The DOC (or DO, or AOC): Nobody Does it Better

At a bad restaurant in Hollywood with an even worse wine list, I was having drinks with some non-wine business colleagues. When someone mentioned that they really like Viognier, I mentioned how much I loved French Viognier from the Northern Rhone. A complaint came up about French wines and how you “never know what you’re drinking.” “Well, of course you know what you’re drinking,” I replied. “You’re drinking a Northern Rhone white wine.” “No, but you don’t know what type of grape, it’s not on the label.”

I then attempted to explain that most of the world’s wine regions don’t list grape varietals on the labels, but it was loud and we were drinking and it’s tough to convey the finer nuances of that point. So now, here it is.

The varietal labeling of wine as we know it is a very modern phenomenon. It was popularized in California by Robert Mondavi in the 1960s. Prior to that–and even today with inexpensive jug wines–California wine was usually labeled with a broad moniker like “Burgundy” or “Chablis,” meant to vaguely evoke what Old World-style of wine it was (allegedly) similar to. As recently as 2005 when I was working as a waiter in a very good restaurant in a wine-educated community I still had to explain to many customers that Chablis was, in fact, excellent wine from France, not a jug wine from Carlo Rossi.

By labeling his wines by varietal, Mondavi pushed California wine into the fine wine realm as there was now something that wine drinkers could latch onto and wrap their minds around–I like Chardonnay more than Sauvignon Blanc, for instance. As opposed to: I like Paul Masson better than Franzia.

So varietal labeling in the rapidly growing California fine wine business became the norm and much of the New World–Oregon, Washington, Australia, New Zealand–followed suit.

But with a few notable exceptions, the Old World doesn’t label their wines by grape varietal. Instead, wines are labeled based on regional designations of varying specificity. Each labeling requirement has different specific wine making regulations and in order to label your wine as “Bordeaux,” for instance, you have to abide by certain rules that go beyond what grapes varietals are in the wine.

In domestic wine there are basically just two requirements: 1, if you label your wine with an American Viticultural Area (AVA) distinction (i.e. Napa Valley AVA), at least 85% of the wine in the bottle must come from that AVA; 2, if you label your wine by varietal (i.e. Chardonnay) the wine must be from at least 75% of that varietal–though the state of Oregon has a more stringent 95% varietal requirement for labeling certain wines.

But that’s it–there are no requirements on barrel aging, what other grapes can be in the blend, or how long the wine must be held in the bottle before being released to the consumer, for instance. It’s just location and varietal. And while convention has resulted in certain varietals being more common in certain AVAs, there is no requirement that a Napa Valley AVA white wine has to be made from Chardonnay. Wine makers can–and do–use many different grapes. While there have been some local efforts to come up with more specific regional requirements, these attempts haven’t gone very far.

The idea behind the Old World model is that if you’re making Burgundy or Chianti Classico and you’re trading on that name, all the producers in the region have a vested interest in ensuring that all wines produced from that region live up to the region’s reputation. Sometimes regulations are determined collectively by the producers within the region, sometimes regulations come from a regional or national authority. A good Cotes-du-Rhone is more than just certain grapes from a certain place: it’s how the wine is made. This way, you don’t have wines as disparate as Charles Shaw and Opus One sharing the same appellation.

Different governing bodies have different degrees of rigor in their labeling requirements–generally the more globally prestigious and historic the designation the more stringent the regulations–Burgundy has more specific labeling requirements than the Languedoc. Burgundy also has many smaller AOC’s (Appellation d’Origine Controllee) within the broader “Bourgogne” AOC which have their own specific requirements.

(We shouldn’t forget that the appellation system still allows for wine makers to capitalize on their own reputation too–Francois Villard, for instance, is an excellent French wine maker who makes both AOC wines and varietal-labeled Vin de Pays wines in the Rhone Valley. There are many other wine makers across Europe doing the same thing.)

Some times regional regulatory bodies are too restrictive and maverick wine makers or groups of wine makers will openly flaunt the regulations and make whatever wine they want, opting to produce wine with a broader regional (Vin de Pays) or national (Vin de Table) label.

This motivation spawned a new classification of wine in Italy, the “Super Tuscan” which are blends of Italian and French Varietals. By regulation, these wines could only be called “Table Wines,” but because of the unique quality of the wines and the efforts of the wine makers they successfully changed the regulations, creating the Indicazione Geografica Tipica (IGT) classification. This compromise noted that these wines lacked the regulatory rigor of the DOC (Denominazione di Origine Controllata) designation while maintaining a level of quality and regional uniqueness beyond that of a Table Wine. These Super Tuscans are some of the most expensive wines in Italy. Prominent wine makers in Spain and Portugal have also opted to go with broader regional designations and over time successfully lobbied their DO’s and DOC’s to change some of their regulations, bringing them back into the fold.

But I think exceptions like this prove the rule and specific regional labeling requirements are a better way to understand fine wine than varietal labeling. Ensuring a consistency of style year-to-year is more important in establishing a reputation for quality than merely trading on something as malleable and capricious as a grape varietal. Although different varietals have different unique flavors, they can also be heavily manipulated. “Chardonnay” can be rich and heavily oaked or crisp and clean. “Riesling” can be sweet or bone dry. “Sauvignon Blanc” can be elegant and aromatic or smell like sweaty gym socks and cat pee (which is elegant and aromatic to some, I suppose). You have to know the particular wine making style of that producer to ensure that you’re getting the style of wine you want.

And of course, requiring only 75% of a varietal in the wine means that that Pinot Noir you’re drinking might be 20+% Zinfandel or Syrah (and if you paid less than $15 for it, it probably is).

About these ads

About David D.

I'm a wine professional. Like a real one who makes most of his living in wine and have for most of my adult life. I also write, but you can see that.
This entry was posted in Armchair Philosophy, Dispatches From Academia, Wine & Cheese and tagged , , , , , . Bookmark the permalink.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s