Log In / Join Now

Drinking Out Loud

Cool About Wine?

Is a lack of emotional commitment the modern wine way?
Photo by: Jon Moe
Matt Kramer says the sheer abundance of fine wines available now encourages enophiles to play the field.

Matt Kramer
Posted: December 1, 2015

It's a contemporary wine paradox: The more wines we have to choose from, the less emotionally committed we become. This is unique to our time. Indeed, you could go so far as to say that it's a 21st-century phenomenon, so recent is it.

On the surface, the problem—if that's the word—is sheer abundance. Anyone who follows wine in the United States, and to a lesser but still significant degree in Great Britain, knows that we're seeing today a diversity and abundance of wines never previously witnessed. It's thrilling, stimulating and, above all, overwhelming. It's also, in a strange way, emotionally numbing. Allow me to explain.

It wasn't so long ago—just 15 or 20 years back—when anyone with an interest in fine wine sampled the offerings and landed on just a few squares, at most. You became first intrigued by and then enthralled with red Bordeaux. Or California wines. Or Italian wines. Or Burgundy.

The selection in each category was significantly more limited than it is today, especially at the highest quality level. The expansion of the ranks of top-quality producers in California, Italy and France, to say nothing of Spain or Portugal, was explosive and is still ongoing. Even the seemingly sanctified classified-growths of Bordeaux were not, in fact, anywhere near as uniformly high-performing as they are now.

But what was really different then was us. When our high-quality choices were fewer, we were more inclined to emotionally commit. You were a Burgundy guy or gal. Or you were utterly devoted to the subtleties and distinctions of red Bordeaux. (Famously, these two wine-emotion cohorts never intermixed.)

Italian wines, for their part, seemed to attract a very particular group. You would think that the natural affinity set would be Americans of Italian descent—and they certainly were present in quantity. But I venture to suggest that the real emotional affiliation for Italian wines came from those of us non-Italians longing to warm our hands, figuratively speaking, in front of what I like to call the Great Italian Fire. We loved their passion, their unapologetic individuality, and for some the fact that it wasn't French.

Everything about French wines back then seemed fussy; Italian wines (and their producers), in comparison, seemed unfussed and warmly welcoming. Also, Italian wines offered an alternative vision and vocabulary of wine beauty and culture than what we had previously received from France. Ditto for California and its wines.

The key point is that you committed. You threw yourself ever deeper into your chosen wine or culture. You traveled to California and practically rolled in the catnip of its freewheeling wine culture. You liked its easy and casual accessibility. (Believe me, meeting the winemaker at a big Bordeaux château was rare. You were received by the export director or, for a fortunate few, the owner.)

This sense of emotional commitment has largely evaporated today, with the noteworthy exception of local wines. (More about that in a moment.) Wine lovers today are so inundated with so many fine wines from so many places on the globe that the idea of wine monogamy seems silly, even futile. It surely seems unnecessary.

It's easy enough to see the gain in today's wine abundance. But have we lost something worthwhile as well? I believe that we have. And it's not, as you might think, a matter of sentimental loyalty. Rather, what we've lost—to some degree, anyway—is the kind of understanding that comes with deep affinity.

Emotional commitment means, in part, accepting a wine on its terms rather than just yours. Your own prior preference is set to one side. For example, if you were committed emotionally to Italian wines it meant contending with tastes and styles that certainly were different from anything you previously knew or liked. In some cases you may very well have been puzzled or even disturbed. (Think of such unusual Italian wines as Vin Santo or Amarone, or the high-acid, food-necessary likes of Barbera.)

But you stayed the course. After all, you were committed. You studied the individual culture, its cuisine, its often highly localized aesthetic. (Think Sherry. Or old-style Rioja.) Eventually you "got" it. The wines made sense.

Does this exist today? Sure it does. But I would submit that it's not to the same degree. Our wine choices are so rich and so far-flung as to very nearly preclude the possibility of such a level of emotional commitment. Certainly, there's little incentive.

As mentioned previously, the sole shining exception to this is local wines. A powerful sense of identification now seems, to this observer, to be invested with wines produced close to one’s sense of “home.”

Only with local wines—Oregon wine lovers, Washington wine lovers, California wine lovers—do I see the same sort of emotion and almost obsessive attention that once was lavished on wines from afar. The same is true, by the way, among wine lovers in Australia and New Zealand. (You want a sense of what I'm talking about? Think craft beers. Now, there's emotional commitment.)

Naturally, there will always be strong followings for one or another wine. But the need, or desire, for emotional commitment and identification is largely gone.

Am I wrong in my perception? Do you think that what I've described is as present today as it was in the past?

