' which in many circles has an obvious stigma. This makes me really wonder about what ethic is most desirable in a winemaking endeavour. Which of these 'ethics' should a winemaker adopt in their approach to their winemaking decisions, and is one approach more pure or admirable than another?

- Make your wine for the market. Wine is ultimately an agricultural product that should be produced for the interests of the people who buy it. The ultimate ethic of wine is to bring pleasure, to enhance culture, and therefore whatever taste trends are 'trending' it is not only okay, but encouraged to pursue them. Like most consumer products the producer should respond to calls of the market. Brands should therefore adapt their style as their consumers desires change.

- Make your wine for the margin. In a sort of Ayn Rand 'money is the barometer of society's virtue' type of thinking maybe the production of wine really has an obligation to find the optimal balance between effort, quality, and profitability. If a combination of quality, reputation, and marketing are required to get the highest price for your wine then the wine itself is only one part of the equation. Maybe it is more noble to eliminate the notion of art and culture in wine, and the most ethical pursuit is in the business of selling the product. Certainly margin is a driver in the fruit selection, vinification, and marketing of the wine. Without profitability we would have very little wine to drink that did not come from our neighbor's garage.

- Make your wine for your personal palette/the palettes of the winery owners. Michael Twelftree touches on this in his interview, indicating that he will hold true to the style of wine that he wants to make despite the circular trending that is inevitable. He believes in his style of wine, and while he is far from thinking it is the only valid wine he feels that he is upholding a pure ethic by sticking with his initial endeavour. If each winemaker and winery did this the world is then offered a wide range of wines, and consumers can have consistency with which to rotate their own palette through.

- Make your wine to represent the terroir/regional style. Wine should always be an expression of where it is from. The more you let the fruit speak the better the wine is. A Marlborough Sauv Blanc is at its highest when it displays the characteristic grapefruit and grass, and provides a bright, clean, and crisp balance that just screams to the drinker 'Marlborough SB' Any other influences may be necessary but are not as pure in their intentions.

I know the truth is that a winemaker or winery must balance out many of these influences. But is one more pure or right than another? Do we take our favorite 'tasting' wines and sort of fantasize that the ethic by which they were made was an elevated ethic over the mid-shelf wine at the supermarket? Obviously there are places for all of these in the market, but which one do you appreciate most?