在葡萄酒界，有一个如同幽灵一般的存在：风土。他让醉心于迟摘的饮酒者焦躁不安，让古怪的酿酒师惊恐不已，让老政客的血压直线上升。
    近一个世纪以来，德国一直以奥斯勒度，即天然糖份含量来衡量葡萄酒的品质，含量越高品质越好。因此，每一个葡萄园，或者说不同品种的葡萄酒都可以通过“迟摘”或“精选”等标签，来提高自身地位。后来出现了一些前卫的葡萄酒专家，大力倡导“风土”这一概念，公开指责法定质量评判标准以及现代生产方式，认为当今冷漠、不近人情的标准以及大量的工业化生产以一种愤怒的姿态冲击着琼浆美酒。他们坚持从口感表现力和酒园栽培两个方面来对葡萄园品质进行认定：规定葡萄品种和生产方法，再对葡萄园进行分级。这似乎是庄园制的重见天日（注：feudalism即欧洲封建主义，8-15世纪出现、发展，后消失。学术界定义为庄园制，与先秦封建制有本质不同，此处译作庄园制以示区别）。
    19世纪末，德国葡萄酒法律开始以奥斯勒度作为品质判定的标准，很显然，统治者并不打算与大众共用一个葡萄园质量评价体系，类似的还有葡萄酒的分级依据：放弃了中世纪早期开始沿用的一套根据产地及严格规定的方式，转而以化学测量评定葡萄汁来对葡萄酒分级。当时一向推崇新教的普鲁士对此大加赞赏，而实际上，德国葡萄酒市场也是一样的想法（19世纪末普鲁士用王朝战争的方式统一了德意志）。在19世纪的最后几十年间，业界迎来了“黄金时代”:伴随当时的移民潮从美洲传播到欧洲大陆的还有一些霉菌，波尔多液能有效防治这些霉菌；随着德国的工业化进程，很多新型机器被投入到葡萄园的生产中，极大减轻了繁重的人工劳作，现代铁路网的建设也做出了极大贡献;在当时的情况下，极富浪漫主义色彩的德国新小布尔乔亚主义不光代表了陡峭石壁上的城堡，让人神往的Loreley（Loreley是传说中莱因河神的女儿，其歌声使水手们受诱惑而船毁沉没。），还偏爱着产自莱茵河以及摩泽尔河两岸河谷中的葡萄酒。
    德国的葡萄酒在当时上可以说是世界顶级的，在大都市最一流的餐厅，它的售价比波尔多名庄系列还要高昂。如今，在莱茵河以及摩泽尔河两岸的酒庄中仍有人见证了当时繁荣的经济盛况。
    光照的地方必然有阴影，在酿酒的过程中，有些人用了一些不诚实的方法，走了一些捷径：用希腊的葡萄干代替德国原产葡萄，或是直接灌装意大利的廉价葡萄酒，甚至参入糖水。。。联系葡萄酒如今这种自作自受的现状，似乎是必然的。亡羊补牢，未为晚也：许多诚实守信的酒庄主发现了这一情况，他们完全有理由相信，赖以生存的事业正受到威胁，要求出台新的法规以保护合法权益。1892年，法规通过了第一草案：禁止恶劣的欺骗行为；作为折衷，日常餐酒如果必要，可以合法添加25%的糖水，这样，就增加了酒精的含量，降低了酒的酸度，自然，酒的体积也就增加了；但是优质高级葡萄酒的酿造中禁止添加任何成分，这样的酒可以称为是“天然葡萄酒”这一用词在1971年出台的酒法中被废止，许多顶级酿酒师被迫放弃了这个标记。
    VDP作为一个天然葡萄酒的拍卖协会，成立于上个世纪之初——在一百年前，“天然葡萄酒”这一老式称呼所代表的含义在添加糖分的葡萄酒对比之下更显杰出——毫无疑问，VDP每一个成员都是现代风土运动的忠实拥护者。
    Ferdinand Öchsle创立了奥斯勒度（öchsle scales）作为含糖量测定的标尺，实践证明这是一种有效的测量装置，渐渐发展成为一种较为客观的品质评判标准，可以帮助判定葡萄酒应该是保持“天然纯净”还是应该稍作加工。
