NYTimes: Asimov On Drinking Local

EricAsimov has an interesting article in today's NYTimes:
Asimov:DrinkingLocal

Eric makes a very well-reasoned and cogent argument for dismissing the whining of many local winemakers that the local restaurants, part of the "locovore" movement, should extend that concept to wines and feature the local wines exclusively. He points out that wine, unlike greens and berries, are not a fragile commodity.
Eric also (correctly) points out that a local cusine eventually adapts to go well with the local wines. But this, obviously, takes decades and centuries to evolve.
He points out the Calif restaurants have been scorning the overblown/alcoholic/food-nonfriendly wines that receive huge scores from Monktown attournies in favor of more restrained/elegant/food-friendly wines from Europe. And that has had a strong feedback to (some) winemakers to make more balanced/restrained/food-friendly wines. Very good point, I think.
Anyway...very nicely done article (as usual) by Eric that contains a lot of original thoughts. Count on this theme to be picked up by the numerous folks writing in the blogosphere who are so incestuous and seldom offer up an original thought.
Tom

I still think it's pretty jerky for a restaurant in NYC to have no (or just 1-2 token) NY wines, and ditto for an SF Bay area restaurant and California. The notion that they can't find any to match their cooking is BS. Food-wine matching experiences vary widely depending on the palate and experience of the diner, and there are very few rules that apply to everyone or even a large majority. For the vast majority of restaurants, it's really impossible for me to believe that NO wines from a decent wine region would match up with at least a few of the dishes served.

Asimov cites four reasons in his article for the local movement.

Food authorities have argued convincingly that the public benefits politically, environmentally, ethically and culinarily from eating local ingredients and supporting local agriculture.

Yet he only addresses environmental, which he essentially dismisses, and culinary. He ignores the other points and does not even consider economic reasons worth listing.

I agree with the need for local wine to be quality wine but for that to happen takes time. Proper sites need to be developed. Best grapes for the area need to be determined as well as the best methods to grow the grapes. Winemakers have to be able to learn how to turn the better fruit into better wine. Without support for the local wines, this may not happen. If it does happen, it takes a much longer time and becomes dependent upon a few brave (and rich) individuals who think they can turn a sow's ear into a silk purse.

Essentially, its a huge catch 22. If everyone says that they don't need to support local wines because they are not quality, then the wineries won't have the cash flow needed to pursue quality. The result is a lot of semi-sweet plonk. From my experience, that is what pays the bills at wineries in Indiana, Ohio, Pennsylvania, West Virginia, Maryland, New Jersey, and to a lesser extent Virginia and New York.

I still think it's pretty jerky for a restaurant in NYC to have no (or just 1-2 token) NY wines, and ditto for an SF Bay area restaurant and California. The notion that they can't find any to match their cooking is BS. Food-wine matching experiences vary widely depending on the palate and experience of the diner, and there are very few rules that apply to everyone or even a large majority. For the vast majority of restaurants, it's really impossible for me to believe that NO wines from a decent wine region would match up with at least a few of the dishes served.

Christian, I'll agree with you insofar as NY wineries could use the boost given to them by placement on NYC restaurants' wine lists, but I don't think that it's jerky at all for an SFBA restaurant to have a wine list with no CA wines. It's not as if the CA wine industry has problems with name recognition or acceptance by the public, after all. Yes, I wish that more restaurants had Steve Edmunds's wines on them, and Arnot-Roberts and some others, but the reality is that there are plenty of restaurants there that have CA-centric wine lists, so where's the problem?

Mark Lipton

I still think it's pretty jerky for a restaurant in NYC to have no (or just 1-2 token) NY wines, and ditto for an SF Bay area restaurant and California. The notion that they can't find any to match their cooking is BS. Food-wine matching experiences vary widely depending on the palate and experience of the diner, and there are very few rules that apply to everyone or even a large majority. For the vast majority of restaurants, it's really impossible for me to believe that NO wines from a decent wine region would match up with at least a few of the dishes served.

