On the lasagna thing, as another pedant I’d argue it isn’t “Lasagna alla Bolognese” without béchamel. But to argue that there are no “authentic” Italian lasagna recipes that use ricotta (see Carnevale, for example) is silly. To wit, it’s the noodles that make it lasagna.
Spot-on. As a writer and not a winemaker/business owner, there's no reason for us to call these things wine. Perhaps we could debate "de-alcoholized wine" as it was at one point wine. But short of that, it's all proxies and wine alternatives.
I do think business owners/winemakers do have a challenge which is how do you make clear what the product is. The same way we have plant-based meats, gluten-free cookies and vegan pizza, sometimes the goal is just explanation. Not sure what you do about that.
Concur on the Wine perspective... "Wine is wine", taking the alcohol out is completely denaturing it... so, yes "Wine alternative" is far more appropriate.. but marketing types need something "heatlhy-ish and catchy" sounding... ugh.
It's actually not healthy at all due to the laundry list a additives that are added to stabilize, sweeten, preserve, and adjust texture. It's disgusting and should not be labeled wine. Additionally, unlike wine, the ingredients should be listed of the Zero Alcohol concoctions. "extracts of wine flavors added" as an ingredient?
Tom, well said and written. It is simple, Alcohol is the Soul of the wine. If you strip the alcohol out you are taking it's Soul. Essentially, rendering it to something else, but not Wine as you stated. I predict this will be a fad just like that junk Orange Wine, and all the other Natural wine nonsense.
Reno - Your statements about non-alcoholic wines being a fad or junk show how out of touch you are. People enjoy these products because they wanted them. Your arbitrary predictions are junk and nonsense. Research before speaking about wine next time, not just spew opinions based on old notions. Stop demonizing products that don't fit your preferences. The world has moved beyond outdated views of wine.
I believe that the federal definition of “wine” is, “The product of a bonded winery.” Additionally, “wine” must contain, “… not less than 7 percent, and not more than 24 percent of alcohol by volume.” These non-alcoholic grape beverages cannot legally be sold as any type of “wine.”
Tom, so even the TTB recognizes (in its own way) that "wine" has something essential to do with Alcohol. But it's also important to remember that wine, for the TTB's purposes also has something to do with taxes.
THANK YOU TOM!! The first time I tasted one of the non-wine chemical concoctions I thought "this shit shouldn't be sold as 'wine'!" The producers and marketers of the garbage are hurting the wine industry's reputation and future. If that were my first experience with wine I would have never become a winemaker.
Oh, wow, Dan, it sounds like you've had quite the.. enlightening experience with those "non-wine chemical concoctions" as you put it. I'm glad to hear that your refined palate was able to distinguish between true artistry and cheap imitations.
It's really enlightening to see how you think these products are hurting the industry's reputation and future. Tell me, Dan, have you ever stopped to consider the possibility that people might actually enjoy these "garbage" concoctions? That maybe, just maybe, there's a market for them out there? Production is growing, so is consumption.
And I'm sure it's completely coincidental that your passion for winemaking began only after discovering the true art of wine. *Sigh* It's almost as if you're trying to justify your own existence by denigrating others' attempts at innovation.
Anyone who dares to create something different from the traditional norm is hurting the industry...according to Dan. How quaint.
Hi Tom, I quite agree with you. Thanks for zeroing on this but beyond semantics and metaphors, removing the alcohol has a couple of real world effects that bar it from earning the name "wine" at all in my book. First of all, without alcohol to provide support and structure for wine's other elements there is no balance, tension or sequence to the wine. All elements of place, grape character, nuance have been absolutely obliterated. Secondly, the very involved manipulations required in the production process to remove the alcohol and then try to construct some sad simulacrum of even an ordinary glass of wine is akin to Frankenstein's monster. The best comparison would be the difference between plant-based burger alternatives and the real thing. There even seems to be a very wrong-headed association with dealcoholized wine being "healthier". Nothing could be further from the truth. People should read up on how dealcoholized wine is made.
