I wish I could say I broke this story at VinoWire but I must give credit where credit is due: my buddy Alessandro Bindocci is posting on the Brunello vote results at his blog Montalcino Report. I’m glued to my seat and am keeping my fingers crossed for Brunello to remain Brunello (100% Sangiovese). Long live Sangiovese!
Category Archives: de rebus italicis
Sue me, Summus… Banfi proposes 3-5% “tolerance” of international varieties
That’s Cristina Mariani to the left, owner of Banfi Vintners, one of the world’s largest and most powerful winemakers. Her family’s winery is one of the largest producers of Brunello di Montalcino.
Yesterday, on the eve of the Brunello Consortium’s historic vote on whether or not to allow blending of grapes other than Sangiovese, she and her company issued a statement in which they declare their support for a 3-5% “tolerance” of other grapes and for a new “Super Tuscan” Rosso di Montalcino designation:
- “It is our strong belief that the heritage of Brunello rests solidly on the ennobled Sangiovese grape, and therein rests its future as well. This is why we dedicated our resources over the past thirty years in our ‘Pursuit of Excellence,’ collaborating with leading scholars to research, register and plant optimal clones of Sangiovese in their ideal soils on our estate. And this is why we will support the move to maintain the definition of Brunello di Montalcino as being made exclusively from the Sangiovese grape, with only a minimal (3%-5%) tolerance to be included in Brunello Appellation Rule to provide for human error in the vineyards or winery, as befitting a truly artisan production.
At the same time, we will work with our supportive neighbors to develop Rosso di Montalcino into a broader appellation that will allow Sangiovese to contribute its special character to a blend of other varietals, and continue to pursue the expression of the region’s unique terroir in ‘Montalcino Super Tuscan’ wines.”
There’s a saying in Italian, avere la botte piena e la moglie ubriaca, to have your cask full and your wife drunk. In other words, Ms. Mariani and her company want to have their cake and eat it too.
I’m sorry, Cristina, but sue me, Summus. You write: this is why we will support the move to maintain the definition of Brunello di Montalcino as being made exclusively from the Sangiovese grape, with only a minimal (3%-5%) tolerance to be included in Brunello. There seems to be some faulty logic here. Or do I not understand the meaning of the word exclusive?
The critical theorist in me can’t decide if I should apply a Marxist or Freudian reading to your conflict. But the Lacanian me reminds me that the signifier always precedes the signified.
In the words of the great Big Joe Turner, either you is, or either you ain’t (Lipstick, Powder, and Paint).
And in the words of James Suckling, LET BRUNELLO BE BRUNELLO!
On the eve of a historic vote, a 1975 Brunello by Lisini
Above: the 1975 Lisini Brunello di Montalcino was one of the most beautiful expressions of Sangiovese I’ve ever tasted. The wine was so bright and alive, with gorgeous acidity, red fruit flavors, and the elegant tannin that defines truly great Brunello. Look at the clear color of the wine: 100% Sangiovese. THANK YOU ALFONSO!
Austin, Texas—Last night Tracie B. and I opened a bottle of 1975 Brunello di Montalcino by Lisini, given to us by Italian Wine Guy. The wine was simply divine. Here are Tracie B.’s tasting notes:
menthol, cedar and sottobosco (woodsy), pecan pie and cherries with cinnamon, tar and liquorice, cherry vanilla oatmeal with cinnamon, chocolate (only for a second)… two constants: cinnamon and vanilla caramel…
The fact that on Monday, members of the Brunello Consortium will vote on whether or not to change appellation regulations was not lost on us. Currently, regulations require that the wine be made from 100% Sangiovese grapes, grown in Montalcino. Many believe — as do I — that over the last decades, unscrupulous Brunello producers have blended international grapes, and most notoriously Merlot, in their wines.
Above: it was tough to pull that cork but Mr. Bianchi knew what to do!
To put it all into perspective, I sat down and took a look at a book that’s been sitting on my virtual shelves for some time: I vitigni stranieri da vino coltivati in Italia or Foreign Grape Varieties Cultivated in Italy, by Salvatore Mondini, Firenze (Florence), Barbèra Editore, 1903 (reprint Zazzera, Lodi, 1998). Keep in mind the date of the original publication of this tome, 1903:
- “Tuscany has the greatest number of foreign wine grape varieties in Italy… These plantings, however, rarely reach important quantities, save for Gamay, which is widely planted, particularly in the province of Pisa. … When he saw the scarce productivity of planting foreign varieties, the inferiority of the wines they produced, and the difficulties caused by their early ripening (which consequently affected the progress of the harvest), Baron Ricasoli decided to transform his vineyards by grafting Tuscan varieties onto the foreign varieties previously introduced there” (p. 45, translations mine).
