Dr. Ron Jackson Wine Science, Perception, pt.3
Ξ May 6th, 2010 | → 0 Comments | ∇ A Day at a Time, Interviews, Technology, Wine & Politics, Wine News |
I am more than a little sad this is the final part of my interview with Dr. Ron S. Jackson. During the hour and a half we spoke, I found him a very generous, open individual. And I insisted that I reserved the right to write him with technical questions that will most certainly arise on a blog such as mine. Dr. Jackson readily agreed. His door is open. What greater reward for my effort is there than this?
Part 1, Principles
Part 2, Practice
Admin Perhaps you could provide us with your general take on the differences between ’sustainable’, ‘organic’, and ‘biodynamic’ viticulture with respect to the health of the soil.
Ron Jackson O.k. About biodynamic I cannot and do not want to say anything. Organic, I can talk to that more acceptably. Certainly if a winegrower is going to use organic fertilizers, then the soil will have and maintain more compost. Depending on how you treat the soil, your soil will be microbially more complex; and complexity in microbial ecosystems normally means stability. Now, does that mean the vine is going to be better nourished? That is another question. And I’m not so sure. All I can with certainty say is that the stability of the soil will be improved. The availability of nutrients to the vine, that is a much more moot point because if you have drip irrigation, for example, and you’re a savvy viticulturalist who applies nutrients at the appropriate time and in the appropriate amounts, then your vine will be super well nourished. But your soil could be as poor as pure sand. The vine would still grow very well, fully nourished; you can limit the amount of water so that you can control the growth of the vine. In some sense, with drip irrigation used sensibly under certain conditions, you can simply tell the vine what to do and when. You can dictate to the vine how and when to grow. You have much more control than under organic conditions in which case you’re basically allowing things to develop as quote nature unquote permits under the conditions of that year.
Now, if you want to have control then obviously the modern way is better because you’ll have more consistency from year to year. If you want to produce excellent wine at minimal cost, that is the way to go. I would say that it is impossible to have consistency and high quality with organic viticulture at low cost. So it depends who you’re selling to. If people want the organic, they believe in that, and are willing to pay more; they like the aspect that they may like the wine this year but may not the next year, and they buy into that whole cultural element, then that’s fine. I’ve nothing against that. People can chose what they want. They’re the ones doing the buying.
From my perspective (I look at it more from the industrial side of things), I tend to like wine more consistent in character. I know this year it’s great and that next year it will be almost the same, and equally great. I know people who really hate that philosophy. That’s fine. There is no reason there should be only one option.
It is also true to say that in organic winegrowing there is the codification, the formal legal elements of what we call ‘organic’, and then there are people who have been doing organic irrespective of the codification; I’m thinking of Rodale from 60 years ago for example. I’ve often met organic gardeners who do what they do indifferent to the official definition. Of course, they may not use the word ‘organic’ on their label, for to do so would not only commit them to a specific set of rules, but also open them up to criticism that they share the whole of the practices allowed under those rules.
In any event, I’d like to hear a bit about climate change in your part of North America. I’ve talked to Dr. Richard Smart about his expansive homoclime database, and Professor Greg Jones recently about this. Now, about the perils but also, as has been observed, the advantages for winegrowing climate change might bring. Do you have a position?
RJ All I can really say is that I’m a believer! (laughs) I would have to be nuts to say that I didn’t. The evidence is too strong, and is essentially all in one direction. When you see CO2 levels essentially going off the scale you say ‘Holy Smoke’! Something is going on here. There is no doubt about it. Now, what are going to be the consequences of this? I’m scared. Literally, I’m scared. Partially because what’s going to happen to sea levels and climate, but those are not what scare me so much. What really influences me in my nighttime fears would be political consequences. That’s where is really gets serious. If you look in past histories with significant climate change, that means big political problems.
Population disloctions…
RJ Oh! That usually comes with extremes of political philosophies. They [dislocations] are often associated with wars. And famines… it’s not nice.
As Richard Smart said ‘Growing wine will be the least of our worries”.
RJ That’s right. If there is any wine to drink. Maybe we won’t even be able to get our hands on it. That is really small fish.
Yours is a refreshing perspective. I get pretty tired of hearing about how Napa’s fortunes might be affected while the world burns.
RJ (laughs) Yeah. Don’t bother me with that! That is not important.