Great points Brent. Having seen the (expensive) process of de-alcing first hand I was horrified by the extensive chemical use. What was once wine joins the ranks of Franken Foods that no human who values their health should ingest. On the other hand, I've tried some terrific non alcoholic, high quality fruit based beverages that I'd happily consume as a wine alternative, that also demonstrate a level of provenance - something we value in the wine industry (and a de-alced wine can no longer comfortably lay claim to in my opinion).
Hard disagree, Tom. "Alternative" is the term for things that are literally not wine - unfermented products. "Non-Alcoholic Wine" is wine according to the fundamental definition of the term, sorry to say but removing the alcohol is more like removing the gluten from the noodles, not the noodles themselves.
It's hard to read writing like this and not see the immediate comparisons to the same histrionic takes on every new category of wine when they were first being seriously considered and/or on the rise in terms of popularity. Natural wine, orange wine, etc. All of it was "not wine" that somehow violated inherent laws of why we would ever take it seriously, yet history proves these takes incorrect and overcorrections to something not nearly as outlandish as the pushback claimed it to be.
Non-Alcoholic Wine (aka dealcoholized wine) has a ways to go, but it is its own category of wine, and like all new categories, humans will continue to improve how we make it. It's here to stay, and it's wine by every core meaning of the term, regardless of your personal like or dislike of it.
That said, I never heard folks say that "natural" or Orange wine or such was not wine. I heard them say it was not good wine, or perhaps not traditional. these products do, as you say, violate inherent "laws" of wine propriety, but I don't think I heard folks say they are not wine.
But even having read your hard disagree, I'm inclined to stick by my belief that the essence of wine is that it contains alcohol. By the way, what "fundamental" definition of wine are you referring to?
Fundamnetal deifnition is that it's a fermented product. "Wine" being a term that can relate to grape-based or other substances (rice, other fruits, etc.) The idea of effectively dealcoholizing the fermented juice after the fact is *in addition to* having created wine in the first place. It doesn't magically transform it back into its original unfermented juice state. So you can argue it isn't any good, that you don't like it, but it's not accurate to argue it "isn't wine".
Until very recent history, dealcoholization wasn't an option. Until only the last decade or two, it wasn't an option while still having a somewhat decent product. And we're still figuring out how to create a final wine that works with its own flavor profile, which should be distinct from the flavor profile of wine that retains full alcohol, just as flavor profiles are distinct between wines with heavy maceration or no maceration. Removing an entire element changes the composition, no question. That's a fun challenge to figure out. But it doesn't change how it was fundementally made in the first place.
Dave - The way you've explained how dealcoholization isn't magic that turns juice back into unfermented product was enlightening to me. It's clear as day now why non-alcoholic wines should be considered true wines, just like any other type out there! Unfortunately, there are still some people with outdated views on the topic.
Wark's continued insistence on his outdated view of what defines wine is truly disappointing and shows a complete lack of understanding about how our industry has evolved over the years. You can't just dismiss new product developments as not fitting into your personal definition of wine - that's the kind of stubbornness that'll lead us nowhere!
The idea of non-alcoholic wines have been born out of a desire to give consumers more choices. The growth of the category is because of the consumer demand. Who are we to tell people they can't enjoy a wine-like experience without the alcohol? Shouldn't we be embracing these developments and finding ways to improve them instead of trying to force them into an old-fashioned mold?
And let's not forget about the fact that winemakers are still figuring out best practices for these products - that only proves how much potential they have! We shouldn't be holding them back because of outdated views on what wine should look like.
Let's keep pushing forward, Dave. Consumers are eager for more choices for their favorite drinks. The future of the industry lies in embracing new developments and finding ways to make them even better - not in trying to limit what constitutes true wine based on personal beliefs about its essence. There's always time to change Wark.