Mondini is referring to the famous letter sent by Baron Ricasoli (1809-1880, producer of Chianti Classico and the second prime minister of unified Italy) to Professor Cesare Studiati in 1872, in which the Baron writes:
- “As early as 1840, I began experimenting with every grape variety. I cultivated each one in significant quantities on my Brolio estate. Our goal was to test the quality and taste of the wines produced from each grape.”
“Following this comparative study, I restricted the number of grapes at Brolio and began growing Sangioveto, Canaiolo, and Malvasia almost exclusively. In 1867, I decided once again to make wine using these three grapes. I made a relatively large vat of each one and then I blended the three in another vat using exact proportions” (translation mine).
There are “plantings of Merlot in Italy,” wrote Mondini, only in ten provinces belonging to the regions of Piedmont, Lombardy, Veneto, Emilia, Tuscany, Latium, and the Mediterranean [coastal areas] of the South” (p. 294).
“In Tuscany, there are some very limited plantings of Merlot in the provinces of Lucca and Pisa” (p. 296).
As the documents above reveal, historically, Tuscan growers have not favored Merlot. It’s a pity that so much Merlot has been planted in Montalcino over the last two decades.
Yesterday, I read another document that gave me hope that Brunello will come out of this mess unscathed. I rarely agree with James Suckling’s take on Italian wine but I was thrilled to see that he spoke out against a change that would allow the blending of grapes other than Sangiovese.
You need to subscribe to the Wine Spectator site to be able to read his blog (yes, I admit it, I subscribe!). But I’ve copied and pasted the following passages below.
- “I think that Montalcino is the greatest place on earth to grow Sangiovese, and allowing Brunello to be something other than 100 percent Sangiovese would be scandalous. … No thank you!” …
“Something as unique and as delicious as a great Sangiovese from Montalcino needs to be protected, even cherished. Its great quality can’t be replicated any place in the world, except for a few other parts of Tuscany. There are other DOCs in the Montalcino area and the rest of Tuscany for blended wines. Let Brunello be Brunello.”
I couldn’t agree more: Let Brunello be Brunello. Chapeau, James. I hope Brunello producers are listening.
Do the math: Siena prosecutor speaks out on Brunello investigation
Earlier this week, Banfi issued a press release announcing that its 2003 Brunello di Montalcino had been released by Siena authorities (it was impounded in April 2008). Evidently in response to Banfi’s press release and the newspaper articles and blog posts that followed, the Siena prosecutor sent a statement to members of the press today.
Click here to read the post published by Franco and me at VinoWire.
Our sources on the ground in Montalcino tell us that nearly half of Banfi’s 2003 release — Rosso and Brunello — had to be declassified.
Read our post and do the math…
Dear Ezio Rivella and Thomas Matthews, please give me a call…
In his post on Friday, Eric referenced my post at Do Bianchi (please see also the post published by me and Franco Ziliani at VinoWire).
In my post on the October 3 Brunello debate, I wrote:
As I watched the live streaming of the Brunello debate on Friday, I couldn’t help but think of Marinetti’s calls to abolish pasta and to “murder the moonshine” (uccidiamo il chiaro di luna! or let’s kill the claire de lune, 1909) when I heard one of Italy’s leading enologists, Ezio Rivella, say that “Sangiovese is a ‘lean’ grape with little color” and that the Italian wine industry would be better served by “using international grape varieties” and “making wines more international in style.”
“You don’t win a 100 points from the Wine Spectator,” said Rivella, “using just Sangiovese.”
Yesterday, Thomas Matthews, executive editor of Wine Spectator, made the following comment on Eric’s post:
After reading this blog entry, I called Ezio Rivella, who is currently in Rome, and spoke with him and James Suckling, Wine Spectator’s lead taster for the wines of Italy. Rivella told us the quotation referenced above was taken out of context, that his point was only to say that Sangiovese can benefit from blending in many cases. He wishes that Mr. Asimov had called him directly to discuss this issue.
Dear Ezio and Thomas, it’s a matter of fact: the statement was made in the context of a debate on whether or not the Brunello appellation regulations should be changed to allow the blending of international grape varieties. And it’s the fact of the matter: Rivella made that statement, voice raised, pointing his finger at Franco and admonishing him, during a debate on whether or not international grapes should be allowed in the Brunello appellation. I watched the debate live over the internet and Franco was there!
