A Silly Champagne Award? I think NOT!

http://www.flickr.com/photos/12635485@N07/ / CC BY-NC-SA 2.0

This posting was penned by JürgO, a regular vintuba.com contributor, in response to Ed Schwartz’s article that appeared in the December 25th edition of the Napa Register. To read the article click on the link below:

A Silly Champagne Award (Out Of My Mind, 12/25/09

There are those who subscribe to truth-in-origin, and others who dismiss this notion as silliness. You could count the French, however you feel about them, most Europeans, the Slow Food Movement and perhaps Alice Waters among the former. The latter are of the flat-earth persuasion: the Mondovino coterie, the varietally obsessed wine lovers who discount the origins of wine and those who uphold McDonald’s uniformity of quality as something to attain as a goal. After reading Ed Schwartz’s ramblingsabout what he calls  “A Silly Champagne Award,” he has firmly positioned himself in the latter category. Schwartz completely misses the overarching principle: Champagne is an Appellation. And, he seems to take the French so very personal: obviously, they have made a lasting impression on him many years ago. Judging from his column, it was not a mutually enjoyable experience. Neither speaking French, not working for a French company nor wearing a Hermès tie made him a Francophile. He may be a Francophone, more likely a Francophobe.

His current lament is about the first Awards of Excellence given to Schramsberg Vinyards and Beringer Vineyards for Truth-in-Labeling, given by the Champagne Bureau, the U.S. representative of the CIVC, the Comité Interprofessionel du Vin de Champagne. He calls this move “oppressively self-serving,” because the recipient Napa producers abstained from using “Champagne” on their label. He yawns about this. Yes, it is a well-deserved victory for the Champagne industry. No one outside the Champagne region should be allowed to use the moniker. Moreover, when Schwartz refers to the “French Champagne” industry, he is using a tautology.

http://www.flickr.com/photos/turbobumble/ / CC BY-NC-SA 2.0

Let’s look at “Champagne.” It is nowadays synonymous with vin mousseux produced in, you guessed it, Champagne, but only Champagne. It does not indicate sparkling wine from anywhere. First of all, it denotes a region of origin, not a style of wine. There is, after all, Marc de Champagne. As foreign as the concept of Appelation d’Origine might be to some, a Sherry is only a Sherry if it comes from the Jerez-de-la-Frontera region in Spain. Conversely, Port comes only from the Douro region in Portugal, not from Napa Valley or from Australia. Swiss cheese is what its name denotes, from Switzerland, not produced in Wisconsin, nor is Châteauneuf-du-Pape from Monterrey County or anywhere other than that specific part of the Rhône Valley. Asperges and Melon de Cavaillon (Cavaillon asparagus and melons) are only from that designated area in the Provence (not from California, like a Google search might suggest). A producer making a product similar in style and ingredients to the original resorting to “borrowing” the original’s legally protected name constitutes an egregious transgression. Aren’t we up in arms about illicit copies of Rolexes, DVDs, CDs, software? If the Chinese make an oversized, gas-guzzling SUV, is it o.k. to call it a Detroit car?

Oh, I forgot. We are only up in arms if transgressions are committed against our interests. And we already know how Ed Schwartz feels about the French.

http://www.flickr.com/photos/anthonygrimley/ / CC BY-NC-ND 2.0

While the U.S. suffered from that collective hangover called Prohibition, Congress felt it did not need to sign the international treaty wherein such concepts as Appellation d’Origine were to be protected. After all, we would never be drinking alcohol again. That is the reason why U.S. producers  can  use such blatant falsehoods as “Champagne” for wine that does not come from Champagne.

Perhaps one more example is needed. There is a wine-producing village in the canton Vaud in Switzerland named Champagne. They wanted to call their wine… well, you guessed it. In spite of their reasonable claim to the name, they lost in court because Champagne is a PDO (Protected Designation of Origin), and as such a legally protected Appellation d’Origine reserved for wines originating in the part of France known as Champagne. Christian Dior wanted to launch a perfume named Champagne, and he had to change its name.

It is not about you, Mr. Schwartz. The silliness, however, is with you!

JürgO

Tags: Beringer, California, Champagne, Ed Schwartz, France, JurgO, Napa, Napa Register, Schramsberg, sparkling wine, wine