There’s a new battleground. Folks are choosing sides and sneering at the opposition with a passion usually reserved for sports rivalries. It gets as intense as arguments over politics and religion, only nobody has dubbed this conversation unsuitable for public places. Yet.

It’s tribal. It’s viral. Sometimes it gets very personal. And it’s… wine.

“They call this a wine list? This a wine bar!” [Someone on Facebook commenting on a photo of what seemed to me to be a pretty reasonable list.]

“That’s not even wine.”

“Are there even grapes in that wine?”

“Did they make that in a tank or a petri dish?

The quotes above are real. And, though emotional, they are so vague you can’t know which type of wines they are complaining about. In fact, they each attacked a different type.

Because the current battle has more than two sides. There are traditionalists. There are those dubbed hipsters. There are passionate “natural wine” adherents. There are devotees of organic and/or biodynamic growing, not necessarily tied to the natural approach. There are large, commercial wineries who follow recipes and people who hate large, commercial wineries who follow recipes. There are people who detest fruity, mouth-filling wines and those who only drink those, finding others thin and shrill. There are consumers who believe anything they like is “good wine” and believe all wine professionals to be charlatans. 

Getting jostled around in the middle are consumers who’d just like a glass of something tasty, but are afraid they’ll get the stank eye if they ask for “the wrong wine.” It used to be people asked advice when buying at a restaurant or store because they were unfamiliar with wines on the list or wanted something to pair with a particular dish. Now, some ask just to avoid inadvertently offending the sommelier or seller. 

The wine landscape has also taken on many new features and is much more difficult to navigate than in years past. The days of “white or red” are long gone. So too, for the most part, simple distinctions of body, fruitiness, or acidity. Varietal choices are also complex, due to the freedom New World regions have to grow whatever grows well and tastes good (or doesn’t, but might have). 

“Fiano, sir? An excellent choice! Would you like that from Sonoma County, South Australia, or, perhaps, Campania? That’s in Italy and is the variety’s home region.”

“South Australia! Another great choice, sir. Would you prefer Adelaide Hills, Barossa Valley, or McClaren Vale?”

“Excellent! And would you like an Adelaide Hills Fiano with or without skin contact?”

“Certainly, sir. I understand. But we don’t have Budweiser. Will PBR be okay?

You couldn’t blame a wine drinker for throwing up their hands in frustration. Between diversity and divisiveness, one might need a cocktail to take the edge off after simply trying to order a glass of wine to relax with.

I saw a very extensive, restaurant wine list recently which devoted a heading and three-quarters of one page just to “skin-contact white wines.” I saw another which used a three-star system to indicate how aggressively natural each wine was—essentially clean, funky, or “what died in here?” On one hand, I commend their efforts to effectively categorize their wines and make it easier for consumers to find a zone they will enjoy. On the other hand, just wow.

I’m not committed to any one of the warring factions. This article isn’t intended to be for, or against, natural wine or whatever its opposite is. Should we call wines that aren’t natural “unnatural?” I don’t think so. And, by the way, there’s no consistent or specific definition of what natural wine actually is.

My real point is that, while some consumer-focused wine professionals like to say they “demystify” wine, the industry overall is confusificating it. It reminds me of the transition which happened in television. In the early 1970s, there were three networks and people might have had access to a PBS station, a couple of local ones and, if the rabbit ears were properly twisted, a few UHF channels too.

Then cable happened, satellite happened, new networks were established, and a myriad of special interest channels were created. My cable box displays more than 900 “different” channels. With so many choices, people get overwhelmed. So they either stick to a a handful of channels they’re comfortable with or rely on a service like Netflix to tell them what they should watch.

And the proliferation of TV channels also led to factions among viewers. Networks no longer had to provide broadly appealing entertainment or provide even-handed commentary. Instead, they target specific demographics, capture those people, and put them in an echo chamber. The great diversity of choices actually led to less diverse viewing on an individual basis.

I don’t have solutions to offer right now. Entropy and Balkanization are powerful forces. I’m generally in favor of wineries being free to do what interests them. And people really should be able to drink whatever they like. But the current situation is enough to drive one to drink. Tequila.

Copyright Fred Swan 2019.