Masked wine and vintner gender:
the pits of anthropomorphism,
presumption and paranoia
by PHILIP WHITE
Pay a moment to a geniune winetaster's dilemma.
We have a lot of discussion about the ethics of tasting
wines unmasked and whether such products can be professionally and fairly
appraised by a taster who knows their identity.
Those who insist all wine should be evaluated blind seem
to expect that even a wine judge worth their salt can get right down to
describing the size of the tannin in the tail of a drink without once
suspecting what it was or who made it. That's like taking all the badges off,
say, a new Jaguar before delivering it to the motoring writer who's then
expected to drive it around for a week and appraise it without once suspecting
it's a Jaguar.
Lack of badging does nothing to obscure a very strong brand: obviously Kombi
But as if to test my theory to the limit, here I have a
bottle of red wine with no identifying feature at all. Inside the bottle or
out. Which is making me reconsider the templates folks like me apply when we
analyse and describe.
Like where do you start?
First, I find myself wondering what sort of car he
drives. I'm being gender specific, because I'm confident that this wine was
made by a male person. It's about the way their blend of hormones and their
environment influence their very own aroma and flavour receptors and what
they're gonna pay the workers ... all things which inevitably have their
influence over what ends up in the bottle.
Then they wallow awhile in the shiny gastroporn of their
industry and the confidence gene goes up a bit higher and suddenly they've
perished but we're all expected to pay $179.99-$403:99 a bottle.
Or, you know. Something reasonable above $450 but you fully
appreciate the effort we go to Philip.
Like these are wines of place.
There are lot of these wines out there. Dial up the oak;
pay. Dial up the fruit: try not to pay until just after you're dead; dial up
the designer. Dial up the designer. Dial up the designer.
It's cold outside on this ironstone shoulder but at least
I live in a place I revere. I get ironstorms. Go design an ironstorm.
Kerrannngkt-shooooosh! There are wines made in this. And then there are wines
made like this. Without any this.
Wines like this make me think of men who drive Rolls
Royces with bald tyres. Porsches with Volksy engines. Porsches with their own pet
men.
It has sophistry, which means its vendors are polishing
their rocket. Or their Bentley, or whatever it is. Motorsport. All that
frockin' up.
There are a lot of these wines out there.
Then the guilts spill in and I start wondering if it was
made by a female person. I'm not a reliable mathematical model but I reckon
about half the people out there fit this template and quite a lot of 'em make
wine.
At the watershed of the 'seventies and 'eighties, when
women began to graduate from Roseworthy with winemaking tickets, editors would
send the young White out to interview them as if the flavours would be
different. They also liked the photographs of the young lady winemaker on the
gantry, or halfway up the ladder.
Like when you photograph a male winemaker you make him
stand there holding a glass at the end of his arm's reach and stare at it,
transfixed like a zombie. But female winemakers need to pose like Betty Grable
on the aluminium ladder or lean deep and low over a bunghole.
Maybe the person who made this tragic compromise of a
drink is indeed a female but one who did it to the orders of a male boss. I try
to keep up with my industrial psychology papers and I've been chewing up every
morsel published about Imposter's Syndrome for forty years and I reckon that
amongst the winemakers this disease is much more intensively spread through the
males who pump out wines like this.
So this wine could have been made like this by a person
without a penis and no particular interest in having one but a firmly vested
interest in pleasing a person who pretty obviously has one but deserves no
special attention at all for fitting that appellation. And thus quite
deservedly suffers Imposter's Syndrome.
Sometimes during the last five glasses - big ones; one
left - I thought this might have been made in or from Langhorne Creek. It has
that typical Langhorne Creek Wolf Blass Bilyara Nuriootpa regionality about it.
Don't ask me what it is: it could be Cabernet. It could be Shiraz. It could be
a blend of the two. It might have some Merlot in it. How could anybody tell?
Go back Philip. You'd better write some descriptors. But
the damn bottle has no label.
Now let's think about this a minute. On the one hand, you
got a bloke worrying about whether this ordinary booze was made by a male or a
female. Something he doesn't usually think about.
Old shibboleths. Fading phantoms. Legals.
Then he's worried about how many decades of expediture
and heartbreak it took to get the thing into bottle like this.
And then they send it to the very bloke they're hoping
will lift their poor arse somehow and get
them through all this with a bit of a write-up and they don't put a
label on the bottle. No trade mark; nothing. Not even a scrawl of white texta.
I get these a lot. Like not every day but two or three a
month. And somehow the Stalinist blank of the unbranded bottle seems more
powerful than most wines of similar quality which have been blessed with that
other equally restrictive luxury of labels.
Which leads us the quality of the drink. Can we talk?
Why do so many of these unlabelled tasting samples taste
the same. Like same maker. Same publisher. Similar quality. Same amount of
product in the sales manager's hair. And there you are, wondering that if you review
it harshly you might be sexist.
Or worse, you have a crush on the maker who's not
permitted to fraternise lest her afterhours racket is exposed and you go round
to her joint unannounced to clear the air and you discover her girlfriend calls
her Brad.
I dunno. They probly got a Fiano, people like that.
And now I'm the one with the Imposter's Syndrome.