I will never forget the time my wife and I were touring the celler at a high end DC restaurant. The Somm was showing us around and then he points over to a corner of the cellar and says "The California Cabs are over there. They don't go with anything on the menu but we sure sell a hell of a lot of it."

I still think it's pretty jerky for a restaurant in NYC to have no (or just 1-2 token) NY wines, and ditto for an SF Bay area restaurant and California. The notion that they can't find any to match their cooking is BS. Food-wine matching experiences vary widely depending on the palate and experience of the diner, and there are very few rules that apply to everyone or even a large majority. For the vast majority of restaurants, it's really impossible for me to believe that NO wines from a decent wine region would match up with at least a few of the dishes served.

Christian, I'll agree with you insofar as NY wineries could use the boost given to them by placement on NYC restaurants' wine lists, but I don't think that it's jerky at all for an SFBA restaurant to have a wine list with no CA wines. It's not as if the CA wine industry has problems with name recognition or acceptance by the public, after all. Yes, I wish that more restaurants had Steve Edmunds's wines on them, and Arnot-Roberts and some others, but the reality is that there are plenty of restaurants there that have CA-centric wine lists, so where's the problem?

Mark Lipton

As you point out, it's not a serious problem. My irritation is with the attitude that no California wine is worthy of the list, because: (a) I accept that they have a certain preferred style(s), but it's lazy not to make an effort to find California wines that fit it; (b) if they don't like the more popular styles of CA wines, it would help if they encouraged alternate styles, and there are some lists where you can see that being done; (c) the pretense that the food-matching paradigm they have chosen applies to all palates has no scientific basis at all as far as I can tell. I also think it's not very good business sense if you have a restaurant frequented by tourists, especially if they are coming from cities with already French/Italian-dominated wine lists, but that's another story.

...Essentially, its a huge catch 22. If everyone says that they don't need to support local wines because they are not quality, then the wineries won't have the cash flow needed to pursue quality. The result is a lot of semi-sweet plonk. From my experience, that is what pays the bills at wineries in Indiana, Ohio, Pennsylvania, West Virginia, Maryland, New Jersey, and to a lesser extent Virginia and New York.

This is a good point, although luckily for them, the local wineries are not completely dependent on the somms to support their industry. Of course, semi-sweet doesn't have to be plonk (paging Mr. Donhoff); for example there's some terrific Kabinett-Spatlese styled Vignoles, Traminette, Riesling etc. being made in Michigan, NY, Missouri. But then you run into another canard of modern restaurant wine service, that only dry wines go with most foods.

Looking at this from an European perspective, I expect restaurants in wine growing regions to benefit from local knowledge to make a shrewd selection of local wines. That doesn't, however, preclude a selection from other regions as well but I would take a dim view of a restaurant with no local wines at all. This used to be quite common in very up-market restaurants in France which often snobbed the local produce in favour of prestigious Bordeaux, Burgundy and Champagne but I think that those days are now passed.

When I am travelling, I like to chose a local wine and am disappointed where the selection is lazy in the sense that it relies exclusively on large well-known producers such as Jadot, Guigal, Hugel, Antinori, etc., excellent though these are, and ignores smaller artisan estates. It has happened several times that the sommelier has guided me to a certain wine where I have visited and bought at the estate the next day.

Of course, not all regions offer a wide selection of wine types. For example, robust reds are not to easy to find from local production in Alsace, Germany and Champagne, though the Pinot Noir/Spätburgunder has been putting on some weight in recent years and fortified dessert wines are only made in a few places. However, decent bubbly is more widespread than many people think and I like to order a local one as apéritif, where possible.

Eric also (correctly) points out that a local cusine eventually adapts to go well with the local wines. But this, obviously, takes decades and centuries to evolve.

I alway thought it was exactly the other way around? As an example, wasn't Pauillac "famous" for lamb way before wine? And didn't the wine evolve (from something much sweeter) not the food? Doesn't the flag have a lamb on it? Maybe this is an Old World vs. New World thing. I just can't imagine in Italy the cuisine adapting to the wine.

Eric also (correctly) points out that a local cusine eventually adapts to go well with the local wines. But this, obviously, takes decades and centuries to evolve.