Thanks, Walker, and I agree! Though I do think we can push more gently on those like Tom who are experienced, smart, well-meaning, and by no means a mere reactionary. I wasn't around for the initial rise of the Nartural Wine movement, but I have waded through the ashes of the aftermath, and seen how the different sides became unecessarily entranched, dogmatic, and resistant due to the fervency of the language being used.
Let's push forward, for those who want to imbibe the new offerings - and those who do not, absolutely don't have to! I just wish we could all be more careful on deciding what needs speaking out against vs. what we merely have no interest in. Actively speaking out against a category is deleterious, so we should be aware that this is the effect we're angling for - we shouldn't do it unless we want to harm the category, and not just express an opinion amongst friends in a room, or what have you.
Yep, nope! you know what I wrote about DA?Na wine back in the fall. Like you, I am an old school guy...if it does not have alcohol it ain't wine. That said, I tasted a lot of these DA-zed 'wines'. Some were not bad. So, Here's my acronym for what they should be called: NOPE-Non-Offensive Personalized Elixers*
I don't want non-alcoholic wine but I'd go to Vegas on the odds that you will lose that argument at some point in the future. We have a tendency to project the zeitgeist into the past but remember that roughly 100 years ago people were still arguing about whether whisky had to include grain or if it was still whisky if distilled on a different type of still even if all the ingredients were exactly the same.
As a side note, you can buy lasagna in Italy that doesn't even have a red sauce at all and it's still called lasagna. Saying that lasagna needs certain ingredients is like saying ravioli isn't ravioli unless it has one certain filling or that pizza isn't pizza unless it's Margherita.
You may be right about what gets defined as "wine" down the road. But I'll take issue with your comments on Lasagna and Ravioli. I argued that the essence of "lasagna" was a dish with layered pasta noodles. Not a red sauce. I think that we can agree that if the dish does not have pasta layers with something in between, it's something else. As for Ravioli, I'd argue that it doesn't matter what's in the filling, but that there is a filling enclosed in pasta pockets.
Wark - This is nothing but a feeble attempt to maintain an outdated stereotype about alcohol being inherently necessary for something to be considered wine. Your argument that non-alcoholic wines can't truly be called wines is as baseless as it gets (even for you!), and it reeks of stubbornness and resistance to change.
You know what? Stop associating wine with its alcoholic nature so rigidly. Wine, at its core, is about the experience - the flavors, aromas, textures - not just about the buzz that comes from drinking something that contains alcohol. Maybe it's more about the buzz but some won't admit that. If people are happy enjoying a beverage that has all these qualities without the booze, who are you to tell them they're wrong?
Wark, your comparison with lasagna is ridiculous! Were you watching old episodes of Garfield and Friends while you were writing this drivel? Do you really think every single aspect of making lasagna must be followed precisely or else it becomes something else entirely? That's absurd. People make food their own way all over the world - same goes for drinks.
Look, I'm not saying we should water down our standards just because someone wants to sell grape juice without alcohol in it. But why are you so against giving consumers more choices? Especially healthier choices... If non-alcoholic wines can provide a similar experience without any of the drawbacks associated with alcohol consumption, then isn't that something good?
Instead of trying to limit what we call wine, embrace these new developments in the market. They might appeal to people who want the taste and enjoyment of wine but can't, don't want to, or don't need to consume alcohol. And if they become popular? Evolution!
So, Tom Wark, next time you write about this topic, how about considering other viewpoints? Instead of bashing non-alcoholic wines and trying to keep them out of the limelight, why not focus on what we can learn from these products? How can they help us improve our existing wines or offer something new and exciting for consumers?
And remember, the world is changing. People are drinking less alcohol overall, whether due to health reasons or simply lifestyle choices. So maybe it's time we rethink how "wine" should be defined in this evolving landscape - not cling onto old notions of what wine must be like.
So here's my final thought: let's open our minds and hearts to the possibilities that non-alcoholic wines bring. They might just be the key to unlocking a whole new era of enjoyable, flavorful beverages for everyone!
