WARREN WINIARSKI AND THE COMING OF AGE OF AMERICAN WINE

Courtesy University of Chicago

It is fitting that Warren Winiarski would have a prominent role in the Smithsonian National Museum of American History’s exhibit FOOD: Transforming the American Table, 1950-2000. The exhibit includes a display illustrating the transformation that occurred in the American wine industry in the second half of the twentieth century, particularly how wine has come to be appreciated as an important aspect of our food culture. Mr. Winiarski has played a pivotal role in that transformation.

 

But it was a rather atypical journey for him to get to that point. When I interviewed him recently, I was surprised to find out he originally wanted to be a forester and enrolled at Colorado A&M (now Colorado State University) but only stayed eight months. He then went to St. John’s College in Annapolis, MD to, as he told me, “read the great books.” Then, he went to the University of Chicago to study political science and theory, which I thought was especially cool, since I have a Master’s Degree in Political Science.

 

This next part, though, is more typical. Warren told me it was a year of graduate study in Italy that introduced him to “la dolce vita” that changed him. It was in Italy where he began to understand wine as a daily beverage, not just an occasional celebratory drink. He also said he was inspired by a 1933 book (”American Wines and How to Make Them”) by Philip Wagner, the founder of Boordy Vineyards in Maryland, who Winiarski said believed Americans could make better wine than they were. And he acknowledged influence from Martin Ray, another legend of California wine, for his strong belief in varietal wines before that was fashionable.

 

Courtesy cask23.com

He moved with his family from Chicago to Napa Valley in 1964 to pursue a life in wine, rather than academia. He worked at the Souverain and Mondavi wineries before consulting for other companies. In 1970 he bought property next door to Nathan Fay’s vineyard (which he later acquired) and established Stag’s Leap Wine Cellars. Like many others at the time, he also benefitted from consultation with the great winemaker André Tchelistcheff.

 

But it seems Mr. Winiarski learned from the master a little better than most. Warren went on to produce one of the most iconic (I know that word is overused but it applies in this case.) wines in California history. In 1976, at “The Judgment of Paris,” wine merchant Stephen Spurrier’s tasting of twelve California and eight French wines (ten Cabernets and ten Chardonnays), Warren’s 1973 Stag’s Leap Vineyard Cabernet (just his first vintage!) Sauvignon won first place.

 

Courtesy cask23.com

I have to admit I was surprised how humbly Mr. Winiarski described his reaction.  “Initially, I just thought it was nice to win a wine tasting, until I found out the other wines in the tasting. And then George Tabor’s article in Time brought it to the attention of the world. The significance and impact of the tasting grew over time. Regions all over the world realized they could make wine just as good as France. It opened opportunities; gave people courage.”

 

Naturally, the Smithsonian eventually took interest. He contributed a bottle of the wine to the museum’s collection and the museum maintains a Stag’s Leap Wine Cellars archive. “They came out to Napa and produced a film at SLV and then asked me to speak at the ‘Red, White and American’ [symposium on Wine in American History and Culture, in 1996],” he said. Mr. Winiarski also told me his family’s foundation helped with the FOOD project early on.

 

I asked him what he thought was the significance of the exhibit and specifically wine being included? Mr. Winiarski said “the exhibit is more than the typical museum piece; it shows people what they take for granted. It broadens the category of food to include wine.”

 

Courtesy cask23.com

When I suggested the FOOD exhibit illustrates how there has been a similar influence of technology and corporate consolidation in wine as in food production, Mr. Winiarski acknowledged this adding, “There are parallel forces – science, technology and culture; they are inseparable.” He said technology can make for better quality and simplify processes but agreed it is also important to retain the lessons of tradition.

 

He pointed out since 1950, “Wine changed from being mostly fortified [sweet and high alcohol] to drier table wine. There is more interest in learning about wine, its origins and places, and more books about wine. We even are seeing changes in traditional places like Portugal.”

