Nihil obstat quominus imprimatur. This famous Latin phrase - literally:
nothing hinders it from being printed - certainly was the most wished one by
whoever wanted to write a book in past times. As it is commonly known, with this
phrase was obtained the ecclesiastic permission to print a book or any other
publication; in case it was not granted, the publication was destined to be
included in the dreadful index librorum prohibitorum (list of prohibited
books), a list of books considered to be offending or discreditable for Catholic
moral and faith. The phrase, which was printed at the beginning or the end of
books, and was simply called imprimatur, was to give common
mortals reassuring permission in reading those books, while avoiding the risk
of committing a sinful act and, in particular, to be accused or heresy or other
infamous definitions which would have disturbed the subjugated morality of
people. In other words, it was a deprecable method used to limit the freedom of
thought and therefore establishing a social order to the exclusive benefit of
those who had the power.
The word imprimatur is generally used, broadly speaking, to state the
receipt of the approval or grant to do or belong to something, in other words,
an indisputable approval received by a high authority. The imprimatur,
broadly speaking, is something charming people: to know there is someone, or
something, who can approve a product, a person, a thought or idea, reassure the
fact, and avoid the effort, of having a position, without understanding and
feeling - personally - about the real quality. This is both useful and dangerous
at the same time. It is useful in case the imprimatur is honestly
given by an organ or subject truly competent and having no interests besides the
promotion of real quality. It is dangerous in case it is used with the goal of
imposing something, of dubious quality, with the only goal of making it
commercially successful by considering labels only and no real facts. A mediocre
product, however strong of an imprimatur, gets a remarkable commercial
success also, and in particular, in case it does not deserve it at all.
There is no need to make practical examples: the market is full of such
products. And our society too is full of mediocre subjects, if not pathetic and
awkward, however destined to success just because they must be successful.
Can the wine be an exception? Of course not. The world of wine, or better to
say, most of the subjects involved in the production of wine, are always working
hard to the creation of certificates, standards,
regulations, marks and denominations in order to give an
imprimatur to their wines. Most of the times - it seems like so - these
subjects mainly work on these aspects only, sometimes forgetting to work on a
fundamental factor: quality is not obtained with a certificate or a
denomination, it is mainly obtained with a cultural and moral presupposition of
the one who makes it, beginning from the vineyards. It makes no sense - and it
does not have any practical confirmation - to say a wine belonging to a
denomination or to a specific wine making religion is better than those not
belonging to this bureaucratic privilege.
I don't like DOC, DOCG and appellations in general. I want to make this clear: I
am not talking about the wines belonging to these denominations, indeed to the
concept of denomination itself. Likewise, I don't like certificates and
imprimatur given to organic, biodynamic, natural wines and so on. It
makes no sense. We cannot hide a wine as the cultural expression and the
competence of a producer - interpreter of his or her wine making vision with the
precious and fundamental support of environment and Nature - while focusing on
the fact that wine, that producer, has a certificate. It could be made an
objection that denominations and certificates are useful in order to
safeguard a wine from possible frauds or forgeries, also in the interest of
producers, also in the interest of consumers. What we could say, therefore,
about the embarrassing differences which are frequently found in wines belonging
to the same denomination or certificate? Mediocre wines and of dubious value,
considered like the other wines of high quality and value, just because they
belong to the same denomination or have the same certificate. And those wines,
what contribution do give to the prestige and reliability of a denomination or
certificate?
Belonging to a denomination, getting a certificate, joining a wine making
movement or current of thought, represents - this is undeniable - a concrete
commercial chance. Nevertheless, they exert a certain influence and charm on
consumers: for many the imprimatur of the denomination or style, is a
reassuring thing. Something which then become habits hard to change, at least
until it arrives a new fashion, a new imprimatur capable of offering a
new certainty in the glass, and this is enough for them is order to believe they
made the right choice, the choice someone else decided, or better, imposed.
Luckily, there is also an increasing number of wine lovers who, finally, go
beyond that and take as the only reference what they find in the glass, while
remaining indifferent to denominations, certificates, to the blessing of
organs and institutions. They focus on the talent of the producer and his or her
way to tell a territory and its grapes. For them, luckily, if the wine is DOC,
natural, organic, biodynamic or something else, makes no difference - provided
it is however genuine - and leave to the glass the ultimate word.
There are producers who have always made of quality their personal
imprimatur, while staying away from denominations, certificates and
bureaucratic or institutional approvals, showing with facts their talent and
this concept of wine and territory. Many of them - the wine making history is
full of examples - stay away from the logic of denomination and certificates on
purpose just because this would be detrimental and unfavorable for their own
mark. They have no interest in classifying their wines as organic,
biodynamic, natural or in any other way, despite these methods sometimes
belong to their viticultural and productive process. They are not interested in
focusing on these characteristics because what they have is a higher factor and
more precious of any wine making or viticultural criteria: quality and facts.
They have no need to hide possible faults with labels and certificates, to
follow new wine making religions and then to tell the world about that.
Quality is a cultural presupposition belonging to seriousness and passion of a
producer, as well as the talent to understand and interpreting a territory the
best possible way, while respecting it and respecting consumers. Something no
imprimatur can ensure, but it is however undeniable certain
imprimatur are effective in giving an illusion to those who consider the
label only and are happy with the appearance. «It is you (consumers) that in a
certain way make quality. If there are bad wines it is because there are bad
consumers. The taste follows the roughness of intellect: everyone drinks the
wine he or she deserves» said Émile Peynaud. Wise words.
Antonello Biancalana
|