Fashions were not enough to make the world of wine uniform and homologated.
Fashions were not enough to debase even more the image of wine and to sacrifice,
one more time, a unique product, expression of a millenary culture. The latest
news is that now the law is working for the same goal, too. This way we will be
happy to have in our glasses a wine made with methods not agreed by many,
however perfectly legal, as upon the heads of us mortals the wisdom of a law
could decide for all of us a new model of wine making. The European Union -
proposed by the Management Committee for Wine in Brussels - is evaluating the
possibility of using wood chips for the wines produced in the community. Within
few months, the European Union could in fact allow viticulturists of the Union
to use oak wood chips for the production of wines, just like the way it is
already permitted in the countries of the so called New World, a measure
that, frankly speaking, leaves speechless and very perplexed. It is the latest
menace to the world of wine to the exclusive advantage of the usual smart
ones, who will finally have a perfectly legal way to sell consumers the
illusion of tasting a wine aged in wood casks.
There are many justifications proposed by the ones who support this new law,
most of them, honestly speaking, are pretty arguable. Without discussing about
the reasons of these opinions, which are to be taken for what they are, it
should be however understood the role of the cask in wine making and whether it
can be replaced by wood chips. Despite for most of consumers it is true the
organoleptic sensation typical in wines aged in cask gives the conviction in the
glasses has been poured an important wine, every real wine lover which can
be called like that, knows cask is more than that. First of all, the beneficial
effect of the slow oxidation the wine has in the cask and which is impossible to
get with any chip. Perhaps it is thanks to the common ignorance wood chips
get their main support: in case wood aroma and taste are perceived, therefore
the wine is undoubtedly good, important and of quality. This trick can be
done by using wood chips, whose cost - among the other things - is far lesser
than the worst of casks. One of the reasons supporting this law is in fact
represented by costs.
The possibility of using wood chips in the production of wines should help -
they say - to contrast the strong attack to the European market done by the
wines coming from those countries in which the use of this technique is
permitted. As the wine produced with wood chips undoubtedly has a lower price,
as well as considering the fact consumers like important wines having wood
taste, in this way it will be possible to release in the market the so called
carpenter's wines, to the advantage of wallets and the palate of the most
unwary consumers. Let's admit this, the price of wine has reached pretty
prohibitive levels and accessible only by few, where most of the times
speculation takes the place of an arguable and presumed quality. Did they really
need to take such a measure, which certainly humiliates the dignity both of
consumers and wine, in order to make a mass of consumers happy, which, again,
are completely ignorant about what the market is proposing? Consumers will be
hoaxed twice, both for the fact wine produced in this way will have no
obligation to write in the label this disputable technique, as well as for the
lacking of honesty from producers who will make wood chips their best ally in
the cellar.
We understand the fact not all consumers are interested in looking for or
appreciating quality in the beverage of Bacchus, after all, not all the people
can appreciate art or can feel the emotions of a painting. However they should
grant us the freedom, or better to say, the awareness of choosing, by clearly
writing in the label the type of wine contained in the bottle. If there are
consumers who prefer wines made with wood chips, they have all the rights to buy
it and to appreciate it, we however think it is not fair this measure can be a
subtle way to hoax everyone. Although it is true only the wine maker exactly
knows all the miracles happening in his or her cellar - thanks to chemistry and
to its magic, most of the times it is possible to make a bad wine into something
decent - we do not believe they should take advantage of technology in order
to sacrifice honesty. In many countries, for example, it is mandatory to write in
the label whether the wine contains sulfites, likewise they should clearly write
in the labels the use of wood chips and not ridiculous description praising its
wood aroma or taste, in order to make that wine into something it is not, and
for the sake of speculation.
To make the situation even worse, there were many who expressed their opinions -
a ridiculous way to make a stone appear as if it were gold - who believe the use
of wood chips is an alternative way to age wines. The ones supporting
these opinions should, in our opinion, better understand the complex chemical
and physical phenomena taking place in a wine kept in a cask to age, something
which cannot be obtained in any case with wood chips. It would be better, as
well as honest, to simply define these wines for what they really are: wood
aromatized wines. This would be correctness and honesty! Certainly not an
alternative way to age wines! After all, in what consists the technique of
using wood chips in a wine? To put a wine in an inert tank - usually stainless
steel - to plunge a bag full of wood chips and to allow it to macerate for some
time. Does this mean aging a wine? Does this mean making a wine more
important? Although we have nothing against aromatized wines, we believe
wines produced with wood chips should necessarily belong to the category of
aromatized wines, something which should also be written in the label.
We are not saying we are against the use of this technique - after all if there
are consumers who like wood aromatized wines and are happy with their
consumption, everyone is free in his or her choices - we simply want honesty and
correctness, not only for consumers in general, but also for the dignity of wine
and its culture. A law like that, no matter how it will be, leaves perplexed.
Not only for the not very honest way to support it, by making it look like
something it is not and will never be, but also for the consequences in the
efforts done so far in the promotion of quality wine and its typicality. Going
on like this, bureaucrats will soon or later make a law defining grape varieties
to use in the production of wine, while banning all the autochthonous ones, of
course. They will do that, there is no doubt about this, for the safeguarding of
the interests of consumers - not for the interests of the usual smart ones,
of course - and for increasing the prestige and the quality of wine, of typical
products and their diversities. It is so evident… |