Another question with respect to climate change: about the higher alcohol levels, longer hang time, the race for phenolic ripeness in hotter climates. Just what is the role of climate change in what is often called, correctly I think, the Parker Palate. Is he driving winemakers to produce a certain style or is Parker merely tasting the fruit winemakers now have to work with in a warmer world?
RJ Well, I suppose he [Parker] is an influence on the consumer. The producer will look at that. But it is also driven by scientific research where they are looking at greater phenolics, greater color… color influences perception, just modify the color and people will change their perception of the wine. The wine can be exactly the same, just a slightly darker color, they can change the perception. Certainly a more fruity character is more pleasant. I like that. But you can get fruity flavors but not necessarily get the high alcohol contents. There is no absolute conjunction between the two.
But we still need somewhat better techniques to determine when to harvest based on flavor and not so much on straight phenolics. We still are not sufficiently advanced to be able to determine this. People certainly have been for the past 20 to 30 years trying to figure out what is the most important aspect of significant humanly detectable flavor in wine. We’re still not there. And until we can define what it is that really are the significant components, we will still fall back on old techniques: intensity of color, phenolic content, sugar content, acid content, all these standard things. They work really well! There is no doubt about it. There really is a good correlation between all these factors and flavor. But if we knew even more what the actual critical compounds were, we could follow them.
And depending on the climate that you’re in, the flavor development, the sugar content, and the drop in acid level do not always coincide. So, cool climates tend to have a different sequence than those in the warm climate with exactly the same grape variety. What apples in Napa, California wouldn’t work necessarily in Washington. So, if we knew what the compounds were that really influence people’s perception, or a critic’s perception (laughs), the winemaker could then select when to harvest and not get high alcohol contents that are somewhat disappointing. And I find them disappointing, too. I find that wines that are getting 14%, 15% alcohol, where I grew up with 11% and 12%, I find that their balance is different. I don’t really like them. That may be simply because of habituation. I see so much of the influence of habituation. Maybe the new wine drinkers will come to think that the higher alcohol content in their table wine is natural. And if you give them something more at 12% they’ll think the wine is not balanced (laughs).
Yeah, I wanna get my money’s worth!
RJ So, habituation is a big factor. I see that especially with wine and food. Habituation is probably the major driver.
Also it is the American diet, perhaps, that plays a role. Coca Cola, cheeseburgers… they have a certain mouthful, a satisfying heft, a sweetness. Is this not also habituation? And wouldn’t it be foolish to think that wine would be any different. Especially when you hear the ‘trust your own palate’ mantra shouted by wine gurus. And the people who have been habituated now think that if it tastes like Coke, “hey, I like Coke, therefore….”
RJ That’s right! (laughs)
So how do you persuade people to explore and to question their palates, their routinized expectations?
RJ I wish somehow that I could shake people up and say ‘Try different things.’ Just take a wine, don’t look at the label at all. Pour it out, get away, just sit down and think about what you’re perceiving. Just think! Don’t drink. Think! Swirl. Smell. Analyze what it is you’re detecting. I am not expecting people to say that it has just a hint of truffle and all of this silly talk. (Well, ok, for some people it isn’t silly. But for many people I think it is silly.) Then ask yourself if there is complexity there. Do I really like this? Is this something that I, as a human being, appreciate by itself. Is the taste something that I do in fact appreciate? If not, fine. If yes, good. Then go and look at the bottle. Was it inexpensive or more? Certainly, if I could get people to do comparative tastings, blind comparative tastings, then I’d be happy. Even better, though certainly more complex because they are not readily available, would be to use black wine glasses, so you cannot be influenced by color. The only thing that can influence is taste and smell. If you don’t know where it came from, it’s just you and the wine! That’s it. You’re having a kind of conversation, you and the wine. You don’t have anybody’s comment. No other information. That’s it. That’s where you start to get truth.
And if you do this repeatedly, then you start to find what is really your own preference, whatever it is. It can change. It may not change. I’m not insisting that people change. I would like people to try to find what really is their opinion. Later on you can read what this critic says about this wine, if you can find such a review. Do they have a perception similar to mine? If so then you can begin to trust them when they suggest things.