 

I agreed technology and industrialization (fueled by corporate consolidation) have had the benefit of broadening access to wine and often with good quality. But, I asserted, quality often has been sacrificed for quantity. Mr. Winiarski responded by pointing to an example: “Paul Masson was practically a saint for his dedication to pinot noir but when corporate owners took over, they used his name to increase sales but weren’t aware what it took to make fine wine at that volume.”

 

He emphasized there is room in the wine industry for both. But he pointed out the industry is cyclical, so small and new wineries often find it difficult to survive the down cycles. “It would be good if we could even out the cycles, so what’s good doesn’t disappear. We need to make more room for the innovators, visionaries and young people.”

 

This seems to me a fitting sentiment for the next fifty years of American wine. We have seen parallel developments in recent years, with many new startups, smaller, family-owned wineries, and wineries in every state at the same time there has been significant corporate consolidation (even Winiarski sold to Piero Antinori and Ste. Michelle Wine Estates in 2007). The industry also has seen more and more winemakers and wineries look to more “sustainable” winemaking practices and business models. And as a fundamentally agricultural endeavor, winegrowers and winemakers will be at the leading edge of climate change impacts. These are just a few of the elements that could spur another “Great Transformation” in American wine. I can’t wait to drink the results.

 

SMITHSONIAN CHRONICLES TRANSFORMATION OF AMERICAN FOOD & WINE

Volumes have been written about the transformations that occurred in American society in the last half of the Twentieth Century. Certainly, no arena of American society has seen more change since the end of World War II than that of food production and consumption.

 

A new exhibit, “Food: Transforming the American Table,” which opened at the Smithsonian National Museum of American History last November, really brings these changes to life in a unique and effective way. I had a chance to view the exhibit recently and heartily recommend you visit it, too.

Fourteen years in the making, co-curator of the exhibit, Paula Johnson told me this first major Smithsonian exhibition on food history is intended to illuminate the transformation of how food is produced, how we eat, and what we eat. Ms. Johnson also wanted to make sure I noted she made a conscious decision to include a section on wine in recognition of its growing significance in American food culture and the increasing acceptance of its place at the American table. I will touch on this later in this column and will go into greater detail about the wine section, including my subsequent interview with winemaker Warren Winiarski (a critical figure in American wine history), in a future article.

Courtesy of Smithsonian

The exhibit employs a variety of displays to illustrate the post-war changes. It begins with “Julia’s Kitchen.” This literally is the kitchen from Julia Child’s Cambridge, MA home with original table, appliances, and utensils. It was quite remarkable to peer through the glass and witness this iconic space.

Courtesy of Smithsonian

“New and Improved” – a display highlighting the introduction of various new scientific approaches to farming, processing and distribution – recalls various developments in what I would call the industrialization of food. Even as science and technology (most notably in the form of chemical fertilizers and pesticides) produced higher yields, more certainty and lower costs in the fields, new appliances and access to more energy changed the way people prepared meals.

 Viewing the display, I also got a sense of how all this intersected with the American myth of “progress” and how advertising slogans like “better living through chemistry” were deployed in an industry offensive to convince the American people (who had just survived the Great Depression and World War II) the changes would always make life better. Of course, it wasn’t all good news. A section of the display titled “A System for Abundance” tells a story of the difficult, dangerous lives of the workers in the field.

Courtesy of Smithsonian

Curator Johnson aptly characterized “Resetting the Table” as illustrating the complementary and contradictory trends of the time – showing how immigrants, activists, and global travelers all challenged what had become convention. The display first takes a look at the rise of ethnic food and its connection to the country’s history as a nation of immigrants. To me it illustrates an insight into how immigrants adapted to their new environment and how those of us already here have benefited from a broadening of our exposure to previously unfamiliar foods, cultures and people.

 

This section also chronicles the rise of alternative visions of American food culture that emerged in the 1960’s and 1970’s – often associated with what has been labeled the “counterculture” and “back-to-the-land” movements – and focused on small scale, organic production. Being reminded of the “Do It Yourself” advice of Mother Earth News it becomes clear these alternatives were (and are) not anti-science, as often has been charged. Rather, they reflected a different approach to science – one that used new discoveries to assist nature, not subjugate or appropriate it. And viewing copies of fondly remembered books like Dick Gregory’s Natural Diet for Folks Who Eat and the Moosewood Cookbook I realized also these were a call to recover an appreciation of quality, an assertion that food can taste good and be good for you.