Thomas, me thinks thou dost protest too much.
Ezio, feel free to give me a call. Franco knows how to get in touch with me and I know that you and he are in cordial if not friendly contact.
Sincerely,
Jeremy Parzen, Ph.D.
*****
In other news…
Over at Montalcino Report, my friend Alessandro Bindocci reports that 153 Brunello producers have now signed an open letter to agriculture minister Luca Zaia and the Brunello Consortium asking them to keep Brunello 100% Sangiovese. 149 had signed the original letter last week and that number already represented a majority of producers.
High Noon in Montalcino
Italians love westerns. At least, they used to. In the 1960s and 70s, the Italian film industry produced some of the wild west’s most enduring iconography.
A showdown of epic proportions is beginning to take shape in Montalcino, as the Brunello producers association braces for an October 27 “once-and-for-all” vote on whether or not appellation regulations will be changed to allow for the use of grapes other than Sangiovese. See this report that Franco and I published today at VinoWire.
The stakes got higher yesterday when 149 producers signed off on an open letter to separatist agricultural minister Luca Zaia and supporter of “more elastic” regulations informing him that they don’t want to change current legislation. My friend Alessandro Bindocci broke news of the letter over at his blog Montalcino Report.
Zaia recently began blogging, but before you add his feed to your Google reader, be sure to read this post by Italian Wine Guy.
Me? I’m glued to my seat and my keyboard. Stay tuned for high drama from Montalcino…
Donne e buoi dei paesi tuoi (observations on the Brunello debate part II)
Above: “harvesters” in a photo taken in Langa, date unknown, but I am guessing sometime between the two world wars (images courtesy Fontanafredda).
There’s a saying in Italian, donne e buoi dei paesi tuoi. Literally translated, it means women and oxen from your own village or [choose] women and oxen from your hometown.
Paesi tuoi is also the title of Cesare Pavese’s dark novel set against the rural backdrop of Langa (Piedmont)* in the years that preceded the second world war. The story centers around Berto and Talino, who travel to Talino’s village (paese in Italian) after they are released from prison. Berto falls in love with Talino’s sister Gisella. In a fit of jealous rage, Talino kills Gisella with a pitchfork. Her tragic death is a metaphor for the changing face of rural Italy during the country’s industrialization under fascism. Berto is a factory worker from a big city and his presence in the country seems to unleash an otherwise contained and tolerated depravity. He is repulsed by the atrocity he witnesses and flees. Pavese’s unforgiving realism is one of the greatest examples of 20th-century Italian (and European) narrative.
Renowned Italian enologist Ezio Rivella was born in Asti (in Langa) in 1933 and was 8 years old when Pavese’s novel was published in 1941 (it was translated as The Harvesters in 1961).
As Rivella and winemaker Teobaldo Cappellano sparred during the Brunello debate on Friday, October 6, Rivella repeatedly interrupted his interlocutor, admonishing him: “I knew your grandfather very well, Cappellano. And the wines he made were very different from the wines you make today.” Cappellano is one of Italy’s greatest defenders of traditionalist winemaking and is one of the founders of the Vini Veri or Real Wines movement. (Teobaldo doesn’t have a website, but Dressner did this solid profile in English.)
No one would deny that the traditions of winemaking in Italy have changed dramatically since the second world war and radically since the 1970s. Rivella pointed out that in Teobaldo’s grandfather’s day, Nebbiolo was regularly placed in the solaio or loft to “cook” the wine and accelerate its aging — a practice unimaginable today for those who produce fine wine.
“What is tradition and where does it begin?” asked moderator Dino Cutolo, a professor of agricultural anthropology, citing The Invention of Tradition by EJ Hobsbawm and TO Ranger (1983). In farming communities, tradition is shaped by necessity not by cultural self-awareness, Cutolo noted.
Countering Rivella’s claim that commerce should trump tradition in Brunello, Cappellano pointed out that the DOC system was put into place to protect not the winemakers but rather “the territory.” The spirit of the legislation was that of ensuring that artisanal winemakers would not be swept away by the Goliaths like Rivella’s Banfi. And he argued that “provincialism” in winemaking — viewed as a positive element, in opposition to globalization — is the very element that sets Italian wines apart from those produced elsewhere. “We shouldn’t make wines that everyone likes,” said Cappellano, “we need to make wines enjoyed by those who know the wines.”