I alway thought it was exactly the other way around? As an example, wasn't Pauillac "famous" for lamb way before wine? And didn't the wine evolve (from something much sweeter) not the food? Doesn't the flag have a lamb on it? Maybe this is an Old World vs. New World thing. I just can't imagine in Italy the cuisine adapting to the wine.

Perhaps in some cases they "evolved" together as a match, but let's remember that many of the better known wines of the world are such because of a history of export and trading. This was true in ancient days too, as wine as a good was both fairly stable and already had various grades of quality and desirability in the market. So influence on wine style was already coming from outside the local food culture. However, in modern days with oenotourism so important, I am quite sure that many chefs in well-known wine regions make a concious effort to adapt their cuisine to the local wines.

There used to be a very good reason for drinking local wines... compatibility with local cuisine. In Europe and other older regions, the regional cuisine and regional wine often developed simultaneously, and since shipping, or mercantile commerce was not as easily done, chances are that both the wine and cuisine would remain largely local. Of course, under those circumstances, it is natural for one to develop an affinity for the other. But in the new regions, we rarely have examples of distinguishable local cuisine located in wine producing regions. Perhaps the Chesapeake Bay area will develop wines which ultimately provide a match to its seafood-oriented cuisine, but globalization has largely created a situation where there is no regional cuisine, just a melting pot of others from elsewhere. Shipping is now commonplace, so it is natural that we can pick and choose wines to match the food we are eating.

...Essentially, its a huge catch 22. If everyone says that they don't need to support local wines because they are not quality, then the wineries won't have the cash flow needed to pursue quality. The result is a lot of semi-sweet plonk. From my experience, that is what pays the bills at wineries in Indiana, Ohio, Pennsylvania, West Virginia, Maryland, New Jersey, and to a lesser extent Virginia and New York.

This is a good point, although luckily for them, the local wineries are not completely dependent on the somms to support their industry. Of course, semi-sweet doesn't have to be plonk (paging Mr. Donhoff); for example there's some terrific Kabinett-Spatlese styled Vignoles, Traminette, Riesling etc. being made in Michigan, NY, Missouri. But then you run into another canard of modern restaurant wine service, that only dry wines go with most foods.

Agree that semi-sweet does not have to be plonk. The point is that striving for quality takes resources (time and money). Cutting corners in the vineyard and the winery to conserve cash flow often results in an inferior product. Leaving that product with some RS masks somewhat the inferior nature while making it easier to sell the the tourist/weekend wine drinker crowd. Pricing it below $10/btl also helps a lot. The result is more often than not cheap plonk.

...Essentially, its a huge catch 22. If everyone says that they don't need to support local wines because they are not quality, then the wineries won't have the cash flow needed to pursue quality. The result is a lot of semi-sweet plonk. From my experience, that is what pays the bills at wineries in Indiana, Ohio, Pennsylvania, West Virginia, Maryland, New Jersey, and to a lesser extent Virginia and New York.

This is a good point, although luckily for them, the local wineries are not completely dependent on the somms to support their industry. Of course, semi-sweet doesn't have to be plonk (paging Mr. Donhoff); for example there's some terrific Kabinett-Spatlese styled Vignoles, Traminette, Riesling etc. being made in Michigan, NY, Missouri. But then you run into another canard of modern restaurant wine service, that only dry wines go with most foods.

Agree that semi-sweet does not have to be plonk. The point is that striving for quality takes resources (time and money). Cutting corners in the vineyard and the winery to conserve cash flow often results in an inferior product. Leaving that product with some RS masks somewhat the inferior nature while making it easier to sell the the tourist/weekend wine drinker crowd. Pricing it below $10/btl also helps a lot. The result is more often than not cheap plonk.

And we could add that a lot of the wineries in "newer" regions are further down the learning curve, viticulturally and in winemaking experience, with fewer educational and industry resources to draw on.

