4 Comments
User's avatar
Mitch Cahoon's avatar

This is really an accurate take

David Mastro Scheidt's avatar

Thanks Mitch. You’ve seen a lot over the years as well, I’m sure.

Clark Smith's avatar

Well said, David. The Nattie wine critics are definitely predatory and care little for your logical arguments. As Dan Berger once told me, "I would agree with everything you just said except that then I would have no story."

I do believe we brought this on ourselves because instead of frank sharing of standard techniques and new technologies the way bartenders, brewers and TV chefs do, we claimed to "do the minimum." The Alice Feirings of the world saw the opportunity and went for the throat. If we want to break out, we have to start coming clean about how winemaking really is done.

There's no money in this business. Our honor is all we have. Yet we trade it away easily to please paparazzi that do not wish us well.

This too shall pass. While honesty will disqualify you from many of today's markets (I've given up entirely on New York City), there are still plenty of people that would rather enjoy a properly made wine from an honest practitioner. You just have to find them. As Paul McCartney put it (via Peter and Gordon), "I don't care what they say, I won't stay in a world without love."

David Mastro Scheidt's avatar

Thanks Clark.

I’ve had winemakers say in public in front of people they’ve “never made and addition or correction in 14 years”. Seriously?

It’s nonsense. That’s like saying a chef has never thrown out a creme brulee or souffle. Of course they have.

People want to believe this mystery, this alchemy, the story. And the marketing departments of wineries help perpetuate it with language like, “the perfect harvest”, “optimum conditions”, “exactly the right day” nonsense. For 20 years it’s been perfect? Damn, I’d rather be lucky than good I guess.