    之后的经济的繁荣也对奥斯勒度的发展起到了很大推动，随着拖拉机和化肥的改良，以及新品种、高含糖量的嫁接葡萄的出现，德国葡萄种植业格局被打破，开始重新洗牌：同一区域的种植量加倍，收成翻了几番；新型机器和小发明又给葡萄园带来想都不敢想的高产量，酒窖里也全然是一片新气象。当时，不管是从葡萄酒的产量还是口感，都满足了人们的需求：微甜的口感让人愉快，带有花香，随处可饮。这也许是出于自古就有的对成熟的甜味水果的喜好，也有可能正如心理学家所说，是因为战后的这一代人对甜食的渴望。
    50年代的农业会一直因为“不具备地域特色”而并不待见甜葡萄酒，到了60年代，人们将此视为准则，严格执行，所以一直以来甜葡萄酒的大量生产都只是“技术上可行”，直到1971年出台了新酒法，这股甜酒的风潮才发展到顶峰：酒法明确废止了“天然葡萄酒”这一称号，要求以具体的含糖量（奥斯勒）的描述标注。比如现今使用的“珍藏”、“迟摘”、“精选”这些标签就是根据奥斯勒值来定的，在这一酒法之下，酒农自然追求尽可能高的含糖量，以求获得最有利的标签。世界公认的一些影响品质的因素，比如葡萄园和土壤的特点，葡萄品种，葡萄藤年份，植株间距等等，酒法中都没有提及，实际操作中，这些因素只能渐渐融入背景当中。只要一天以含糖量作为标准，我们就一天只能以“迟摘”作为标签，甚至是一些非常干瘦的葡萄酒，都可以被酒法认定为“高品质葡萄酒”，起一个好听的名字，并在国际市场上卖的很好。不光是在葡萄酒的分级中弃用了风土因素，就连品尝的时候，人们也不再关注风土。
    到了八十年代，德国葡萄酒经历了谷底：不光完全脱离了市场，在德国，甚至没有人再对糟糕的“迟摘”产生兴趣。在现代饮食文化，上流礼仪以及生态学的潮流中，德国的葡萄酒业暂时沉睡了。在农业中，总是优先适用农村社会政策而非经济政策，毫无疑问，政府对上千个小企业的补贴，保证了葡萄酒产业景观的延续。虽然过多的补贴不利于发展经济为主导的产业结构，但是肥硕的猪、一麻袋一麻袋的马铃薯以及甜葡萄酒却在与“德意志民主共和国”的思想抗争中做出了很大的贡献（译者注：在1945年二战德国战败后，1949年德国分裂为联邦德国以及民主共和德国暨东德，联邦德国在经济上发展上明显由于东德，61年冷战加剧建造柏林墙，1989年柏林墙拆除，90年两德正式统一）。
    政府的补贴并没有真正帮助到酒农，为什么一些本该被称为佳酿的葡萄酒并不受到待见？对此，他们毫无头绪，只能依靠恶魔一般的布鲁塞尔以及一些廉价外国酒。其后，协会开始将眼光慢慢转移到不锈钢酒瓶厂而不是栽培，由此可以推断出，遭到危机时，协会无法扭转经济形势，转而通过一些措施加强优化他们的策略和概念：加大力度降低生产成本，寻求更多技巧以达到价廉物美。
     他们做出的一个重要创新，就是对“市场营销”的适应。德国酒农对于自己的“营销无能”颇感自豪，并且这与城里人所追求的状态相一致，而现在他们将其归纳为“用对了虫子才能钓到鱼”，在市场营销中始终强调口感与设计。时至今日，仍有很多人认为这是一个有着很好前景的事业。整个八十到九十年代，葡萄酒市场发生了很大的改变：一方面是因为市场营销带来的消费者行为改变；还有高度现代化的公司，尤其是来自加利福尼亚和澳大利亚的企业，营造了国际化的氛围，他们出产的霞多丽，长相思以及品种繁多的柔和口感的红酒在超市的陈列柜上与法国、德国葡萄酒激烈竞争，将人们从固有的、对于葡萄酒悠久传统的重视当中解放出来，“塑造品味“这一格言又使得他们成功打入相对保守的欧洲；而类似葡萄汁浓缩，反向渗透以及真空电镀这样长久以来颇受争议的方法被合法化，也带来一些影响；另一方面，最新的生化研究发现了一些以酶或酵母形式存在的香料，想要在酒中加点苹果香气么？桃子，芒果？或者说你更喜欢黑莓和黑加仑？