Interesting article. Many of the farmers' markets where I live have local wineries represented there - not that Massachusetts is necessarily the easiest place to grow grapes. I've tried a decent number of Massachusetts wines over the past five years or so, and some of them are actually very good. Westport Rivers Winery makes some very nice sparkling wines, and their still wines are improving.

have seen a fair number of Finger Lakes restos featuring FL wines, ditto re Long Island restos featuring LI wines..What I have not seen is a lot of NYC, Albany, Syracuse, Rochester etc restos doing much re NY wines. Part of the problem in NY may very well be that the NY wines do not compete well pricewise , for a restaurant, that is a big problem..Flagship of Finger Lakes, for instance, is reisling, and there are a ton of inexpensive German reislings out there..FL and LI do a nice job re chard but once again, there are a lot of good chards at all ranges of the price spectrum out there..FL not that great re reds , LI better in that regard but..once again, good LI reds are kinda pricy. Frankly, I don't think the restaurant going folk in the large NY cities are even looking for NY wines when they check out the wine lists in the restos they frequent...I grew up on Long Island, now live upstate NY, not far from wine country, have a few NY wines in the cellar, mostly Wolffer and Paumonauk from LI, Damiani, Knapp and Lamoreaux Landing for the FL's and will confess that.I don't actively seek them out when I look at a wine list.

have seen a fair number of Finger Lakes restos featuring FL wines, ditto re Long Island restos featuring LI wines..What I have not seen is a lot of NYC, Albany, Syracuse, Rochester etc restos doing much re NY wines. Part of the problem in NY may very well be that the NY wines do not compete well pricewise , for a restaurant, that is a big problem..Flagship of Finger Lakes, for instance, is reisling, and there are a ton of inexpensive German reislings out there..FL and LI do a nice job re chard but once again, there are a lot of good chards at all ranges of the price spectrum out there..FL not that great re reds , LI better in that regard but..once again, good LI reds are kinda pricy. Frankly, I don't think the restaurant going folk in the large NY cities are even looking for NY wines when they check out the wine lists in the restos they frequent...I grew up on Long Island, now live upstate NY, not far from wine country, have a few NY wines in the cellar, mostly Wolffer and Paumonauk from LI, Damiani, Knapp and Lamoreaux Landing for the FL's and will confess that.I don't actively seek them out when I look at a wine list.

That makes ultimate sense, Jon. Since you live close to those wines. But when I visit NYC/LI, those are the wines I would want to try.
I quite much like the things that ChristopherTracey is doing at ChanningDaughters on LI. And, on the A16 list in SanFrancisco (of all places),
I discovered the RedTailRidge Rieslings, that impressed me. Nancy Ireland is doing some really interesting things (Lemberger, Teroldego)
there at RTR.
Tom

...Flagship of Finger Lakes, for instance, is reisling, and there are a ton of inexpensive German reislings out there..

I'd disagree on FL Riesling pricing, I see plenty of decent ones around at $12-18 and even leaders Frank and Wiemer are $15-20 for their very good basic bottlings. Most sub-$15 German Riesling these days seems to be "brands" or house wines, although they can be good too. A lot of top artisanal German Riesling, even at Kabinett level, has moved above $20. Looks to me like pricing is about even, although you could argue that as the new kids on the block, the Finger Lakes should price slightly under the established benchmarks.

CM: not to prolong this but, there is no FL reisling that can touch the basic Donnhoff, available in my area for $20-$22 and, from a QPR point of view, no FL reislings can compare with Urban(from St Urbans Hof) at <$10..just to name 2 examples..I have Donnhoff, Urban and St UrbanHofs, Richter, Minges, Loosen, Lietz etc in the cellar and 0 FL reislings..My FL wines are Damiani : Cab Franc,and SB, Knapp: chard and Lamoreaux: Gewurtz

Here in North Carolina, there are some very small producers working with vitis vinifera; few of them are in commercial distribution, and most of those are not much more than ordinary (although Sean McRitchie has made a little magic with cabernet franc). The volume stuff is muscadine. Ever try a muscadine wine? No?

There is also Biltmore, which produces wine in volume for tourist consumption.