Walker, if you don't believe that there is meaning in words or that a thing has an essence or a characteristic that defines it, that's fine. But say so. If Welch's decides to call their juice "wine", you seem fine with that. If someone wants to pour a red sauce, bechamel, Parm and basil into a dish and swirl it around without any pasta and wants to call it "lasagna" then say so. You'll get a lot of sideway glances for your desire to withdrawal all meaning from words and things, but I'm sure you can deal with that.
Just like Non Alcoholic beer will continue to be called NA Beer, so will Non Alcoholic Wine. As previously commented, "Wine Alternatives" are a newer category made popular by "Proxies" from Acid League and Muri. Non fermented, and with a culinary focus. Europe is getting on this new Wine Alternative train faster than the US, but it will eventually be a larger player in the space.
There are a lot of people that LOVE wine, but just don't want alcohol all the time, or at all in their lives right now. This is a tidal shift that the wine industry needs to innovate, pivot and adapt for because if its not edited into their business plans for 3 years from now...whoa. Just look at the data. Theres already double digit drops and we're only in the infancy of this sea level change and it's definitely not a fad.
While Millennials are driving this movement of drinking less alcohol, Gen Z is what they're most scared about. We all intuitively know the negative consequences of alcohol on our bodies and brains. Public sentiment on alcohol continues to shift and alcohol is having a bit of a cigarette moment. Society is moving towards more wellness. Everyone can be on board for more wellness in the world. Or, not, but, thats kinda weird.
Desirable non alcoholic wine may be harder to find, but it certainly exists as technology and process have gotten better. I'm a career bartender that managed a lot of bars, brewed over 100 batches of beer, and geeked out on liquor, beer and wine at a high level for over 20 years. Love the alcohol, but it wasn't good for me anymore and I stopped at 38. Brought it back a couple years later. Nahh, i'm good. Got too much to do in the morning. I'm a top non alcoholic wine specialist and have these conversations everyday for the last 4.5 years with the general public, corporations, winemakers, sommeliers.. everyone. And the conversations go very well. Its just harder for this older, Big Wine generation to get it. I get it. Its your livelihood. You poured your heart, soul, passion, and lives into this special thing that is wine. Its just shifting in a huge way whether you like it or not.
We don't get together over a glass of water, but we do a great drink in hand. One of my favorite moments in life involve pairing wine with food in a hospitality setting with a significant other. I can do that now without compromising my health or bringing alcohol back into my life, which is awesome. Esther Mobley said she has found some decent NA wine and then ended her article saying "if you’re observing dry January, may I recommend a glass of soda water?" and I thought that was so sad when I read that the other day. I don't want a glass of soda water, and as a restaurant owner, I don't want to sell a $0-$3 soda. I want to sell a $12-14 glass of Non Alcoholic wine to the millennial or Gen X'r that recently found out it exists. Think about how many glasses of water are ordered tonight at restaurants across the country because they dont have a desirable Non Alcoholic option for these 10's of millions of people cutting back on drinking? Millions of waters. Now, multiple that number by $12. They're leaving money on the table, and wine industry folks hating on those that don't want to drink alcohol is kinda fucked up. Just wait and see how many known wine companies start making Non Alcoholic wine, just like the big beer companies are doing. Its allll coming.
I got to taste Karen MacNeil for 2.5 hours on the best Non Alcoholic wine in the world (feel free to reach out on what those are!) and it was an amazing experience, for both of us. Blew her damn mind on how far the industry has come in the last 4 years. She said multiple times, "Thank you for educating me and giving me perspective on all of this. Its absolutely fascinating" but goes on to spew rhetoric and actively try to figure out how to get the younger generation to drink more alcohol. You guys will be on the wrong side of history on this one. Its just getting started.
On the lasagna thing, as another pedant I’d argue it isn’t “Lasagna alla Bolognese” without béchamel. But to argue that there are no “authentic” Italian lasagna recipes that use ricotta (see Carnevale, for example) is silly. To wit, it’s the noodles that make it lasagna.
Concur... I must admit a very strong preference to the Carnevale style. The recipe @ Great Italian Chefs is squisito.