阅读德国酒农守则后的体验就如同到怪物实验室走一圈一般令人不快。别人成功的例子提示了一些德国人，这些拥护者向传统主义者发难了：要求学习澳大利亚和法国，取消一些禁令。无论是国际葡萄酒协会还是地方上的酒农联盟，所有人都在努力争取最基础的自主权，多么惊人的成就啊！人们抱着“更好”和“更多”的直率想法生产出了让人惊讶的葡萄酒；人类战胜自然的古老梦想似乎触手可及；似乎守护上帝圣杯的巨蟒受了重伤，葡萄酒的酿造变得有规可循、甚至可以重新酿造，葡萄酒可以理化测量。

    正当德国酒法带着如同蒸汽发动机一般过时的态度，举着奥斯勒度如履薄冰之时，市场早就建立了以“口感划分等级”为原则来进行分级与授奖的方式,国际上也流行以派克点计分（葡萄酒打分，100分为满分），Robert Parker Jr.创立了这个评价系统，带来了市场的改革，Parker给的分数甚至决定了整个地区的葡萄酒命运。

正当Parker和他的团队忙于品酒之时，一个美国的公司- Enologix-却发展了新的方法。Enologix公司建立了一个数据库，将50,000中不同的酒，依照Parker的打分以及酒的化学参数存入库中。越来越多的酒庄主选择支付500到5000美金不等，提由Enologix的数据库分析，帮助他们判断一种酒的标价到底是5美元还是100美元。可以看出，葡萄酒业也来到了现代工业时代，经过多年发展，果汁和啤酒也已然可以和葡萄酒抗衡，人们更加重视视频设计，而不是酿造。问题出在哪儿？只要葡萄酒越来越物美价廉，又有何不可？谁要做21世纪的勒德分子？（译者注：勒德分子是19世纪初英国手工业工人中参加捣毁机器的人，用以代指害怕或者厌恶技术的人）

正当这些Frankenstein实验室里的化学家们得意地搓着手的时候（译者注：Frankenstein在这儿一作怪物实验室之解，一作自作自受，作法自毙的意思），葡萄酒产区却是愁云惨淡的景象：过量生产，酒价下跌以及认同危机。

确实，大多数的酒并非独一无二，或者说，并不符合市场需求,长久以来补贴的都是粗制滥造的商品；许多酒庄主堕落成为了受资助的展览式葡萄园的管理人员，一旦失去资助，这些教授园艺的地方就将关门，整个村子或许都再找不到酒农的继承人了；一百年前，人们用3天的工资才能买到的佳酿，如今只要花费15分钟的劳动报酬；满种葡萄的绝美山坡景观，代表着一千多年的古老文化，如今只要极少的钱就能买来，闲置在那儿。当地的旅游业作为仅有的带来收益的产业，也受到了影响：侵入的黑莓灌木丛，石橡子以及樱桃科的一些植物群，剥夺了翡翠蜥蜴以及一些蛾类的生存环境，陆地景观被破坏，村庄变得一贫如洗，旅游业低迷起来。

 放眼世界，还有另一种文化正在荒芜：品位。比如说食品的全球化：“让成人的品位趋向儿童化！”过去令人迷醉的雷司令、单宁含量丰富的巴罗罗葡萄酒以及香料气息厚重的Syrah现在却越来越像水果沙拉、草莓酱或巧克力糖浆。市场营销的战略家如此解析：成年人通常根据地区，会有不同的饮食文化，而全世界的孩子都喜欢水果化的甜食。那么，幼儿化万岁！让我们回到口欲期得了！（译者注：口欲期是指婴幼儿时期处于一种完全不自立的状态，口是婴幼儿生活的中心和兴趣的中心）

