An unusually hot debate about a rather cold growing season.
It was a fine day, that October 27th. The late autumn sun warmed the Riesling grapes, which were still hanging in Germany's steep vineyards. Growers who took the risk and delayed the harvest were rewarded with a dry and sunny October, saving the crop of an overall rather difficult growing season.
On that October 27th, Die Zeit, a German weekly newspaper published a vintage report that called 2010 a "bad year" - only some sunny days in October "saved this vintage's arse". Such foul language was rather shocking for such a respected paper. Equally surprising was the vehemence with which the author Manfred Klimek tried to defend his assessment of a harvest that had not even been finished yet. He insisted on his blog that 2010 is a "shit year" (Scheissjahr) and claims: "those who say otherwise are liars".
It didn't take long for people to respond, of course. The current scene of action is Mr. Klimek's blog Captain Cork, where he republished his vintage report. In the comments section of the said blog Roman Niewodniczanski of Weingut van Volxem criticises Klimek's hasty judgment of a vintage that is still ongoing and which many wine makers actually praise as a good vintage of elegant and very food-friendly wines. Even wine critic David Schildknecht voices his disagreement with Mr. Klimek's presumptions passionately.
The thread on Captain Cork has turned into a war of words and a battle of exclamation marks. Manfred Klimek is certainly right in declaring 2010 to be a difficult vintage. But to dismiss it entirely while some of the grapes are still ripening (in an unrelated email Weingut Clemens Busch from the Mosel announced that they are going to continue picking grapes for another week) is simply premature. And unfair towards wine growers who were able to work with a capricious growing season and yet produce quality wine in 2010, albeit in much lower quantities.
No wine from 2010 has been bottled yet. Can we judge a whole vintage without having tasted a single wine? Journalism based on mere assumptions can have a more detrimental effect on a vintage than hail in the vineyards. Sensationalistic writing will find its non-discriminating readership, from where the damage continues. We shall see how good or bad the 2010 vintage is once the wines are available. But the fervor that 2010 already instigated also shows that it can't really be all that bad. Vintage variation is what makes wine so unique and if 2010 is indeed completely different from anything we have tasted in the past 20 years then I shall look forward to it.
Agreed!
Submitted by Paul (not verified) on 03 November 2010.
The truth is in the glass. It is the challenging years that separate the wheat from the chaff. (even if they take a beating, to extend the analogy).
According to most reports (collected first-hand last week in the Mosel), yields are down very dramatically, acidity levels are up, and nobody really knows what to expect in this very unique year. One estate told me that they will de-acidify for the first time in memory, another is buying up bulk wine to meet a 20K liter deficit. Clemens Busch, as you said, is taking a wait-and-see to the yields as they are still picking, and yield depends also on the cleanliness of the fruit.
Lower yields
Submitted by uwe on 03 November 2010.
Exactly. Reduced yields are really the only fact at this point. Some growers will deacidify but that is not a reason to dismiss a whole vintage.
Unrelated to the 2010 vintage: I wanted to take a look at the wine photos on your site, but the links for the wineries don't seem to work.