Agreed!
Spot-on. As a writer and not a winemaker/business owner, there's no reason for us to call these things wine. Perhaps we could debate "de-alcoholized wine" as it was at one point wine. But short of that, it's all proxies and wine alternatives.
I do think business owners/winemakers do have a challenge which is how do you make clear what the product is. The same way we have plant-based meats, gluten-free cookies and vegan pizza, sometimes the goal is just explanation. Not sure what you do about that.
Concur on the Wine perspective... "Wine is wine", taking the alcohol out is completely denaturing it... so, yes "Wine alternative" is far more appropriate.. but marketing types need something "heatlhy-ish and catchy" sounding... ugh.
It's actually not healthy at all due to the laundry list a additives that are added to stabilize, sweeten, preserve, and adjust texture. It's disgusting and should not be labeled wine. Additionally, unlike wine, the ingredients should be listed of the Zero Alcohol concoctions. "extracts of wine flavors added" as an ingredient?
Tom, well said and written. It is simple, Alcohol is the Soul of the wine. If you strip the alcohol out you are taking it's Soul. Essentially, rendering it to something else, but not Wine as you stated. I predict this will be a fad just like that junk Orange Wine, and all the other Natural wine nonsense.
Hi Fred! Fred! thanks for selling a lot of Matanzas Creek!
Reno - Your statements about non-alcoholic wines being a fad or junk show how out of touch you are. People enjoy these products because they wanted them. Your arbitrary predictions are junk and nonsense. Research before speaking about wine next time, not just spew opinions based on old notions. Stop demonizing products that don't fit your preferences. The world has moved beyond outdated views of wine.
I believe that the federal definition of “wine” is, “The product of a bonded winery.” Additionally, “wine” must contain, “… not less than 7 percent, and not more than 24 percent of alcohol by volume.” These non-alcoholic grape beverages cannot legally be sold as any type of “wine.”
Tom, so even the TTB recognizes (in its own way) that "wine" has something essential to do with Alcohol. But it's also important to remember that wine, for the TTB's purposes also has something to do with taxes.
THANK YOU TOM!! The first time I tasted one of the non-wine chemical concoctions I thought "this shit shouldn't be sold as 'wine'!" The producers and marketers of the garbage are hurting the wine industry's reputation and future. If that were my first experience with wine I would have never become a winemaker.
Oh, wow, Dan, it sounds like you've had quite the.. enlightening experience with those "non-wine chemical concoctions" as you put it. I'm glad to hear that your refined palate was able to distinguish between true artistry and cheap imitations.
It's really enlightening to see how you think these products are hurting the industry's reputation and future. Tell me, Dan, have you ever stopped to consider the possibility that people might actually enjoy these "garbage" concoctions? That maybe, just maybe, there's a market for them out there? Production is growing, so is consumption.
And I'm sure it's completely coincidental that your passion for winemaking began only after discovering the true art of wine. *Sigh* It's almost as if you're trying to justify your own existence by denigrating others' attempts at innovation.
Anyone who dares to create something different from the traditional norm is hurting the industry...according to Dan. How quaint.
Hi Tom, I quite agree with you. Thanks for zeroing on this but beyond semantics and metaphors, removing the alcohol has a couple of real world effects that bar it from earning the name "wine" at all in my book. First of all, without alcohol to provide support and structure for wine's other elements there is no balance, tension or sequence to the wine. All elements of place, grape character, nuance have been absolutely obliterated. Secondly, the very involved manipulations required in the production process to remove the alcohol and then try to construct some sad simulacrum of even an ordinary glass of wine is akin to Frankenstein's monster. The best comparison would be the difference between plant-based burger alternatives and the real thing. There even seems to be a very wrong-headed association with dealcoholized wine being "healthier". Nothing could be further from the truth. People should read up on how dealcoholized wine is made.
