As I sat down for lunch at the Vancouver International Wine Festival, Evan Goldstein MS provided this year’s keynote speech exploring the importance – and the evolving role – of “place” in wine. Evan Goldstein is one of just 269 Master Sommeliers worldwide, has authored four books, and co-authored several more. He is a Founding Board Member of the Best USA Sommelier Association (BUSA, and a contributing editor to the Oxford Companion to Wine (5th edition, publication 2023). Also, with his business partner Limeng Stroh, he heads up two companies: Full Circle Wine Solutions (President & Chief Education Officer) and Master the World™ (Co-founder & Chief Wine Officer). I’ve enjoyed hearing Evan speak at past seminars of the Vancouver International Wine Festival and was curious to hear what he would be saying about wine and how “place” and terroir, fits into it.
Evan Goldstein MW’s Keynote Address
Evan started by saying that some people aspire to make the best wines in their region, others in their country, or the world. For Evan, he mentioned that Eric Asimov in the New York Times said the most enlightened approach is simply to try and make the best possible wine from the place where the grapes are grown, to which Evan agreed, I think.
The existence of terroir is a unifying theory and a contentious topic, according to Evan. Some believe in its existence, while terroir deniers claim it’s mostly a marketing tool. We must ask ourselves, is there undeniable and empirical proof of terroir that a wine has a genuine sense of place, or rather is terroir simply a myth?
Evan noted that he is often asked about the existence of terroir in wine. He believes that terroir is indeed a real and essential component of wine production. What do we really know about terroir? Evan said that terroir is not the literal reuptake of soil components flavouring the wine, but there are environmental elements that we can sense such as eucalyptus from red wines coming from parts of Australia. There is also the garrigue character of Rhone and Provencal wines. We know from our own experience that wines made from different parts of the same vineyard, with the same variety, clone, viticultural, and winemaking practices taste differently, and that climate, both macro and micro, plays a key role. Plus consistent differences across vintage for a wine proves terroir’s existence.
Evan noted that there are several studies on this topic, including one by Laura Catena that empirically looked at terroir through the phenolic profiles of the Malbec grape. They selected 23 parcels from 12 different geographical indications in Mendoza and used standardized wine-making techniques across three different vintages, (2016, 2017, and 2018), to evaluate the wines from those different GIs and parcels, through an integrative data analysis. The result, through blind tastings, is that they correctly identified 11 of 23 parcels consistently across the vintages. He also noted similar studies occurred in Veneto, Valpolicella, and the Alto Adige and the researchers were getting similar results.
Evan then said that we must ask ourselves about terroir’s content, such as whether it must be micro, small in scale, such as we get in Burgundian Crus? Can terroir have scale? Can you taste the difference between West Sonoma Coast Chardonnay and those from the Santa Rita Hills?
Does blending grapes for wine negate terroir? Regional and cross-regional geographic blending is important in many wine styles, such as for port or Champagne. Is Champagne a terroir wine? Champagnes are blends of dozens of plots and often sub-regions, yet most of us would agree that champagne has provenance. Does winemaking technique such as lees contact, extended barrel time, and other human factors negate terroir? Or are they part of the terroir equation?
Is winemaking “style” as equally important as terroir? The trend towards early picking in the pursuit of balanced wines is more about style than it is about place compared to those later harvested, high-octane Napa Valley cabernets, for example. How do we determine wines of style versus wines of place? Oak, clay, and concrete vessels, for example, all play a role in a wine’s vinification and maturation. Do wine faults, such as Brett, enhance or detract from terroir?
In the end, Evan closed by asking if we make too much of terroir. Does wine have to taste of a place? If it does not, is that good, bad, or neutral? We were left with two views to ponder: One view is that terroir is about wine having a sense of place. The other view is that terroir is a key to quality. You need great terroir to make great wines, but not all great wines have terroir.
My Comments
I appreciate Evan’s thought-provoking discussion of terroir and how much some people lean on it to justify wine’s quality or character, while there is the aspect of winemaking methods and styles of wines, such as the production of Champagne, blended still wines, and port wines, which are removed to some degree from the strict view of terroir, but do show the character of the region from which the wines were produced. If people’s preference for a certain wine style changes, e.g. from big and bold to more restrained, or vice versa, how does that affect terroir? I am sure that this debate will continue for a long time.
I must mention also, how much I enjoyed the lunch at the Vancouver Convention Centre. Their Fraser Valley chicken breast, with herb polenta pave, baby potatoes, ricotta and sauteed spinach and rosemary jus was outstanding. We had a variety of BC wines at our table to enjoy with our lunch. Thank you to the Vancouver International Wine Festival for providing me with the opportunity to enjoy this lunch and keynote speech by Evan.
