Wine Conversation: Old World vs New World (V)
If we cancel these terms we may as well cancel wine itself.
I’ll warn all of my readers. I have big opinions on this topic but more so on cancel culture as a whole. I do hope you feel comfortable responding if you don’t agree. Conversations are what need to happen in this world- civil conversations. Because not all of us have had the same life, same experiences and same history. We are all entitled to our opinions and to not be canceled for them.
Part one of our conversation this month is from
- she gives understanding to both sides as she starts the conversation off.
Part two is from
- where he describes why he doesn’t like the terms and brings some mythology into play.
Part three is from
- where she stands behind the Court of Master Sommeliers decision to stop using the terms.
Part four is from
- where she acknowledges everyone’s opinions but explains how in blind tasting the terms still are part of her thinking and vocabulary as well as used at the winery she works at.
First, a note on cancel culture
I decided to be a part of this conversation because it was a topic that was skirting on the edge of cancel culture, and I felt a strong urge to express my opinion on this subject. We can’t be against canceling cultural concepts and words from some groups of people and then do it ourselves.
Canceling words or phrases that clearly are not being used in derogatory ways is a slippery slope. I am talking about a few words and phrases in the wine lexicon that very few people use in any way that could be deemed offensive. Of course, not all words evoke the same feeling for every single human; that would be crazy. We all have very different life experiences and histories. You can still use these terms and be respectful of others.
When I talk and write about wine, I refuse to be canceled for using words that help me describe something to my customers or readers. And not only words I use, but words my customers use every time they shop for wine with me. If we want to alienate more people from wine- continue canceling words that consumers have been using for decades when talking about wine. I feel wine writers and educators always seem to make things more complicated for those that just simply want to enjoy wine without being judged.
Now that my big opinion is out of the way, onto Old World and New World
It clearly frustrates me that "Old World" and "New World" are now considered part of the ever growing list of words some people deem we shouldn't use anymore.
I hear these terms used in the wine shop I work at every shift. Whether it be customers, my colleagues or our distributors, everyone uses them. When I hear them or use them, they are being used to refer to a place rather than a style usually. The Old World refers to Europe, and the New World includes all other parts of the world. My customers always ask where Old World or New World wines are located and which ones we may recommend. Or we ask our customers if they prefer wines from the Old World or New World. This helps us narrow down where in the shop we will guide them to and what countries we can offer wine recommendations from. Everyone understands these terms; they don't need an explanation. Yes, you could argue that you could as simply ask for European wines instead of Old World wines but many people have referred to them as Old World for so long they don't think about it or care.
In regards to describing the style of wine, I typically don’t use these terms that much anymore. Today, many wines from around the world come in various styles, making the old standards feel less meaningful to me. Yet, it’s easy when I hear a customer use these terms to describe a wine style to slip right back into the old habit of using them as well. I do still have customers tell me they love Old World style reds. This doesn’t mean I can’t show them a Burgundian style Pinot Noir made in Oregon, it just gives me a reference to a style of wine they enjoy. I don’t care one way or another if people choose to continue using them when referring to wine styles, that is their prerogative. And frankly, whatever is easiest for them is best for me.
I still have to ask why it is so offensive when someone uses Old World wines, not European wines. People aren’t thinking, "New World wines, those great countries with a history of slavery, yay!" or "Old World wines, those remarkable countries that colonized so much of the world." Seriously. If we are going to explore that rabbit hole, we might as well cancel wine altogether. Many vineyards around the world have relied on slave labor, free interns, undocumented immigrants, and prisoners to pick grapes. Without them, these businesses might struggle to survive and then where would we all be.
So, I will continue to use these terms and not worry if someone decides to judge me for it. I mean no offense, and I am not denying that some won’t agree with me. I'm using terms that have been around for ages and are helpful to the people I serve in the industry. People will still use these terms whether you like them or not, though perhaps not in all wine circles.
Up next is
. I look forward to reading your thoughts later this week!
Well, I'm glad we finally have some disagreement around here!
I totally get using the language that customers use, and I'm not kicking anyone out of the winery or looking down my nose at them if they use these terms. I know what they mean, and it helps me find what they like, whether I fully love the terms or not. I was talking about the evolution of my own language to terms I find more accurate as well as inclusive, and maybe eventually that trickles down the line to others who are selling and buying wine. But maybe it doesn't. I'm not fussed about it either way.
What I do want to push back on a bit in your post is the second to last paragraph, when you seem to suggest we shouldn't question unethical business practices in wine because they had to do it for survival, and if they hadn't, there would be no wine. First, I think that's a serious stretch. There are and always have been people making wine without slave labor and unpaid prisoners (which is basically the same thing). I think it's important to be aware of the darker sides of the wine industry, both historically and currently, and if I find out a producer is using slave labor now to produce wine, I'm not going to buy their products or recommend them to anyone else. Is that cancel culture? I think that is what has come to be seen as cancel culture these days, but I think it's a far more insidious and harmful form of cancel culture to hide or ignore negative realities, or to say we should just get over it and appreciate the end product, effectively canceling my freedom to make choices about where my money goes and what goes into my body.
It's a lesser degree of seriousness, but this is related to the language debate as well, because if language isn't allowed to evolve - if people insist on clinging to older terms just because they're older, and refuse to consider how those terms affect the overall conversation - we've "cancelled" any new voices before they've even had the opportunity to speak.
Kate wraps her bare fists in bandages and screams like JCVD as she split-kicks the rest of us - finally, it's a FIGHT! (no, no, *mostly* kidding ;P)
The thing about language changing, or anything in culture, is that this is actualy an active thing, not a "things change" while no one is paying attention to it. The change occurs because people question something, actively, and push for change. Always met with resistance, often generational, but the active questions and new narrative helps bring new generations up with the idea, which then isn't so crazy to them. My problem with the phrase "cancel culture" these days is its overreaching in the same way those who use the term say they're against - all criticism and calls for "change" and stating clearly why old behaviors are troubling or problematic in whatever way, is suddenly "cancel culture".
Even the use of the phrase here - "cancel words" - is a choice. "Phase out" would be mine, since no one is getting punitively punished for their use, outside of some people stating their strong opinions on the topic, which can't = "being cancelled". Opinions are like assholes, everyone's got 'em.
And look, y'all know me, I love a good hyperbolic statement on any article, but "...if we are going to cancel words in our wine lexicon we may as well cancel wine itself"? As you state in the comments, "language evolves", isn't this the same kind of extreme no-quarter no-nuance stance anyone who acually did believe in "cancel culture" would take?
Lastly, most troubling issues in modern day are systemic, meaning they're largely subconscious - assuming anyone does think the terms are offensive, most know no one *means* offense, but that doesn't change the issue with what the terminology or practices seem to be doing, or keeping in place. As I argued in my own entry to this Conversation - "new world" as a specific phrase keeps wine regions that are now centuries old, perpetually "new" aka in second class status, even though most of the regions in the "Old World" are roughly the same age in terms of how they came to be what they are today. Personally, I don't call this "offensive", but I do call it outdated and inaccurate. And hence, the need to find a newer lexicon that represents wine as it has existed from the 1700's - now.