Great points Brent. Having seen the (expensive) process of de-alcing first hand I was horrified by the extensive chemical use. What was once wine joins the ranks of Franken Foods that no human who values their health should ingest. On the other hand, I've tried some terrific non alcoholic, high quality fruit based beverages that I'd happily consume as a wine alternative, that also demonstrate a level of provenance - something we value in the wine industry (and a de-alced wine can no longer comfortably lay claim to in my opinion).
Hard disagree, Tom. "Alternative" is the term for things that are literally not wine - unfermented products. "Non-Alcoholic Wine" is wine according to the fundamental definition of the term, sorry to say but removing the alcohol is more like removing the gluten from the noodles, not the noodles themselves.
It's hard to read writing like this and not see the immediate comparisons to the same histrionic takes on every new category of wine when they were first being seriously considered and/or on the rise in terms of popularity. Natural wine, orange wine, etc. All of it was "not wine" that somehow violated inherent laws of why we would ever take it seriously, yet history proves these takes incorrect and overcorrections to something not nearly as outlandish as the pushback claimed it to be.
Non-Alcoholic Wine (aka dealcoholized wine) has a ways to go, but it is its own category of wine, and like all new categories, humans will continue to improve how we make it. It's here to stay, and it's wine by every core meaning of the term, regardless of your personal like or dislike of it.
Hi Dave. You can disagree when ever you like!!
That said, I never heard folks say that "natural" or Orange wine or such was not wine. I heard them say it was not good wine, or perhaps not traditional. these products do, as you say, violate inherent "laws" of wine propriety, but I don't think I heard folks say they are not wine.
But even having read your hard disagree, I'm inclined to stick by my belief that the essence of wine is that it contains alcohol. By the way, what "fundamental" definition of wine are you referring to?
Fundamnetal deifnition is that it's a fermented product. "Wine" being a term that can relate to grape-based or other substances (rice, other fruits, etc.) The idea of effectively dealcoholizing the fermented juice after the fact is *in addition to* having created wine in the first place. It doesn't magically transform it back into its original unfermented juice state. So you can argue it isn't any good, that you don't like it, but it's not accurate to argue it "isn't wine".
Until very recent history, dealcoholization wasn't an option. Until only the last decade or two, it wasn't an option while still having a somewhat decent product. And we're still figuring out how to create a final wine that works with its own flavor profile, which should be distinct from the flavor profile of wine that retains full alcohol, just as flavor profiles are distinct between wines with heavy maceration or no maceration. Removing an entire element changes the composition, no question. That's a fun challenge to figure out. But it doesn't change how it was fundementally made in the first place.
Dave - The way you've explained how dealcoholization isn't magic that turns juice back into unfermented product was enlightening to me. It's clear as day now why non-alcoholic wines should be considered true wines, just like any other type out there! Unfortunately, there are still some people with outdated views on the topic.
Wark's continued insistence on his outdated view of what defines wine is truly disappointing and shows a complete lack of understanding about how our industry has evolved over the years. You can't just dismiss new product developments as not fitting into your personal definition of wine - that's the kind of stubbornness that'll lead us nowhere!
The idea of non-alcoholic wines have been born out of a desire to give consumers more choices. The growth of the category is because of the consumer demand. Who are we to tell people they can't enjoy a wine-like experience without the alcohol? Shouldn't we be embracing these developments and finding ways to improve them instead of trying to force them into an old-fashioned mold?
And let's not forget about the fact that winemakers are still figuring out best practices for these products - that only proves how much potential they have! We shouldn't be holding them back because of outdated views on what wine should look like.
Let's keep pushing forward, Dave. Consumers are eager for more choices for their favorite drinks. The future of the industry lies in embracing new developments and finding ways to make them even better - not in trying to limit what constitutes true wine based on personal beliefs about its essence. There's always time to change Wark.
Thanks, Walker, and I agree! Though I do think we can push more gently on those like Tom who are experienced, smart, well-meaning, and by no means a mere reactionary. I wasn't around for the initial rise of the Nartural Wine movement, but I have waded through the ashes of the aftermath, and seen how the different sides became unecessarily entranched, dogmatic, and resistant due to the fervency of the language being used.
