Why is the promoter of Australian wine James Halliday still rabbiting on with the French term terroir when describing wines from the Eden Valley, South Australia?

Introducing the Henschke reds of 2017, The Australian, 28/5/2022, begins with, ‘Bruno Prats, proprietor of a leading Bordeaux Chateau: ‘Terroir is the coming together of the climate, the soil, and the landscape. It is the combination of an infinite number of factors: temperatures by night and by day, rainfall distribution, hours of sunlight, slope and drainage, to name but a few.’ The late Peter Sichel, another chateau owner in Bordeaux, added another view: ‘Character is determined by terroir, quality is largely determined by man.’ And ‘Viticulturist Prue Henschke and her winemaker husband Stephen own undeniably the most valuable terroir in Australia.’

Here we go again. Terroir is an odd term that is used as a catch all to impress those seeking further wine knowledge and means everything experts can think of. Not all that helpful really. What there is agreement about is that terroir was first used in France, I recall around 1880 but this is from memory, and as the term suggests implies that wine flavours have some connection to soils and the rocks that soils are derived from.

Plants grow, the roots stop them being blown away while accessing water and basic elements and that’s about it.

To explain the mysteries of wine to consumers in the post-war year’s terroir took on a life of its own and in that beautiful French way the term evolved so it could not be grabbed, slipping away to take on another shape. I suspect explaining terroir assisted the vineyard owners in charging their preposterously high prices since it allowed makers to develop whatever tale they wished for each enquirer. Often these were wine writers who then gave the rabbit another good run in the back garden.

For unknown reasons the wine scientists of Australia have been sent on a hunt for the unique terroirs of Australia and I hope this sad burden will one day be lifted from their shoulders.

The French own the term and like plasticine let them make of it whatever they wish. C’est la vie.

The world of wine is a big place and to create a growing recognition for a country or a brand requires sustained effort. Remarkable then that Penfolds Grange has gained acceptance as a desirable collectable by the wealthy, now being seen on par with the Bordeaux first growths.

Alas those less fortunate and with a desire to become fashionable are attracted to the use of the Grange name in marketing efforts that can be termed ‘by association’. Likely those at Treasury Wines, the owners of Grange, take the view that borrowing Grange is part of ‘all advertising is good advertising’.

Recently the owner of the Yarra Valley winery Levantine Hill, property developer Elias Jreissati released entries into the collectables field, the Levantine Hill Optume Shiraz and Levantine Hill Optume Cabernet priced at $800 a bottle.

The Australian’s Eli Greenblatt, 24th March prompted by the press release and interviews with Mr Jreissati and the winemaker Paul Bridgeman mentioned Penfolds and Grange, nine times, quoting several unflattering remarks.

These included;

‘Grange is one of the greatest wines in Australia and certainly one of the greatest wines in the world,’ added Mr Jreissati, ‘but It‘s not my cup of tea, Grange is a very Australian wine and so is Hill of Grace … but you know, we are about making a cool climate, sophisticated, silky wine.

Mr Bridgeman said Optume offers a cooler climate alternative to the current crop of luxury reds. It is more finessed and complex rather than an ‘in your face’ big red.

No mention of how the wine ranks with Mount Mary or Yarra Yering yet taking free use of the Grange name and then bagging warm climate reds.

I have noted similar comments over many decades and these ill-considered outbursts must stop. All Australian wines are equal. Australian premium wines are not selling well in export markets and something is very wrong. The image we create is up to us and Levantine Hill is not rowing in a different boat to Penfolds Grange.

Having some knowledge of the big wine themes increases the appreciation of what is in your glass and a good place to start is by understanding these two fundamental points of view. Why were wines referred to as Claret and Burgundy and why Australia cannot be a France down under?

Claret of course is the English term for Cabernet wines from the Bordeaux region while Burgundy is a general term derived from the French region where reds are made from Pinot Noir.

The two were seen as making different styles, Claret recognising a firmer, leaner, drier style with Burgundy being a softer, plump, rounded style.

These terms were used on bottles and wine casks and were not dependent on the varietal mix as in the 1950s Cabernet and Pinot Noir barely existed. Over time these terms were phased out and replaced with varietal names which has evolved into the variety being seen as offering a style when the differences between varieties are mostly marginal.