I find it hard to get worked up about whether restaurants offer local wines. I'd rather focus on the globalization of wine availability, which is one of the boons of modern civilization. I mean, how else would we have discovered the compatibility of German and Austrian wines with Asian cuisine?

Here in North Carolina, there are some very small producers working with vitis vinifera; few of them are in commercial distribution, and most of those are not much more than ordinary (although Sean McRitchie has made a little magic with cabernet franc).

I had a Childress white (Chard I think) a number of years ago that was actually quite nice. Liked it so much that on my next visit to NC I bought half a case but it was the next vintage. Big mistake. Nothing else I have tried from NC has been worth talking about but I don't get there regularly these days and it has been a few years since I last tried anything from that area.

CM: not to prolong this but, there is no FL reisling that can touch the basic Donnhoff, available in my area for $20-$22 and, from a QPR point of view, no FL reislings can compare with Urban(from St Urbans Hof) at <$10..just to name 2 examples..I have Donnhoff, Urban and St UrbanHofs, Richter, Minges, Loosen, Lietz etc in the cellar and 0 FL reislings..My FL wines are Damiani : Cab Franc,and SB, Knapp: chard and Lamoreaux: Gewurtz

That's a statement of opinion, not fact (although in the case of Donhoff it comes close). Personally, Wiemer's semi-dry Riesling is one of my favorites in its price range, from anywhere. I thought Loosen's Blue Slate Riesling was brilliant QPR, but prices have gone up a lot, at least here out west. One inroad for FL Riesling might be wines by keg, if the restaurants can pass on some of the savings. I've seen a number of placements in NYC wine bars and restaurants lately.

Its easy for others to tell restaurants what they should, or shouldn't do, but in the end they have one job - stay solvent. If they can offer some local wines within that mandate, great - good for them, but suggestions often exceed that all the way to "Why don't they have exclusively local wine?" (Uh - because it would be economic suicide, maybe?)

Most restaurants sell whatever sells and view any secondary mandate to educate as something that they'll do only if the wines they expose that way will also sell. You can't expect them to try and educate people about local wines if it costs them shelf space and money when those wines sit there month after month while the public prefers other (often admittedly less food friendly) wines.

Its easy for others to tell restaurants what they should, or shouldn't do, but in the end they have one job - stay solvent. If they can offer some local wines within that mandate, great - good for them, but suggestions often exceed that all the way to "Why don't they have exclusively local wine?" (Uh - because it would be economic suicide, maybe?)

Most restaurants sell whatever sells and view any secondary mandate to educate as something that they'll do only if the wines they expose that way will also sell. You can't expect them to try and educate people about local wines if it costs them shelf space and money when those wines sit there month after month while the public prefers other (often admittedly less food friendly) wines.

These are all excellent points, except that the restaurants that people are complaining about here (and probably the ones that Asimov frequents) are typically big on searching out obscure new regions and wines elsewhere in the world, not just stocking things that sell themselves off a wine list. We all know this type of list: 2 Gruners, 3 Albarinos, a Ribolla and a Picpoul for every California Chardonnay or Pinot Grigio. That's OK, and a wine-oriented restaurant can get away with this, because to some extent they can create demand by hand-selling and trading on their own reputation for good taste. So why not put a similar effort into the backyard wines?

Here in North Carolina, there are some very small producers working with vitis vinifera; few of them are in commercial distribution, and most of those are not much more than ordinary (although Sean McRitchie has made a little magic with cabernet franc).

I had a Childress white (Chard I think) a number of years ago that was actually quite nice. Liked it so much that on my next visit to NC I bought half a case but it was the next vintage. Big mistake. Nothing else I have tried from NC has been worth talking about but I don't get there regularly these days and it has been a few years since I last tried anything from that area.

Childress (owned by NASCAR team owner Richard Childress) made some decent wines in the mid '00s. If I have my chronology correct, shortly afterward they brought in Mark Friszolowski, who'd made a big rep at Pindar on Long Island. Surprisingly, I thought the wines lost some quality after that.

Anyway, the larger point is, of what use is it for restaurants to promote "backyard" wines when the wines are clearly subpar?