 无论是鲁道夫史坦勒提出的自然活力农耕，还是现代开明的生态学良知，都虔诚的认为，人类对万物负有责任应当清醒的进行经济活动，热爱自己的土地：这些年来，抗议越来越多，因为近几年的过度索取，一种对抗运动正在兴起。有这么一个看不见摸不着的东西，他像一个高尚的灵魂，他有一个名字风土。 

风土是对葡萄酒的说明，而不是勒德主义的表现(强烈反对在任何方面提高机械化和自动化)。没有人说工业化生产出的葡萄酒不好，相反，由于工业化使大众接触到了这种传统的杰出饮品，为葡萄酒的民主化作出了贡献。但同一副海报作者不同身价不同，同一个扩音器装在礼堂就不可同日而语，同样，大众量产的葡萄酒和大师级的葡萄酒是有巨大差异的。“并不是说葡萄处理发酵的成品，口感尚可就可称为葡萄酒。”受人尊敬的葡萄酒评论家. Hans-Jörg Koch.如是写道。

风土象征了澄清以及透明度。当酒灌装入瓶后，酒的文化就体现在酒标上：我们将地区，村庄或是葡萄园的名字印在酒标上，并不仅仅是一种形式，葡萄酒应当反映出原产地的特色，这同样也适用于葡萄的品种以及年份。

风土又象征着对大自然生态环境的关爱：无论是在葡萄园还是酒窖里，有时应当放弃一些现代科技带来的便利，因为可能带来难以估量的后果。

风土是一种文化的象征，因此，无法用理化方式进行科学测量。所谓“客观的评价葡萄酒”和一些奖项就不太站得住脚了。从事于葡萄酒新闻工作的大师Michael Broadbent是这样阐述的：“在葡萄酒颁奖会上我总是想到选美比赛-通常那些最漂亮最聪明的姑娘总是待在家里。”

政府部门和酒农协会里都有一些进步人士支持风土运动，并且将他们认为有价值的想法作为其理念的一部分。VDP联盟是一个行动派的协会，现在，已经可以看到运动的初步成果：他们对葡萄园进行了分级，只有10%被认定为具备风土，可以特别享有对葡萄栽培的参数说明，比如2004年，只有他们可以在酒瓶上标注葡萄园信息，其他的则一律作为村酒或是地产酒上市。通过这种地区分类，德国葡萄酒的“Grand Crus”顶级酒庄也逐渐形成，根据地区，酒标上主要分为” Erstes Gewächs”、” Großes Gewächs” 特级葡萄酒，或者” Erste Lage” 特级庄园，并且有相应标志。近年来，对这种具风土特色的葡萄酒的需求日渐增长,市场观察员承认，面对同样增长的快餐食品，反对运动会继续发展。

全世界都对这种富含文化修养的葡萄酒表现出极大的热情，这为越来越多的酒庄主带来了足够的收入，也有越来越多的年轻人认为酿酒是一个很有意思的职业。在有些地区，闲置的葡萄园里，人们又开始劳作和酿酒。

那么，风土葡萄酒会不会成为拯救德国葡萄酒的神奇药剂？这当然皆大欢喜，但德国葡萄园并不局限在传统地区。在葡萄酒繁荣时期，上千公顷的砂岩和农耕土地被用作酿酒葡萄栽培，即使多年的葡萄藤产量减半，人们还是“只种酿酒葡萄”，然后，就掉进了“全球化”的陷阱。如果更便宜的外国酒口感并不差，那么一个正常人何必一定买德国酒呢？说实话，没有人真的指望，靠着德国风土葡萄酒正在上涨的好名声，就能带动廉价酒的盈利。大多数人会建议我们不应该继续投资于产品的优化，市场营销和整顿改良，而是应该想一想如何明智地利用土地，比如：在小路两旁种植一些坚果树，露营公园，界河地区或者是草地和生态群落。形势不容乐观，葡萄酒应该退回到传统的种植地去。