Let's push forward, for those who want to imbibe the new offerings - and those who do not, absolutely don't have to! I just wish we could all be more careful on deciding what needs speaking out against vs. what we merely have no interest in. Actively speaking out against a category is deleterious, so we should be aware that this is the effect we're angling for - we shouldn't do it unless we want to harm the category, and not just express an opinion amongst friends in a room, or what have you.
Walker, you wrote, "Who are we to tell people they can't enjoy a wine-like experience without the alcohol?"
Is it "wine-like" or "wine"? Because if it's "wine-like", as you write, then even you agree it is definitionally not "wine".
I completely agree. Without the alcohol it is not wine.
Tom-
Yep, nope! you know what I wrote about DA?Na wine back in the fall. Like you, I am an old school guy...if it does not have alcohol it ain't wine. That said, I tasted a lot of these DA-zed 'wines'. Some were not bad. So, Here's my acronym for what they should be called: NOPE-Non-Offensive Personalized Elixers*
I don't want non-alcoholic wine but I'd go to Vegas on the odds that you will lose that argument at some point in the future. We have a tendency to project the zeitgeist into the past but remember that roughly 100 years ago people were still arguing about whether whisky had to include grain or if it was still whisky if distilled on a different type of still even if all the ingredients were exactly the same.
As a side note, you can buy lasagna in Italy that doesn't even have a red sauce at all and it's still called lasagna. Saying that lasagna needs certain ingredients is like saying ravioli isn't ravioli unless it has one certain filling or that pizza isn't pizza unless it's Margherita.
The Zeitgeist moves on.
Good morning, Grant.
You may be right about what gets defined as "wine" down the road. But I'll take issue with your comments on Lasagna and Ravioli. I argued that the essence of "lasagna" was a dish with layered pasta noodles. Not a red sauce. I think that we can agree that if the dish does not have pasta layers with something in between, it's something else. As for Ravioli, I'd argue that it doesn't matter what's in the filling, but that there is a filling enclosed in pasta pockets.
Wark - This is nothing but a feeble attempt to maintain an outdated stereotype about alcohol being inherently necessary for something to be considered wine. Your argument that non-alcoholic wines can't truly be called wines is as baseless as it gets (even for you!), and it reeks of stubbornness and resistance to change.
You know what? Stop associating wine with its alcoholic nature so rigidly. Wine, at its core, is about the experience - the flavors, aromas, textures - not just about the buzz that comes from drinking something that contains alcohol. Maybe it's more about the buzz but some won't admit that. If people are happy enjoying a beverage that has all these qualities without the booze, who are you to tell them they're wrong?
Wark, your comparison with lasagna is ridiculous! Were you watching old episodes of Garfield and Friends while you were writing this drivel? Do you really think every single aspect of making lasagna must be followed precisely or else it becomes something else entirely? That's absurd. People make food their own way all over the world - same goes for drinks.
Look, I'm not saying we should water down our standards just because someone wants to sell grape juice without alcohol in it. But why are you so against giving consumers more choices? Especially healthier choices... If non-alcoholic wines can provide a similar experience without any of the drawbacks associated with alcohol consumption, then isn't that something good?
Instead of trying to limit what we call wine, embrace these new developments in the market. They might appeal to people who want the taste and enjoyment of wine but can't, don't want to, or don't need to consume alcohol. And if they become popular? Evolution!
So, Tom Wark, next time you write about this topic, how about considering other viewpoints? Instead of bashing non-alcoholic wines and trying to keep them out of the limelight, why not focus on what we can learn from these products? How can they help us improve our existing wines or offer something new and exciting for consumers?
And remember, the world is changing. People are drinking less alcohol overall, whether due to health reasons or simply lifestyle choices. So maybe it's time we rethink how "wine" should be defined in this evolving landscape - not cling onto old notions of what wine must be like.