The local merchant as well…
RJ That’s right. And if you like Tempranillo, then they might suggest this, and this, and this. Try some, again, blind. See how you respond. You could include your favorite wine and compare two. Can you distinguish between the two? It is just the fact that you are thinking about the wine is the best means that anyone can use to find out what their real tastes are. And to find out what quality wine can have. It really can be stupendous! My best personal experiences are wines with that I had no idea what the wines were. Or I made a mistake! (laughs) I took out the wrong wine. What have I poured here? This is ambrosia from heaven! What did I just open? It can be such a shock. Wow! Wine can be stupendous. It doesn’t have to be just nice and pleasant.
When I drink I never think in terms of pleasure. I think in terms of difference. For me it is the differences I find in wines that motivates me. At the store I grab varieties I’ve never heard of just for the experience of drinking an entirely new world. Then I’m interested in reading about the grape, where it’s grown… I become engaged in a larger dialogue.
RJ Initially it is a sensory difference, and then you augment your interest in that with all this other material, rather than going from the material to the wine. I find that having the sensory difference to start the whole thing rolling is the inspiring way.
Could you tell me of your latest research?
RJ Oh, well, since I’m retired…
You’re retired? You sound all of 35!
RJ (laughs) Oh, well if you double that then you’re pretty close! I wish I were back at 35 with all I know now. Boy, now that would be inspiring.
Yeah, I know. Experience always comes too late! So you’re not doing research?
RJ Other than writing books, editing other books, writing chapters of books.
Obviously you’re retired…
RJ It is a funny type of retirement. A wholly active retirement.
The life of the mind knows no rest.
RJ Oh, boy, I don’t want to let it have any rest. I refuse to allow it to have rest. I push it to the maximum. As you get older you need to push it to the limit. No bars held. So research is basically writing now.
And a cellar? Do you have a cellar?
RJ Oh, yes. Though it is getting depleted because, regrettably, my wife passed away three months ago.
I am very sorry to hear that.
RJ So the house is now way too big. My mother lived here, then she passed away. My wife. The house is way too big for me. It’s actually up for sale. And I had this huge wine cellar full of wine that I thought I’d be drinking for the next 20 years! I haven’t been buying. When Susan became ill, I stopped buying and began to drink. So it’s going down, but I certainly have a cellar still.
And the wines? What country is mostly present?
RJ Australia is the primary occupant of the cellar. I like a lot of Spain. Italian. Portuguese. The Portuguese I like because the grape varieties are really distinctive. Italy has a huge selection of grape varieties. I’m always intrigued with those. I like German wines. The Spanish ones, I really have a particular fondness for Rioja. It was the Marqués de Murrieta Ygay blanco that was the first white wine that sent me into heaven. That old-style white Rioja, I just couldn’t get over how stunning that was. Regrettably, you can’t get it in most Provinces of Canada anymore. Why, I don’t know. Maybe not a lot is being produced and most is being consumed in Spain! But it’s not coming to Canada, anyway.
It’s many of these older styles. Amarone, the very ancient style. I loved it. And my love became even greater when I realized some of the best Amarone is Botrytis-infected. Of course, this is my fungus! Now I am even more interested. Most of the literature is in Italian, and my Italian is not great. But I will fight through Italian to understand what they are saying about that particular wine!
I like carbonic maceration. I think it is a neat technique. Sure, it’s not considered hi-tech… well, it is hi-tech in one sense. But most connoisseur’s kind of frown on it. But it is a fun wine. Why do I have to be serious all the time? Diversity is much of the spice of life. I like that.
Well, sir, it has been a distinct pleasure. Oh, one last question. Did you read the patent text from Virgilio and his group?
RJ Yes. The patent sounds quite interesting. I was quite inspired to read it. I don’t know if this is going to be the BT of fungicides. All of these things will be great for a while, but like all fungicides, if you depend on only one, you’re designed to fail. You can’t use one. You’ve got a host of microbes out there, billions of them, and they are mutating. They are going to find a solution sooner or later. If they don’t they will simply disappear off the face of the Earth.
They’ve got the numbers against you. In plant pathology the current view is to never use the same fungicide more than once. Rotate. Use only if necessary, and in the right amount. Minimize the application beyond need so that you preserve these things for generations, not just for three or four years. That’s a horrible waste.
But his seems most interesting. From an academic point of view, it will be interesting to find out what exactly it is doing to the fungi. How is it killing them? The fungi will be able to produce proteases to break it down too.
But it is something different. And we need new weapons in the arsenal, that is for sure.
Thank you for your generosity, Ron.
RJ It’s been fun, Ken.
Admin