欧洲，澳大利亚以及南非这些传统的葡萄酒产地都面临这样的问题：如何在快餐文化的冲击下，保护文化遗产？毫无疑问，在加利福尼亚召开的第一节风土大会，宣告了与快餐食品的战争正式开始。全世界的酒庄主都受到触动，重新开发他们的葡萄园：不同的土壤，有所变化的微气候，传统品种葡萄，年份长扎根深却产量小的葡萄藤······

风土最重要的一点就是：葡萄酒并不仅仅是土壤，葡萄藤，微气候以及劳作的总和，它是一种不稳定的变化过程，好比在意欲和直觉、检查与自由放任、太阳神阿波罗与酒神狄俄倪索斯之间的复杂中间地带。对于根据线性外推来进行优化，风土则完全不予理会。在洛杉矶艺术宫展出的蒙娜丽莎，是一副令人称奇的复制品，人们还在旁边摆上了达芬奇的蜡像，然而这幅画一放到巴黎的真品旁边，顿时变得滑稽可笑。

或许原来的并非完美，但是“过失品味起来也很不错”，男高音艺术家，同时也是葡萄酒爱好者的Christoph Prégardien承认道。葡萄酒的一种立体化的氛围，使我们见识到了另一个层面上的事物。品味风土葡萄酒就如同去听一场音乐会，“观众想要进入这个声音的广阔世界，就必须有有一颗懂得音乐语言和表达方式的心，用心去听。”小提琴演奏家Anne-Sophie Mutter这样认为，她认为演奏者通过一种“私密的，精神的联系”来与听众交流。

   风土，如同一个奇妙的幽灵，在葡萄酒的世界飘荡着。他让挑剔的美食家，坚定的酿酒师，远见的政客以及热爱大自然的人们联合在一起。他超越了可口可乐，召集了一群忠诚的品鉴者，向着复杂的、真正的品味世界，开始了一段激动人心的旅程。

      一切权利归法兰克福汇报Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung GmbH所有

 

 

 

 

 
    From Oechsle to Terroir
    Oenological Manifesto

   A spook is going around the world of wine. His name is Terroir.
He unnerves many a wine drinker used to spätlese, scares the odd winemaker and increases the blood pressure of old established Politicians.
   Since almost a century the quality of wine in Germany has been defined by “öchsle”, the sugar accumulated in the grapes while ripening. The more the better. That way every vineyard, every grape variety, has its chance to rise through the olympia of labelling, as Spätlese or Auslese. Then along come the avantgarde of wine professionals and preach “Terroir”, dennouncing the legal quality criteria and modern production methods as an abbomination of a heavenly beverage through the cold spirit of the times and industrialisation. They want to define the quality of a vineyard through the expression of flavour and culture. Grape varieties and methods will be stipulated, vineyards classified. Isn’t that feudalism through the back door?
 

At the end of the 19th century, as the idea of öchsle- degree determining quality was taken on by German wine law, it was clear to all- as it is now- that Our Lord wasn’t sharing out quality amongst the vineyards by popular democratic criteria. Despite this, the grading of wines by regions bound to certain stipulations, a method developed since the early middle ages, gave way to a chemical component in the grape juice. In the modern world of protestant Prussia this may well be treasured, but is surely also an expression of the specifics of the German wine market. This had its “Golden Years” in the last decades of the 19th century. With the “bordeaux solution” an effective antidote was found against the moulds brought in from America with the emmigration rush. Newly developed machines helped ease the hard manual work in the vineyards and a modern rail network optimised the distribution. On top of that, the new romantic spirit of the German bourgeoisie led them to dream not only of castles, rocky cliffs and the tempting Loreley but also of wines preferably from the Rhine and Mosel valley. German wines were “mega-in” and in the top metropolitan  restaurants of Europe they were more expensive than the famous Chateaux from Bordeaux. Even today the villas and splendid winery cellars on the Rhine and Mosel bear witness to the economic prosperity of those years.   

