Natural wine, and the search for identity

The first thing that you have to understand about natural wine is that there is no one “Natural Wine Movement”, no governing or regulatory body, no labeling guidelines, and no consensus. Like beauty, natural is in the eye of the beholder, and in this case, the detractor as well.

I will attempt to provide some clarity to the ongoing discussions, debates, and character assassinations that are taking place in the name of natural wine, but remember that the wine community is still in the process of defining the idea of natural wine, which means things will continue to change.

At its core, the natural wine movement focuses on producing wine with little manipulation by the winemaker, but that is about all that is common among the groups calling for natural wine. Interestingly enough, the natural wine movement seems to take the vineyard somewhat for granted. I think this is because for many natural wine advocates, organic/biodynamic grape production is assumed.

How many kinds of natural wine are there?

I count four major natural wine factions. I have named them the (1) purists, (2) additive-free proponents, (3) traditionalists, and (4) everybody else.

The purists calling for natural wine

Of the four natural wine contingencies, the easiest group to understand is the purists. Natural wine purists like, Nicholas Potel (a prominent négociant in Burgundy), want to drink wine that is made from nothing more than organic grapes and the natural strains of yeast that live on the grapes.

Purists are generally motivated by a deep appreciation for wine, and they want to taste what nature produces not what man can do with what nature provides. A purist may be against the use of sulfur dioxide (SO₂) probably not for health reasons, but as a matter of taste and aesthetics. To a purist, a wine is alive and just needs a little nurturing to be as it is intended.

Additive-free wine proponents

Additive-free, natural wine proponents focus as much or more on the health effects of the wine compared to the wine itself. Additive-free proponents want a natural wine with no impurities because they believe natural wines are more healthful. This group also includes vegans and wine drinkers that are sensitive to SO₂.

Additive-free proponents generally offer the most confining interpretation of natural wine, because they are opposed to winemaking techniques, such as fining, that are not objectionable to many in the other camps. Additive-free folks are not so much bothered by fining as a process, but they are frequently opposed to the fining agent that is used. For example, vegans oppose all animal products as fining agents.

Traditional winemaking and natural wine

Traditionalists are the conservative wing of the natural wine movement. This group advocates old-world style wines produced with old techniques, such as treating wine with SO₂ during cellaring and bottling. Traditionalists see modern winemaking techniques such as micro-oxygenation, reverse osmosis, alcohol reduction, must concentration, and the use of cultivated yeast strains as destroying the soul of a wine.

Traditionalists often seek the expression of terroir in a wine, and they believe modern winemaking homogenizes wine, destroying its sense of place.

New world wine, old world wine, and the natural wine debate

The traditionalist branch of the natural wine movement is where the debate is the most widespread and personal. The spiritual leader of the natural wine traditionalist is Alice Feiring. Alice is not a natural wine advocate per se, but she is a big proponent of traditional winemaking and a self-proclaimed terroir jihadist.

On the other side of the debate table is something akin to a modernist wine movement. The modernist wine movement’s hero is, of course, Robert Parker. Parker is not particularly active in the debate, but the wines he tends to like are, in general, anti-natural wines.

On the web, Clark Smith and Alder Yarrow carry the modernist wine banner. Because of the high octane tussle that is going on between these opposing views, this segment of the natural wine movement gets the most coverage, but it is not the largest group.

Everybody else, the real force behind natural wine

The “everybody else” group in the natural wine movement is by far the largest and the most ill-defined of the natural wine contingencies. This group is home to almost anyone who wants to make a positive change in the way modern wine is produced.

In this context, natural means doing something different than current modern practice, such as reducing technology or, where that is not possible, offering older or simpler technology. It is also home to people who belong to two or three of the other categories — for example, a wine drinker that is a terroir enthusiast who is also vegan or a traditional organic farmer experimenting with a return to manual harvesting.

To me, the natural wine movement and the debate around it is only as good as the wine that comes from it. To that end, there are a number of natural winemakers, most of whom fall into the “everybody else” category that are making really good wine.

These winemakers are part of everybody else in the natural wine movement because they are pragmatic — they have to be. These people make their living growing grapes and making wine. Dramatic changes have the potential to ruin a harvest, and that is a show-stopping disaster for many vintners, winemakers, or wineries.

Natural wine on the label, but not in the bottle

After taking a look at the natural wine movement, it is clear that a consensus among the various proponents about its meaning will most likely never happen. It is also apparent that the natural wine movement is about improving the quality of wine on lots of different levels, even if there is disagreement about which level and what should be done.

From a consumer’s point of view, “natural” is not a meaningful adjective on a wine label. I know that the natural wine movement is about more than labeling, but as a consumer I am interested in what is in the bottle I buy.

I am interested in things like: where were the grapes grown, how they were grown, who made the wine, how did they make it, and how did the wine turn out? If words like natural have no real meaning or several meanings, they do not add to my knowledge of what I am buying or what I can expect when I drink it. After all, I want what every wine drinker wants — a naturally good bottle of wine.