As I watched the debate that Friday, I thought of how my friend Alice Feiring dealt with the concept of “tradition” in her excellent book, The Battle for Wine and Love: or How I Saved the World from Parkerization. “When I explored this New World wine vs. Old World another theme kept on coming up,” she writes, “and that was the confusion surrounding the word tradition. There were so many meanings. Who knew? Some … were able to use it as a weapon, as a synonym for poorly made wine, for wine that turned into vinegar. Now, what did traditional wine making mean to me? I wasn’t sure. I needed to find a new way to identify wines I liked. Perhaps I was using the word traditional when I meant ‘authentic.'”
We can debate the nature of tradition and authenticity until we’re blue in the face. But one thing is certain: the authenticity of place will disappear if Brunello appellation regulations are changed to allow for the blending of international grape varieties. The laws were created not to help Goliaths make money, but rather to ensure that the Davids would continue to express the authenticity of place.
Paesi tuoi… in the triangle of [mimetic] desire, industrial Banfi was the Berto, the “other” who upset the balance of rural life in Montalcino. In doing so, introduced the capitalist notion of progress (read greed) that has sullied the landscape of the once pristine Orcia River Valley where Brunello di Montalcino is made.
In other news…
Tracie B. told me not to bother watching the 60 Minutes advertorial devoted to the Antinori family last night. But I did enjoy Strappo’s post-game wrap-up. What happened to CBS hard-hitting journalism? Edward Murrow must be rolling over in his grave.
* Sometimes referred to has “the Langhe” or “the Langhe Hills,” Langa is home to Barolo and Barbaresco and is one of Italy’s greatest enogastronmic destinations.
Don’t Murder the Sangiovese: the Brunello debate, observations and reflections (part I)
Above: the Brunello debate panel included Banfi’s ex-director enologist Ezio Rivella (seated stage right), moderator Dino Cutolo, wine writer Franco Ziliani, and winemaker Teobaldo Cappellano.
In 1930, at the height of the “happy years” of fascism, the founder of the Italian Futurism movement and the father of the historical avant-garde Filippo Tommaso Marinetti published his Manifesto della Cucina Futurista, in which he advocated “The abolition of pastasciutta, an absurd Italian gastronomic religion.” (The term pastasciutta means literally dried pasta.)
Today, it is hard to imagine that one of Europe’s leading intellectuals and one of the 20th century’s most dynamic figures (indeed, he who literally gave new meaning to the word dynamism) would lash out so violently against one of Italy’s greatest contributions to world cuisine and a sine qua non of its identity. Thankfully, neither the Futurists nor the fascists prevailed and today pastasciutta and freedom, however bridled by consumerism, continue to thrive in Western Europe.
As I watched the live streaming of the Brunello debate on Friday, I couldn’t help but think of Marinetti’s calls to abolish pasta and to “murder the moonshine” (uccidiamo il chiaro di luna! or let’s kill the claire de lune, 1909) when I heard one of Italy’s leading enologists, Ezio Rivella, say that “Sangiovese is a ‘lean’ grape with little color” and that the Italian wine industry would be better served by “using international grape varieties” and “making wines more international in style.”
“You don’t win a 100 points from the Wine Spectator,” said Rivella, “using just Sangiovese.”
At a certain point during the debate, moderator Dino Cutolo (professor of anthropology, University of Siena), pointed out that the calls for the abolition of Brunello as 100% Sangiovese were coming “from the right.” He quickly added, “not the political right, but from my right.” But his lapsus linguae wasn’t lost on the crowd and drew a chortle from the gallery, palpable even over the internet.
At the height of the heated exchange, when voices were raised and tempers flared, Rivella leveled his finger at Franco Ziliani: “how can we not change the appellation regulations and allow for the use of Merlot in Brunello, caro Lei, Ziliani?” (borrowing a vocative, dear sir, evocative of another era). In the light of the “enormous capital we have invested, we need to make wines for the international market.”
The bottom line: when Banfi, led by Rivella, came into the picture in the 1970s and launched a new era of industrial winemaking in Montalcino, it tried — politically and viticulturally — to impose a modern imprint and it expanded the appellation’s plantings to international grape varieties. The large, commercial producers of Brunello have lobbied twice unsuccessfully to change appellation regulations (allowing for blending of international grapes) from within the now defunct producers consortium. Their bid failed because within the consortium’s hierarchy, the vote of the smallest producer (think Delaware) carried the same weight as the majors (think California).
I’ll let the reader infer her/his own parallels or analogies from the above.
