There are grapes whose story is very sad. Norton is one of them. It is one of those grapes that history forgot and that some bold wine makers are trying to put back on the map. The story is told masterfully by Todd Kliman in his book: The Wild Grape. A Forgotten Grape and the Untold Story of American Wine (Clarkson Potter, NY, 2010).

Daniel Norton was a  physician who died very young but not without leaving as a legacy to America a strong and resilient grape bearing his name, the Norton. It is a native grape like Catawba, Scuppernong or Niagara.  The wines made from Norton won awards in Europe in 1873 during the Vienna Universal Exhibition. A wine critic Vizettelly wrote: “The finest American red wines were those yielded by the vine sknown as Norton’s Virginia, [...]. The former produces a well-blended, full-bodied, deep-colored, aromatic, and somewhat astringent wine, only needing finesse to equal a first-rate Burgundy [...]” (p. 122).  Like some other grapes, Norton lost ground to other grapes, mostly coming from Europe. At the end of the 20th Century, some wine makers, led by the Chrysalis vineyards, re-discovered the potential of the Norton grape.

I let you discover the story told almost like an historical novel by Kliman. What interested me most in the book is Kliman’s thoughts on the “domination” of the vitis vinifera mostly coming from Europe over the native grapes. European wines were the benchmark of  viticulture and wine making for centuries. European wine growers and makers brought their knowledge to America when they emigrated.  Sometimes they applied it to growing local vines, sometimes to growing what they knew to grow – Cabernet, Pinot Noir or Shiraz.

My question now is: is there room in the American wine industry for a wine brand based on a native American grape? Chrysalis Winery took up the challenge.  As stated on their web site, “Here at Chrysalis, we’ve undertaken a serious commitment to restoring the native American grape, Norton, to its position of prominence as a source of world class wines.  Cloaked in myth and mystery for decades, Norton thrives in the mid-Atlantic and Midwestern regions, and produces a robust red wine with big fruit flavors that ages beautifully over the years.  One hundred and twenty five years ago, Norton wines were deemed the “best red wine of all nations” at a worldwide competition in Vienna. Today excellent Norton wines are again being produced in many states east of the Rockies.”

Unfortunately the rewards are not coming easily to those strong willed wine makers. An “Heritage Tasting” held in Richmond did not attract the attention of the wine world outside the producing area.  Articles in various national magazines failed to increase awareness of the grape. What’s wrong?  When “googling” Norton grape, very few information come up: a Wikipedia article, the Missouri Wine Organization web site and a few articles on the grape.

It seems there is no real strategy behind the revival of the grape. Let’s hope that Kliman’s book will allow Chrysalis and the other wineries growing Norton to get more coverage. But only a strong and clear strategy that will allow the Norton grape to get back on the map. The revival of a forgotten grape is no trivial matter, but not an impossible task. Some regions succeeded in creating awareness on brands with a very difficult name, like the Müller-Thurgau in the 80′s on the West Coast of the US or  the Cahors Malbec in France whose fame was “stolen” by Argentina.  Let’s hope for the best…!

In spite of the financial crisis or maybe because of the financial crisis, a recent study of the 2008 edition of The U.S. Wine Market: Impact Databank Review and Forecast show that Americans are drinking more and better wines. The study seems to confirm that US wine drinkers keep away from low-end brands and favor smaller brands. The Wine Spectator reported in depth on the subject:

“Smaller brands will continue to drive the U.S. market. The 50 largest brands nationwide, all selling at least 1 million cases, are projected to post a collective 0.2 percent decline in 2008, according to the report. Wine brands beyond the top 50 will account for less than half the industry’s volume but are once again expected to significantly outperform their much bigger counterparts. Currently, well over 7,000 wine brands are sold in the United States, but less than 300 labels sell more than 100,000 cases annually.

Fifty brands sold between 500,000 and 1 million cases each last year, combining for a solid 4.3 percent increase, including such brands as Fish Eye, Menage à Trois and Santa Margherita. Another 61 brands sold between 250,000 and 500,000 cases each, led by the likes of Kim Crawford, Red Diamond and Edna Valley, and posted a combined 7.2 percent gain. But the hottest segment, comprising the 118 brands that sold between 100,000 and 250,000 cases, surged 8.2 percent last year, thanks to such brands as Acacia, Bohemian Highway and Oyster Bay.

The bigger brands still make up a large share of the market. Last year, 28 brands sold more than 2 million cases each, and another 26 labels sold between 1 and 2 million cases.”

This report confirms there is room for small and creative brands – as we suggested yesterday.

I just finished reading The Wine Trials 2010 by Robin Goldstein and Alexis Herschkowitsch. I must confess I’m very perplexed by this book. The authors blame the “lifestyle marketing” for overpriced wines. They also condemn the fact that a group like LVMH invest more money on marketing than to produce the goods, without mentioning that this marketing strategy covers all products manufactured by LVMH and not only their wine and spirits business. Because they reject marketing (they call it the “enemy” of the wine drinker) and the “taste of money”, they promote wines widely available in supermarkets and under $15. But, among the 150 selected wines, there are Two Buck Chuck, Norton, Almaden, Barefoot wines, to mention just a few. Do the authors sincerely think those wines are so widely available without heavy marketing and a lot of money? This selection by two main criteria – under $15 and widely available in supermarkets – is counterproductive for the wine industry. Wine drinkers and consumers need wines under $15 but original and well crafted. There are so many of them all over the world. It’s true it requires a little effort on the part of the consumers but it is well worth it. The Web 2.0 provides tools to look for, find and now locate affordable and not so easy-to-find wines.

All the selection of wines is based on blind tasting. I won’t make any comment on this choice: I’m not an enologist or a wine critic and have no opinion on the subject worth of mention. When they say blind tasting gets the truth out of a wine, I’m a little skeptical: why is it right to prefer a $15 cava over a $150 Dom Perignon and wrong to like a Dom Perignon? It’s just a matter of taste and education. I’m the last one to condemn somebody who likes a $3 Two Buck Chuck. As I already wrote, a wine is like a book: some people like reading detective stories or chick lit and others poetry or essays. There’s nothing wrong with it. But don’t tell me it is “un-American” to drink expensive wines because of their marketing strategy!

The Wine Trials 2010 is also very critic of wine critics and established magazines, such as The Wine Spectator. Critics of critics have been going on for many years. One of the answers provided by the Web 2.0 is the peer-to-peer recommendation system. Consumers have now a huge array of information through social media, forums, blogs, Facebook pages and Twitter. They can access this information instantly on their phone or through Internet.

Did I dislike this book? Not really. While reading it, I went from smiling to raising a perplexed eyebrow or being mildly offended. This said, I respect the effort behind the work: it is certainly very hard to carry such a tasting, even if I have a lot of reservations about the result. I also respect the thinking behind the work. Goldstein’s introductory chapters are worth reading thoroughly. As he says all along his book, the reader has to make up his/her own mind on the ideas and principles behind the book as well as on wine. Maybe the authors and I have to agree we disagree!