So here's my final thought: let's open our minds and hearts to the possibilities that non-alcoholic wines bring. They might just be the key to unlocking a whole new era of enjoyable, flavorful beverages for everyone!
Walker, if you don't believe that there is meaning in words or that a thing has an essence or a characteristic that defines it, that's fine. But say so. If Welch's decides to call their juice "wine", you seem fine with that. If someone wants to pour a red sauce, bechamel, Parm and basil into a dish and swirl it around without any pasta and wants to call it "lasagna" then say so. You'll get a lot of sideway glances for your desire to withdrawal all meaning from words and things, but I'm sure you can deal with that.
Just like Non Alcoholic beer will continue to be called NA Beer, so will Non Alcoholic Wine. As previously commented, "Wine Alternatives" are a newer category made popular by "Proxies" from Acid League and Muri. Non fermented, and with a culinary focus. Europe is getting on this new Wine Alternative train faster than the US, but it will eventually be a larger player in the space.
There are a lot of people that LOVE wine, but just don't want alcohol all the time, or at all in their lives right now. This is a tidal shift that the wine industry needs to innovate, pivot and adapt for because if its not edited into their business plans for 3 years from now...whoa. Just look at the data. Theres already double digit drops and we're only in the infancy of this sea level change and it's definitely not a fad.
While Millennials are driving this movement of drinking less alcohol, Gen Z is what they're most scared about. We all intuitively know the negative consequences of alcohol on our bodies and brains. Public sentiment on alcohol continues to shift and alcohol is having a bit of a cigarette moment. Society is moving towards more wellness. Everyone can be on board for more wellness in the world. Or, not, but, thats kinda weird.
Desirable non alcoholic wine may be harder to find, but it certainly exists as technology and process have gotten better. I'm a career bartender that managed a lot of bars, brewed over 100 batches of beer, and geeked out on liquor, beer and wine at a high level for over 20 years. Love the alcohol, but it wasn't good for me anymore and I stopped at 38. Brought it back a couple years later. Nahh, i'm good. Got too much to do in the morning. I'm a top non alcoholic wine specialist and have these conversations everyday for the last 4.5 years with the general public, corporations, winemakers, sommeliers.. everyone. And the conversations go very well. Its just harder for this older, Big Wine generation to get it. I get it. Its your livelihood. You poured your heart, soul, passion, and lives into this special thing that is wine. Its just shifting in a huge way whether you like it or not.
We don't get together over a glass of water, but we do a great drink in hand. One of my favorite moments in life involve pairing wine with food in a hospitality setting with a significant other. I can do that now without compromising my health or bringing alcohol back into my life, which is awesome. Esther Mobley said she has found some decent NA wine and then ended her article saying "if you’re observing dry January, may I recommend a glass of soda water?" and I thought that was so sad when I read that the other day. I don't want a glass of soda water, and as a restaurant owner, I don't want to sell a $0-$3 soda. I want to sell a $12-14 glass of Non Alcoholic wine to the millennial or Gen X'r that recently found out it exists. Think about how many glasses of water are ordered tonight at restaurants across the country because they dont have a desirable Non Alcoholic option for these 10's of millions of people cutting back on drinking? Millions of waters. Now, multiple that number by $12. They're leaving money on the table, and wine industry folks hating on those that don't want to drink alcohol is kinda fucked up. Just wait and see how many known wine companies start making Non Alcoholic wine, just like the big beer companies are doing. Its allll coming.
I got to taste Karen MacNeil for 2.5 hours on the best Non Alcoholic wine in the world (feel free to reach out on what those are!) and it was an amazing experience, for both of us. Blew her damn mind on how far the industry has come in the last 4 years. She said multiple times, "Thank you for educating me and giving me perspective on all of this. Its absolutely fascinating" but goes on to spew rhetoric and actively try to figure out how to get the younger generation to drink more alcohol. You guys will be on the wrong side of history on this one. Its just getting started.
Grape juice + fermentation = wine
Grape juice + fermentation - fermentation = grape juice