Light brings shade. Some made a quick buck with quite questionable methods. Raisins from Greece, Cheap wine from Italy, sugar water…Compared to the Frankenstein-wine practices of today this may all seem quite “natural”. Nevertheless: Many honest producers justifiably saw their livelihoods threatened and demanded protection through new wine regulations. In 1892 the first draft of this was passed. The worst of the concocting was banned and as a compromise an addition of 25% sugar water to the must was legalised for simple everyday wines. This had the effect of pushing up the alcohol levels, reducing acidity and profitably increasing volume. However, manipulation of the top wines in any way was prohibited. This meant they could call their wines “naturally pure”, a term only abolished by the wine law of 1971 to which many top producers still feel obliged to today. It’s no surprise that the members of the “Predicate Wineries”, a unification of the regional auction rings for naturally pure wines founded at the turn of the century, are the strongest advocates of terroir movement today. Just as a hundred years ago the definition of the old fashioned term “naturally pure” distinguishes itself from flavour manipulation in the wine cellar.
 

The answer to the question whether must should be kept “naturally pure” or “improved” was delivered by the öchsle scales. This density spindle constructed by Ferdinand Öchsle proved a very practical measuring device for sugar content and slowly became a virtually objective measure of quality.
The breakthrough for öchsle came only with the economic boom years, as the cards for German viticulture were reshuffled with tractors, fertilizers and new high öchsle clones and grape varieties. The area planted doubled, harvests multiplied and new machines and gadgets led to unimagined productivity in the vineyard and entirely new prospects in the cellar. After all, it was meeting the growing demand that counted, not only in volume, but taste as well. Keep it nice and sweet, flowery and drinkable. Was it due to the candy defecit of the post war generation described by various psychologists or the archaic longing for sweet ripe fruits? In any case for the first time it was technically possible to produce sweet wines on a large scale. While such sweet wines were often rejected by the chamber of agriculture as “not regionally typical” in the fifties, they were already the norm by the sixties. The sweet wave reached its peak with  the wine laws of 1971. The term “naturally pure” was abolished and replaced by “predicates”, which were defined by öchsle degree. Kabinett, Spätlese or Auslese, all of them well used terms today, were linked to öchsle threshholds. Naturally the winemakers aimed at highest possible öchsle levels  to attain the more profitable “predicates”. The character of the vineyard and soil, grape variety, age of the vines, planting distances, yield, i.e. decisive quality factors recognised worldwide, were not mentioned in this wine law. In reality these factors faded into the background. As long as there’s öchsle, as long as its spätlese. Even the thinnest of wines became legally sanctioned “quality wines” with nice sounding names sold with great success on the world market. Not only did terroir play no longer role in the grading of wines, with viticultural methods as they were it simply was not there to taste.
 

Back down to earth in the eighties, as the bottom fell out of the market for German wines and even in Germany nobody was really enthusiastic about the cocked-up spätlese. The German wine business was simply caught sleeping by the trend towards modern food culture, savoir vivre, and ecology. No wonder, since the government subsidies had ensured that the wine landscape looked like a puzzle of thousands of small businesses. Much like the rest of agriculture, economic policy had long given way to rural social policy. Subsidies from an over-filled watering can hindered the development of economically sensible business structures, but with fatter pigs, full sacks of potatos and sweeter wine they provided an important contribution to the idealogical conflict with the “DDR”.
 

That wasn’t much help to the wine growers. They hadn’t a clue why their supposedly top wines were not seen as such,so they resorted to diabolising Brussels and cheaper foreign wine. But since the official and political eyes of wine growers inclined towards stainless steel bottling plants more than cultural developments the way the branch reacted to the crisis was predictable: Instead of initiating an economic and cultural U-turn an attempt was made at optimising the old strategies and concepts: more power, sink production costs further, more technic, to make it better and cheaper. An important innovation of the times was the adaption of the term “marketing”. To be “inable” to do this honours the German wine makers soul and corresponds to the picture the townies are looking for, but the magic word has been boiled down to “the worm has to taste good to the fish”, where target groups are bombarded with taste and design. Even today this is a supposed carrier of hope. It wasn’t only changing consumer behaviour that completely changed the wine market in the 80ies and 90ies. Highly modernised businesses, in particular from California and Australia, set the tone as global-players. With modern Chardonnay, Sauvignon Blanc and various softened red wines they hunted the French and German bottles from the supermarket shelves, they freed the world of its remaining respect for its wine heritage. The motto “taste can be made” also began its march of triumph in conservative Europe. Methods such as must concentration, reverse osmosis or vacume evaporation, long known but frowned upon, were legalised. The latest biochemical discoveries filled inumerable plastic sachets in the form of yeasts and enzymes. Anyone for apple aroma? Peach, mango? Or would you prefer black cherries with blackcurrents?
 