While millions of Americans were embracing the new culture of convenience and abundance, these alternative voices drew attention to the trade offs and the long-term effects of mass production (industrial, large-scale, centralized) and mass consumption (consumerism, planned obsolescence, disposable): impacts on the environment, individual health and workers.

Courtesy of Smithsonian

This period also was a time of great transformation in wine. The “Wine for the Table” section calls attention to the complicated relationship this country has had with alcohol – specifically, in this case, fermented grape juice. Much has been made over the years of Thomas Jefferson’s affinity for wine; and even more has been written about the origins and legacy (and reality) of Prohibition.

 

Most people today still probably don’t realize wine grapes have been cultivated since the 1700’s on the East Coast; and probably only a few more realize the boom in California winegrowing that began about the mid-1800’s. Not surprisingly, in 1950, wine was mostly an afterthought for most Americans. Julia Child deserves credit here as well for introducing to the public the European tradition of drinking wine with food.


Then, in the 1960’s and 1970’s, a group of truly visionary California winemakers (many of whom benefited from consultation with the great winemaker André Tchelistcheff) transformed the industry, not only in California but – with a little help from the famous “Paris Tasting of 1976” – throughout the U.S. and really, over the following decades, the whole world.

 

The exhibit highlights contributions from now icons of the California wine industry, such as Robert Mondavi, who left his family’s winery to start his own winery and became arguably the greatest ambassador of California wine. And Miljenko “Mike” Grgich at Chateau Montelina and Warren Winiarski at Stag’s Leap Wine Cellars – the winners of the 1976 tasting – are well represented. These and others, of course, emulated French winemaking practices like using small oak barrels, along with what I’ll call modern winemaking techniques like using stainless steel tanks and temperature-controlled fermentation to vastly increase quality.

Display highlighting heritage of California Zinfandel

Actually, the transformation of wine after 1950 reflects many of the same forces as with food – the intersection of agriculture with business with marketing with culture. At the same time as these smaller producers were showing the world California could match European quality, large-scale wine production (most notably the Gallo family – shown on the cover of a 1972 issue of Time) emerged to introduce wine to the American public in a volume and at a price most could enjoy on a daily basis.

 

Over the last two decades especially, there has been a growing interest in organic and other forms of sustainable agricultural and cellar practices. Sometimes it seems like every winery large and small is touting its efforts in this regard. The key here, as Mr. Winiarski pointed out to me, seems to be to find ways to harness science, technology and cultural forces, while retaining the lessons of tradition.

Courtesy of Smithsonian

Finally, in what I think was a brilliant idea, they have included what they call the “Open Table” in the middle of the exhibit.  It is a place where “(v)isitors will have the opportunity to take a seat at a large, communal table and engage in conversation about a wide range of food-related issues and topics.” Here, the museum is inviting visitors to go beyond just being passive viewers of the exhibition. They are saying eating food and drinking wine are essentially social, convivial activities (not to mention economic and political activities). Visitors are encouraged to discuss the themes of the exhibit and even examine how this history has influenced each of our own eating and drinking choices.

 

As I have pondered this fascinating exhibit, it has occurred to me the unwritten theme could be “Back to the Future.” The natural food movement that began in the 1960’s has evolved and grown parallel to the growth of industrial food and the current renewed emphasis on local, small scale production grows in significance alongside the “Big Ag” of multinational corporations that for their part still dominate.

 

The 2000’s especially have seen a renewed commitment to authentic food and wine, with more emphasis on organic, local and small-scale production. The battles between these often opposing forces are heating up over the food world’s role in climate change and the pros and cons of GMOs. We even may be in the midst of another period of transformation. Maybe the Smithsonian should consider making the exhibit permanent and plan to add more years.

 

The exhibit will run indefinitely, and more information can be found at http://americanhistory.si.edu or by calling the public line at (202) 633-1000.