More on St Emilion's Classification 2006
A letter to Decanter Magazine - Spring 2007
(Voted letter of the month)
I refer to the recent St Emilion re shuffle and in particular Figeac’s refusal to join the ‘A’s , which purely based on price. Judging by comments of some of your readers it seems that there are many who believe that price should form the basis of the classification criteria sighting the Medoc’s 1855 system as an example.
Whilst it is fairly logical that demand , market and commercial forces can dictate price it is not as easy to accept that price should dictate the hierarchy of St Emilion’s wines. Why?
To start with demand and price are largely based on the likings of one or two critics which often conflict with other respected critics’ opinion (eg. Mr P/Ms R). Secondly it promotes the idea that the higher the price the better the quality, which as many wine lovers know is not always the case. Thirdly, it encourages winemakers to follow market trends. Therefore it is dangerously illogical to give too much importance to the price issue. St Emilion’s classification is specifically designed to be independent, forward thinking and progressive whose main aims are ; a) to distinguish exceptional terroir, b) to encourage investment and quest for quality, c) recognise outstanding wines, d) reward improvement and punish deterioration (and disobedience), e) to be an effective marketing tool.
So who should decide and on what basis? Of course each and every one of us wine drinkers have our own higherarchies. To me Figeac has been a 1er ‘A’ for a long time. Those who feel that they should follow price structure can continue as at present. But in a wine world under attack from globalisation would it be such a bad idea to let the people of St Emilion decide their own hiegharcy? .
Of course subjectivity and small village politics will remain an issue but if the decisions taken remain in the same progressive sprit of the original 1955 classification aided by the input of today’s varied mix of St Emilion Society, who better to judge St Emilion’s wines than the St Emilionais themselves?
A number of amendments can make the system even more progressive. Here are some ideas. a) have different categories of Grand Cru Classe. b) reduce the review time span from 10 to five years. c) pay less attention to the economic side of things and give more emphasis to wine, taste and pleasure qualities. d) make it easier for lesser known wines to be incorporated. e) make the decision makers and making more open and more accountable. f) simplify some of the existing conditions.
No doubt controversy will remain. And how exciting would the wine world be without it? But at least it would be home grown. That’s understandable!
|
|