The instruction leaflet reads like a horror trip through Frankensteins laboratory. Drunk on mega-design blockbusters the German apologists bombarded the intimidated traditionalists: Allow us to do what the Australians and French have been doing for years. Whether international wine organisation or regional wine growers association. Everyone was fighting for freedom at the lowest commen denominator. With increasing success! The straight thinking of “more” and “better” leads to plastic wines which numb the brain and senses. The ancient dream of human rule over nature seems within reach, the python guardian of the Holy Grail of wine fatally wounded. Wine can be ruled, wine is reproducable, wine is measurable.
 

While the German wine law, with its anachronistic steam engine attidude, rode on further with its shaky öchsle, the market established various medals and gradings on the principle of “school grades for taste”. Internationally, “Parker points” rule the present day. The wine assessments of Robert Parker jnr. reshuffle markets and decide the fates of whole regions. But while the American journalist and his team go to the archaic lengths of actually tasting the wines, the Californian company Enologix goes a step further. For a contribution from 500 to 5000$ a growing number of wine producers put their trust in a data bank with chemical parameters of 50,000 analysed wines, all of which are calibrated with “Parker points”. As such they know exactly whether their wines can cost 5 or 100 $. Wine has arrived in the modern industrial society. The development made years ago by other beverages such as juice and beer has reached wine. Food design instead of vinification. So what’s the problem? Who cares as long as the wine is cheaper and tastes better? Why be Luddites in the 21st century?
 

While the chemists in Frankensteins laboraty rub their hands with glee, it’s looking, with a few exceptions, very sad in the wine regions. Over-production, falling prices, identity crisis. No wonder, most of the wines are interchangeable or don’t conform to the market. Subsidies have long surpassed gross product. Winemakers degenerate to subsidised museum-guardians of their own vinyards. And as soon as the subsidies run dry training schools will be closed and whole villages left without wine growing decendants. Top wines that cost the equivalent of 3 days wages a hundred years ago are now paid for in 15 minutes. Slopes of stunning wine landscape, part of a thousand year old culture, can be bought for a few cent, are given away, lie fallow. With respective consequences for tourism. The encroaching blackberry bushes, stone acorn, stone cherry and others, all part of a unique vinyard flora, rob the emerald lizard, sail moth and the even rarer apollo moth of their environment. By ruining the landscape and impoverising the villages the wine regions lose tourism, one of the few still profitable economies.
 

Worldwide, another culture becomes barren, the taste culture. True to the cry of food  globalisers: “Get children`s tastes popular amongst adults!” Rieslings that previously tasted fascinating, Barolos hidden behind astringent tannins and  wild spicy Syrah wines have become more and more like fruit salad, strawberry jam or chocolate syrup. The strategists in the marketing departments have got it: Adults everywhere in the world have different food cultures. But all the children of the world like it fruity and sweet. Therefore, long live the infantilisation! Back to the oral phase!
   

Whether with Rudolf Steiner`s “agricultural thesis”, or an enlightened, modern ecology conscience, religiously founded responsibility to creation, sober economic calculation or love of the Fatherland: For many years resistance has been rising. A  countermovement formed only as a reaction to the excesses of recent years.

    A spook is going around. He’s a good ghost. His name is terroir.
   

Terroir is explanation, not Ludditism. No-one has a problem with industrially produced wines. On the contrary, since they allow access to a traditionally elitist drink they contribute to the democratisation of wine. But much as a poster differs from the original painting and a ghetto blaster differs from a concert hall there is a world of difference between a mass produced wine and a terroir wine. “Not everything thats made of grapes and tastes good is wine” writes the respected wine law critic Prof. Hans-Jörg Koch.
   

