Terroir and humans have a complicated relationship… Can one exist without the other? Untangling the intricacies of this fascinating symbiosis
Terroir is the set of environmental conditions which form the “soul” of a wine style. Is there a human component in terroir? If so, how? With this article I hope to unravel that intricate relationship.
This is the third and final part of my series dedicated to terroir. I answer the question: what is terroir in wine? in three parts:
- Part 1 : provides a general definition of terroir, along with a brief history of the term and its evolution
- Part 2: focusses on the role of soil, a feature that is often considered paramount in defining terroir
- Part 3 (this article): deals with terroir and humans. Are the latter part of terroir or something completely unrelated? As you will see, opinions differ greatly on the subject!
As I explained in the first article of my series, terroir is the combination of soil, topography, climate, selected grape / clone, local ecosystem and human practices that defines the “sense of place” of a wine. There is a highly controversial element in that list: the human factor. Whether to include it in the terroir definition divides (sometimes fiercely) wine professionals and enthusiasts alike.
The negationists…
One school of thought claims that any human intervention (vine training, irrigation practices, canopy management and other winemaking practices) cannot be tolerated as part of terroir. In their view, it’s important to distinguish what is “natural” from the winemakers’ superimpositions. As such, their definition of terroir is narrower and defined only by geography and geology.
There are others who agree that terroir must be set apart from human interventions – stressing the ephemeral nature of local traditions and practices. Winemaking is affected by fads and fashion. As such, including human intervention in the definition of terroir would mean its nature changes rapidly. This seems to contradict the notion of terroir as “sense of place”, and the connotations it carries of having a relatively immutable character. Places don’t change easily. And when they do, they usually occur over a long period of time.
…and the humanists
Excluding the human factor from terroir may have been popular in the past, but nowadays its propagators are less and less. The vast majority of wine writers recognise that, one way or another, human contribution is a factor in terroir. Personally, I agree with this proposition. For me, human traditions and practices do contribute to the definition of terroir. Winemaking is an inherently human activity, and detaching the human role from this process would be utter nonsense.
Human decisions are plentiful in every stage of the winemaking process. Examples of just a few of the decisions made by humans include:
- What grape varieties (and clones) to plant and at what density
- Whether to train the vines and how
- When to prune and how
- Which pesticides and other chemical products to use (if any)
- Whether to use machinery
- How to sort and press the grapes
- Length of fermentation
- What vessels to use
- Temperature to adopt
- The clarification method to be used… and many more
As you can gather from above and earlier articles I have written about the winemaking process, the list of potential winemaking decisions is long.
How humans affect terroir
Now that we have established that humans do have a role in terroir, you may want to go explore the topic deeper and consider: how does that interaction take place? To what extent does the winegrower or winemaker affect terroir? Here begins a slippery slope. The topic is so broad I can (and should) only give you a brief overview so that you can appreciate the complexity of the topic.
The way I see it, there are three main ways, human interventions contribute to the terroir:
- Sound viticultural and winemaking techniques act as catalysts allowing wines to fully express the terroir. In such cases, the role of the winemaker is similar to a master chef when provided with optimal ingredients. The secret to achieving the best result is to respect Mother Nature’s gifts and not mess with them unduly. The opposite is also true: terroir can be quite fragile, and poor viticultural and winemaking practices can negatively interfere and ultimately obscure the terroir expression
- Traditional techniques handed down through generations or even dictated by the appellation rules can shape terroir as well. Viticultural heritage defines the “cultural aspect” of terroir. Historically it’s a facet which has been much less studied and researched than other – more natural – aspects of terroir
- Money. Deep pockets can undoubtedly better preserve and enhance superior terroir. When vignerons invest large quantities of capital into the winery, they can ensure high standards. They also have access to better technology, tools and research. A famous example of how inadequate funding can affect a winery is Chateau Margaux. Between 1966 and 1978 the owners of Chateau Margaux couldn’t afford to maintain the site at its best. As a result, Chateau Margaux dramatically dipped in quality and became unrecognisable as a Bordeaux First Growth classe.
Based upon the above, I believe it’s fair to say that homo sapiens is the deciding factor on how terroir should be expressed and channeled into a bottle of wine. Left to their own, vines don’t plant themselves in neat rows, they don’t prune themselves, they don’t decide which varieties (and clones) should be planted in each parcel, they don’t know when their berries should be picked, etc. etc. Being a plant, a vine’s goal is to survive and reproduce. Not produce exquisite wine.
The importance of a winemaker: New World vs Old World
Once we acknowledge that winemakers play a role in the manifestation of terroir in wine, this has important consequences. In particular, we appreciate that the relationship between terroir and humans conceals another controversy in the wine world – the role of the winemaker.
As I wrote in my first post about terroir, historically New World wine producers firmly claim their role in defining the ultimate interpretation of their wine. On the other hand, Old World vignerons believe that great wines are tied to their place and their duty is to do as little as possible to let this “sense of the place” emerge from the glass. To brutally summarise the Old World position, they minimise the winemaker’s role and assign more importance to the soil, location and topography.