As the interest in table wines grew the search began to find locations which would reproduce the original French styles meaning a move away from the traditional settler warm districts to cooler locations. In this contest the favoured varieties of Cabernet and Pinot Noir would be judged on how close their reproductions were to the French originals.

This promoted the idea that the best wines would be produced where an approximation of the western continental European climate was found in Australia even though our geography is vastly different.

This European focus has not been helpful and continues a cultural cringe long past its use by date, one surprisingly still favoured by the industry promotional body Wine Australia.

I have run out of space to remind you of the late 2005 clash between the great expert American Robert Parker and local experts over the worth of cool climate Cabernets from the Yarra Valley producer Mount Mary which is relevant to this story.

And a reminder that Glug makes Australian wine that are not Clarets, Burgundies or any others being the full flavoured styles that only Australia makes and cannot be duplicated.

So much is written about wine every week that a casual observer would surely conclude the product must be confusing.

Up to the mid-20th Century using a wine merchant made sense since they sorted out the good tastes from the many marred by microbial infections, oxidation or worse. Even into the 1980s taking advice was helpful. Now when even wine casks provide a decent drink it is time to move on. Who then reads all the articles, books and global web sites offering advice and what are they seeking?

I’m at the end of a long career when all my mysteries about wine have been resolved. Consider then that what I know you can place on the table every night with a Glug wine as they are my essays.

The wine journalist Tony Love, In Daily Adelaide 13th May, summarised Australian Chardonnay this way, ‘Its evolution in style in Australia alone can tell us so much: from the days of being rich and buttery, blown out with over-ripe fruit and clumsy oak treatment, to more contemporary, fresher, brighter, pure expressions where the flavour profile tends towards citrus and white stone fruits with neatly balanced acidity and well-tempered fermentation and maturation in fine French oak barrels…’

This Chardonnay yarn has entered the books as fact, yet the style change was not driven by customers but by administrators. The original Lindemans Bin 65 Chardonnay as developed by Philip John and others was a great drink and would still sell well.

Regrettably the belief that the taste of all wines will proceed to some pre-determined end point as decided by a group that knows better now dominates thinking. I serve customers and remain impressed by their broad tastes and have learnt there is no end point.

So being guided by say the Halliday Compendium, and other authorities, makes no sense to me. A new time has arrived where customers know enough to make up their own minds which is the sensible way of letting the market decide.

To recap the views of Benjamin and myself about the taste of wine can be found in our diverse range of wines and for the big picture use the information age to become your own wine merchant as relying on experts is not the way forward.

I have a few heroes one being Martin Gardner who gave us some of his busy life to debunk pseudo-science wherever he found it. This form of misbehaviour I suppose is easier than seeking out the truth and naturally the wine business has its share.

Biodynamic farming methods are pseudo-science yet recently in Italy its many vineyard practitioners almost gained legal status for biodynamics missing out by one vote being blocked by the President. Official status would allow growers to gain access to the same funding and promotions given to organic farmers.

Alas when nonsense is repeated often enough and is not quickly refuted by those that know, then the many that do not may believe it to be so. Thus I was concerned that The Times wine writer, Jane MacQuitty wrote; ‘Trust the Italians to come over all sanctimonious about biodynamic wines. The Austrian philosopher Rudolf Steiner may have had some wacky theories, but biodynamic wine is just a step up from organic wine production, encouraging each vineyard to be the best it can be.’

In November, the Italian Nobel-winning physicist Giorgio Parisi stated about biodynamics: ‘Frankly it’s witchcraft’ and Ms MacQuitty did herself no favours in calling the Italians sanctimonious instead of explaining to her readers how dangerous this mischief is.

The 2022 Halliday Wine Companion Viticulturalist of the Year inaugural award went to Vanya Cullen of Cullens Wine saying, ‘It was feeling and intuition more than science that led Vanya to pursue biodynamics 18 years ago; the determination with which she has since embraced this regime makes it impossible to overstate the impact she has had on the reputation of biodynamic viticulture in Australia.’
I wonder what scientists at the Australian Wine Research Institute make of this rubbish.