Tomorrow, Teobaldo and Franco’s response. Stay tuned…
A Higher Authority (Brunello needs one)
Above: I watched a live “streaming,” as they say in Italian, of the heated Brunello debate today in Siena. That’s moderator and anthropology prof Dino Cutolo (left), Franco (center), and Teobaldo Cappellano, producer of one my favorite Barolos.
Sparks flew and and tempers flared at the Brunello debate today in Siena. Fascist, capitalist pig Ezio Rivella and his crony and brown-noser Vittorio Fiore faced off with the forces of good: Franco Ziliani and Teobaldo Cappellano. I’ll post my observations and thoughts about the debate soon (I have other pressing issues to attend to today) but you can read my cut-and-dry report at VinoWire.
Does it show that I’m pissed?
The arrogance of Rivella was only rivaled by the colorful remarks by Fiore that “it is not as if we need to make Kosher wine. Israelis make Kosher wines but there are Jews who will pay 200 or 300 Euros for those wines. We don’t need to be so stringent in our winemaking,” he said.
I think that Brunello needs a higher authority. Remember the ad below?
Ziliani vs. Rivella: heavyweight title bout live from Siena, Friday October 3
Above: Franco Ziliani is one of Italy’s most revered and controversial wine writers and his writings have always been an inspiration to me — for their verve, erudition, and the hard-hitting truths he brings to the tasting table (photo by Ben Shapiro).
No, this bout won’t be broadcast from the MGM Hotel in Las Vegas. But it will be streamed via internet from the Aula Magna or Great Hall of the University of Siena on Friday, October 3, 3 p.m. local time: enologist and ex-director of Banfi Ezio Rivella (an outspoken proponent for a change in appellation regulations that would allow for grapes other than Sangiovese to be used in Brunello di Montalcino) and wine writer Franco Ziliani (a steadfast traditionalist and defender of Brunello made from 100% Sangiovese) will face off in an unprecedented debate on the future of Brunello. Other panelists include Teobaldo Cappellano (Barolo producer and founder of Vini Veri) and noted Italian enologist Vittorio Fiore. (The debate will be “streamed” live at www.InToscana.it and www.Vinarius.it.)
Above: no, that’s not the rhino sported by the label of spoofulated Barbaresco. It’s a gravity defying ungulate that hovers above Ca’ del Bosco’s “gravity flow,” whereby the newly harvested grapes travel only by virtue of gravity as they are sorted, destemmed, and transformed into wine. Not only is Ca’ del Bosco a wonder of modern technology, it is also a objet d’art: works of art — ranging from Arnaldo Pomodoro to Igor Mitoraj to Helmut Newton — adorn the grounds and winemaking facility.
During my recent trip to Italy, I had a chance to taste with Franco in one of his favorite appellations, Franciacorta. Ben Shapiro, Giovanni Arcari (a Franciacorta winemaker and consultant), Franco, and I toured and tasted at the amazing technicolor dreamcoat that is the Ca’ del Bosco winery before we retired to dinner and confabulated late into the evening, lingering over Giovanni’s excellent Camossi Franciacorta rosé (would someone please import this wine to the U.S., Strappo?).
Above: a detail of one of the riddling racks in the Ca’ del Bosco cellar. Note the sediment in the neck of the bottle.
The highlight, however, was a stunning 1979 Ca’ del Bosco, disgorged à la volée by one of the winery’s technicians in the cellar. Comparing the ’79 to the recent vintages, it is clear that Ca’ del Bosco’s style has remained unchanged since its early years and these superb wines stand apart for their character, personality and terroir expression. Excuse the pun, but that wine was fly! (Brooklynguy would have loved its oxidized nose and intense hazelnut flavors.)
Above: one of the extraordinary Mitoraj sculptures on the grounds of the winery. Ca’ del Bosco does offer guided tours and tastings by appointment. I highly recommend it: the state-of-the-art winemaking facility is among the most impressive I’ve ever seen, much of the technology developed and patented by the winery itself.
Tornando a bomba, as they say in Italian, getting back to matters at hand… I’ll be publishing a report of next Friday’s Ziliani vs. Rivella face-off. Rivella has long championed changes in appellation regulations (in Piedmont and Tuscany) that would allow for liberal blending of international grape varieties. I regret that the current political climate in Italy appears outwardly amenable to such changes. I don’t believe that Franco and Teobaldo are the “last of the Mohicans.” But I do believe this unprecedented public forum represents a defining moment in what has become a national debate in Italy.
Don’t touch that dial…
Do Bianchi 