I find it curious and almost paradoxical that the French definition of terroir does still include human intervention. However, they describe the human contribution as the traditional and cultural heritage that characterises a particular style of wine. Perhaps this suggests that the French (and more generally the Old World) only consider humans part of terroir if they are willing to respect tradition? In this regard, the Old World vignerons see themselves as the “gatekeepers” of tradition.
When terroir was coined – the beginning
To understand the French perspective, it’s useful to remember how and when the idea of terroir originated. Terroir emerged during what was probably the most traumatic period of modern French viticultural history. In the late 19th century, one of the worst epidemics, Phylloxera, rampaged across the vineyards of Europe, and most notably France. Following the European recovery from the disaster, the concept of terroir emerged in parallel with the creation of the Appellation d’Origine Controlee (AOC) system. The two concepts were an attempt to promote the supremacy of French wine and to tie it to a sense of place which by its very definition could not easily be recreated elsewhere.
A few decades later, the famous 1976 Judgement of Paris caused another shock to the French wine world. The British wine merchant and writer Steven Spurrier organised a blind tasting competition to compare top-quality wines from France against their Californian counterparts. All the judges were French, and as the competition was blind, they assessed the wines without seeing their label. The result was controversial and caused outrage among the French. Californian wines were rated better in every single category! The French sense of pride was seriously compromised.
As a consequence of those events, it is possible that French winemakers leveraged (at least in part) their geography and geology to reaffirm their supremacy in wine. The underlying supposition was that New World winemakers can be talented, but they will never achieve French perfection since they lack a fundamental component: terroir. Quelle vengeance!
New World skepticism
So is terroir a total fabrication? An expedient notion conceived by the French vignerons’ smashed ego to restore their superiority over other wine regions? I’m sure some connoisseurs embrace that idea. Sean Thackrey, an American maverick winemaker, talked about the “viticultural racism” of the French system.
Even without going to the extreme, certain wine professionals fiercely dismiss terroir as “propaganda” or “marketing speculation”. In fact, some New World winemakers are skeptical about terroir and take an individualistic view of the winemaker.
When New World winemakers embrace terroir, they are eager to stress their role into the equation. Far from just a caretaker of tradition and soil, the New World winemaker becomes a key figure. This attitude fits perfectly with the traditional New World spirit. Since they lack tradition, the individualistic energy of the winemaker assumes great importance.
A symbiotic relationship
In my opinion, extremists of either view will forever miss the big picture of terroir. Of course marketing plays an important part in the concept of terroir but labelling it as a mere human forgery would be a mistake. Likewise, excluding the role of the winemaker is naive. The truth must be somewhere in between.
It wouldn’t be a huge leap to say that a symbiotic relationship exists between terroir and humans. The Cambridge Dictionary defines symbiosis as:
A relationship between two types of animal or plant in which each provides for the other the conditions necessary for its continued existence
I think it fits splendidly. Mother Nature, aka the terroir, provides vignerons with the raw materials such as a beautiful and perfectly exposed slope, soil with optimal drainage, a benevolent climate and plenty of sunshine. Humans, on the other hand, offer their viticultural and winemaking techniques to tend the vines and help them prosper.
Symbiotic relationships ensure the continued existence of both component parties. As long as we respect Nature (in my mind that means combat climate change and pursue sustainable practices), terroir will always offer its bountiful potential to vignerons. The latter, when conditions permit, will be eager to apply their know-how to craft great wines from superior terroir. Although it’s not a balanced relationship (after all, Anthropocene is mankind’s domination over Nature), it’s one that indubitably allows both symbionts to thrive.
Bottled poetry
I’d like to close this article with some of the most lyrical words I found on the relationship between terroir and human beings. The following is an extract from “Dreams of Elsewhere” by Scottish novelist and travel writer Robert Louis Stevenson:
Those lodes and pockets of earth, more precious than the precious ores, that yield inimitable fragrance and soft fire; those virtuous Bonanzas, where the soil has sublimated under sun and stars to something finer, and the wine is bottled poetry: these still like undiscovered chaparral conceals, thicket embowers them; the miner chips the rock and wanders farther, and the grizzly muses undisturbed. But there they bide their hour, awaiting their Columbus; and nature nurses and prepares them.
Those places are waiting for their Columbus to produce “bottled poetry”! Is that not a striking metaphor for the relationship between terroir and winemakers?
Conclusion
This article ends my three-part series dedicated to terroir on Wine and Other Stories. Here’s a brief recap of what I covered:
- Part 1 : provides a general definition of terroir, along with a brief history of the term and its evolution
- Part 2: focuses on the role of soil, a feature that is often considered paramount in defining terroir; it also explores the relationship between soil and minerality
- Part 3 (this article): deals with terroir and humans and the role of human interaction. Is it part of terroir or something completely unrelated? What’s the role of the winemaker?
I hope my articles instilled in you some of the fascination I hold towards terroir. To explore terroir is to discover places, traditions… and wine. After all, isn’t that what all the fuss is about…. Right?
Comments · 2