Terroir stands for clarity and transparency. Wine culture should only be on the label when its in the bottle. If the name of a region, a village or a vineyard is on the label it shoudn’t just be a formality, the wine should reflect the character of its origins. Same goes for grape variety and vintage.
   

Terroir stands for an ecologically responsible care for nature, in the vineyard and in the cellar, and abstaining from many dubious modern blessings.
Terroir stands for culture and therefore removes itself from the world of measurable science. The “objective wine assessments” and awards have no place in the terroir world. Michael Broadbent, grandseignuer of wine journalism phrased it: “At wine awards I always think of Miss-contests, the prettiest and cleverest girls stay at home”.
 

 Many progressive forces in ministrys and wine growers societys support the terroir movement, and build valuable ideas into their concepts. The first fruits are showing in the VDP, the association of predicate vineyards. After grading all vineyards only about ten percent remained as real terroir, for which special quality parameters for vini-and viticulture are given. As of 2004 only wines classified as such are allowed to carry the name of the vineyard location. As all other wines will be marketed as village or estate wines, from the classified locations a top group of German “grand crus” is cristalising. Depending on the region these are called “erstes Gewächs (first growth)”, “grosses Gewächs (great growth)” or “erste Lage (first location)” and can be recognised by a logo. For years the demand for such terroir wines has been continually growing, and market observers agree that the counter-movement to the likewise increasing Coke-isation will climb further. Already the worldwide enthusiasm for culture imbued wines provides a sufficient income for a growing number of wine makers and to more and more young people the profession of wine maker seems interesting. In some places fallen walls are being rebuilt and fallow vineyards newly planted.
   

Are, then, terroir wines the magic potion to rescue German wine? That would be nice. But the German wine landscape doesn’t only consist of traditional vineyards. Thousands of hectares of alluvial land and turnip fields put under vine in the boom years, even if yields of old vines are halved, will only deliver “just wine”. And that’s caught in the globalisation trap. Why should a right minded citizen buy German wine when the same taste can be found cheaper in many other countries. No-one honestly expects the rising reputation of German terroir wines to pull in its wake the cheap wine into the profit zone. Instead of investing lots of money into product optimisation, marketing and destilisation we would all be well advised to think about sensible alternatives of land use: alleys of nut trees, parks with camping sites, river overspill areas or just meadow and biotope. What a heavenly scenario, should the wine retreat to its traditional vineyards.
 

Every traditional wine region, be it in Europe, Australia or South Africa faces the question of how to confront the coke-isation and save its cultural heritage. Its no wonder that the first terroir congress was organised in California as a decleration of war on fast food. Worldwide wine makers are moved to rediscover their vineyards: the different soils, the changing microclimate, traditional varieties, old, deep rooted vines with few, but small, berries…
   

Terroir is grasping that wine is more than the sum of soil, vine, microclimate and work: a fragile process of change, a complex picture on the border between planing and intuition, checks and laisser faire, of Apollo and Dionyses. Terroir has turned its back on optimisation by linear extrapolation. The exhibition of the Mona Lisa in the Palace of Living Arts in Los Angeles, where not only a perfect reproduction of the famous picture can be marvelled, but a waxwork Leonardo next to his bare butted model Gioconda, seems ridiculous next to the original in Paris.  

Its not the perfect, but the “mistakes that taste grand” acknowledges the tenor and wine lover Christoph Prégardien. Wines with an almost cubistic aura and give us insight to another level of reality. Terroir wines have a lot in common with going to a concert. “The ear to the heart of the listener needs a greater musical vocabulary and a more complicated musical grammer. In return you’re rewarded with an enormously rich world of sound”, says Anne-Sophie Mutter and speaks from a “secret, almost spiritual link” between performer and audience. A good ghost wafts through the world of wine. His name is terroir.

He unites critical gourmets, committed wine makers, forward-looking politicians and nature lovers. Beyond coca-cola he’s gathering a community of uncompromising connoissuers to an exciting journey into the world of authentic and complex taste.

All rights belong to the Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung GmbH

 

         

                                               杭州拜仁贸易2012.08.21Cecilie译第一稿