And above all, is it even desirable? Or is today's cooler, more informed, even forensic, approach to wine a preferable way to be?

Rick Jones
Mesquite Texas USA —  December 1, 2015 1:06pm ET
You are not wrong in your perception. The field has gotten way too big for an average amigo like me to keep up, especially financially. What I see happening for me and among my wine loving friends is we are making choices. We don't pick one here and one there from all over the world but tend to find an area we like and stick to it. For me, opposites attract as Italy and Oregon vie for my wine dollar. The somewhat negative effect of this is I don't follow near as closely to news from all the wine producing areas as I used to. As you say there are so many I just don't have time. The result is I am buying less from the rest of Europe and Australia. I sometimes wonder what I am missing but I just can't afford to find out.
Douglas Clover
Fairfax VA USA —  December 1, 2015 9:40pm ET
The statistics say I'm playing the field - I have wine from 16 countries in my small cellar. I've visited "wine country" in Napa, Bordeaux, Monterrey, Sonoma, Santa Barbara (which I value more than the average person), Mosel, Columbia Valley, South Australia, and, last month Burgundy. Despite the fact that my normal answer to a sommelier's question, "what kind of wine do you like?" is "I like good wine," I do have some sort of emotional attachment to Burgundy. I went there with high expectations, and they were exceeded. For me, these wines elevate above mere objective ratings, and the best are close to a spiritual experience. I believe it's possible to be on both sides of this question - when I am shopping for value, I have no geographic loyalty (if that's forensic approach, OK), but I am still more prone to get silly with a Burgundy purchase than any other locale.
michael brill
San Francisco, CA —  December 2, 2015 9:44am ET
Really great post... infinite choice destroys loyalty. Why go on a second date when there's a pool of [hopefully] hotter candidates a click away?

Sticking with the dating analogy, what gets people on a second and third date? What compels them to get married and learn each other better than themselves?

Now look at what wineries offer. One sloppy first date where things went too far and then... nothing. The winery is back on hotcustomers.com looking for the next big thing. Maybe there's a booty call club shipment but that gets tired really quickly. Back at hotwines.com, there's a cute Portugese wine that likes walks on the beach, dogs and is only $14.99. I'll try that.

I agree with you that there is pleasure that comes with knowing something in depth, but wineries (and the entire industry) need to *create* the basis for long-term relationships. Otherwise there's just too much excitement about the possibilities of the next click.
Tone Kelly
Rochester NY USA —  December 2, 2015 1:19pm ET
A very interesting observation about commitment. I too was emotionally committed to Bordeaux for several decades. Oh, I sometimes tried Burgundy, Rhone, and even the occasional Italian bottle - all of which I liked but I couldn't get my head around them. By the 1990s I was trying more California and Australia as their winemaking got both better and more widely known.

But in the early 2000s I started into Burgundy. By 2007 was heavily invested in Burgundy. For me Burgundy is the end game, not because it is better than any other wine but because I am emotionally connected to the aromatics and the elegance of mature Burgundies. There is an emotional connection that I haven't found elsewhere.

Sometimes people just dabble and sometimes it takes a while to find one's true love.
Stuart Grostern
London —  December 2, 2015 5:15pm ET

Well written article but overly simplistic.

Many enthusiasts (including me) start with an inclination, that germ of knowledge we acquire that sparks the interest and turns into obsession. We tend to get deeper before we go broader. It's our way of figuring out that wine is interesting in its own right for the characteristics and experience. Some of us don't venture broadly, and some love the mere idea of infinite variety of vintages, varietals, blends, terroirs, makers, etc.

I disagree with the idea that there was a 'then' and a 'now' where 'then' is characterized by people who were only deep and attached, and the 'now' people are wide and detached emotionally. Choice has allowed the us and the them to move fluidly across the wine spectrum, sampling the diversity and enabling all to live in the wonder of the diverse availability we are lucky to experience now.

I, for one, am emotionally attached to a very wide set of wines, many quite deeply based on the number of profound experiences, visits to the specials sites and a general enthusiasm for continual learning.

So, great article but I think you've oversimplified for the sake of controversy.

Also one correction. London is THE centre of the universe for wine diversity....


Would you like to comment? Want to join or start a discussion?

Become a WineSpectator.com member and you can!
To protect the quality of our conversations, only members may submit comments. Member benefits include access to more than 315,000 reviews in our Wine Ratings Search; a first look at ratings in our Insider, Advance and Tasting Highlights; Value Wines; the Personal Wine List/My Cellar tool, hundreds of wine-friendly recipes and more.

WineRatings+ app: Download now for 340,000+ ratings.