Philosophizing wine, why not?

Vega Sicilia did it ... in Champagne it was usual practice (and still is), Artadi did it (at least about plots, and many others) ...

We have gone from "Pagos Viejos" to "Carretil" and from "Krug, Bollinger or any other style" to the champagne of the plot, vintage and specific producer ... and I love it, don't get me wrong.

It seems that the prevailing discourse is, to a certain point, the search for a personality (beyond the “quality” concept, which could be too abstract), in the conjunction of a plot, terroir in a narrow sense, within a vintage concrete ... what "nature" gives in that year. I share this completely: personality, difference, unique character, beyond a "quality" than who is the "judge" that rules (subjective).

But there is another part of the discourse that, if so, I do not share at all and in this case, it would be like a kind of search for a certain "purity". Because ... what is purity?

I wonder why there is not a producer who, in search of HIS OWN interpretation of what a “wonderful” wine would be for him/her, does not mix vintages, parcels, varieties and whatever. An equally IRREPETIBLE alchemy, the composition of a human being, interpreting that same "nature".

There are obvious reasons, let's say "identity", related to things, entities, such as that in Champagne they wanted to achieve a stable style and without surprises and they also had the financial capacity to do so, while the common wineries had (and have) than to produce and sell "each vintage" for their subsistence, since all this "philosophy" requires serious investment decisions: spaces in the winery, technical and physical means, planting decisions in the vineyards and a lot of other things ...

But there are also "philosophical" reasons and I base them on the fact that we are "pendular" and on "photography" you have the main "culprit" for all this: black / white, beautiful / ugly, good / bad dichotomies, Parker / crispy wines ...

The "monovarietal" culture is very "New World" (also in the "Old World" if we think in "the North"). In both, the devastating new tendency to express the personality of a single plot, what some have called "bottling a landscape" and they both seem wonderful, I don't try to "choose" between one and the other trends, because everything enriches and increases the wonderful complexity of this world of wine.

I speak precisely of enriching, considering the "vintage" as one more variable, to create "that specific wine" that is in the maker's mind, but not as in Champagne, with the intention of consolidating a style, but creatively.

There is nothing more "Mediterranean" than "the blend" (of varieties and plots) and we must not forget that the Mediterranean is the cradle of wine.

Chave is one of the fervent defenders of the blend of plots, saying that "strength" is in that mix and not in the individuality of each one of them ... that in this way "man" bends "nature" .. I would say that this is how he decides to "interpret" ... by the way, Parker once said: if there was an Olympus of wines, Chave would be Zeus.

Making a joke: when "women" accuse us (men) of being unable to do two things at once ... they are right.