Michel Rolland

Michel Rolland tries to find Terroir in his glass



Michel Rolland is the most controversial figure in all of the wine world. Many people want him horse whipped and jailed, while others see him as an answer to all their problems and pay him very well for his advice. What can you make of a winemaker from Bordeaux who says things like "I can make great wine anywhere", a man who has abandoned, nay forsaken the artisanal process? Yet his wines are loved the world over, by critics and consumers alike.

The tenets of his winemaking philosophy fly in the face of conventional wisdom. To Rolland, place is irrelevant and the approach to wine making, whether it be Pomerol or Mendoza is always the same, ripeness, extraction and micro-oxygenation. In Rolland's defense, he is making some of the most lush, approachable wines in the world. And what others might refer to as a hegemony of aesthetics, others see as a democraticization of wine. The only problem is that his very successful approach, with the high Parker scores, and hundreds of millions of dollars that follow, supplant the indigenous, historical winemaking wherever he goes. When you are talking about Bordeaux, you are either discussing one of the pillars of world culture, or simply another product to bring to market. Where you fall in that debate makes Rolland's ubiquitousness, consulting for over 100 wineries, either a panacea or a plague.

I think that probably Rolland should be horsewhipped, but not jailed. Instead he should merely be exiled to Argentina where he can make wine in peace without interference from things like tradition and historical typicity and character. In Argentina he is a man free from the shackles of his ancestry and he can swim like an otter in a sea of possibility. In Argentina the arid climate and constant sun allow the Bordeaux varietals to flourish, reaching proportions formerly unknown. In Argentina vineyards can achieve levels of ripeness impossible in Bordeaux. Rolland's approach of maximum extraction expresses the fruit as Bordeaux never could. His method of mirco-oxygenation, whereby oxygen is injected into the wine during fermentation through a porous ceramic block, creates a wine of opulence and roundness of texture well suited to the Bordeaux varietals planted in Argentina. The question is, as Rolland smoothes out all the rough surfaces, as he burnishes and hews the wine in the cellar, does he simultaneously strip away character ? Is all sense of place lost ? And does it matter ? Lets take a look at two of his wines, and see if we can figure this out.

Clos de Los Siete 2006 $20 . A blend of Malbec, Merlot, Cabernet Sauvignon and Syrah. Rolland takes the finished wine from seven vineyards and creates this cuvee. From the back label "A new star is born: with seven points and symbolising ambition and conviction". I, for one didn't need the back label for that, I could see the ambition on the front label, and taste it in the glass. The wine is big, but not massive, new oak is present and it's obvious he is a practiced hand. He has made barrique his servant, not his master. The wine is more complicated than I expected but that may simply be from the inherent advantage of blending varietals. But no stones, no soil. None of the vast tracks of alluvial washes are represented here. Argentina itself is absent in this glass.


Cuvelier Los Andes 2005 $24 One of the seven wineries contributing wine to Clos de Los Siete. The Cuvelier family, who own the vineyard, are also the proprietors of both Chateau Leoville-Poyferre and Chateau Le Crock. Rolland consults for them in the production of this wine. Many French wine families such as the Rothschilds and the Marnier-Lapostolles have established wineries in Argentina and Chile over the past few decades. Many of them have set out to make Bordeaux, and others have set out to use Bordeaux varietals, including Carmenere, to find the voice of Argentina's vineyards. Don Melchor being the best example of the former and Clos Apalta the best example of the latter.

Rolland has done neither. The wine has a tremendous volume of flavor, and a powerful fruit expression. Tannins are firm, but well tamed, providing the basis for opulent fruit of great depth. Massive wine, very fat, much heavier on the new oak, and the perceptible unctuousness of glycerin. The wine is largely Malbec, that Bordeaux varietal well suited to Argentina, with Cabernet Sauvignon, Syrah, Merlot, Petit Verdot in supporting roles. But the Malbec, instead of expressing itself as definitively Argentine, is confused by Syrah. Do we really need Syrah here?

The wine is certainly a crowd pleaser, and it tastes great as far as that goes. Actually drinking it is a bit fatiguing, and it is hard to imagine the food that pairs with this wine. The Famous beef of Argentina? Maybe, but the food would be better served by higher acidity and some earthiness, some gaminess to balance all that high toned fruit. Again, terroir is wholly absent, there is no particular sense of place. In it's stead is the very obvious hand of Rolland, for whom winemaking is a top down relationship between himself and the land. The wine rises not from the vineyard but from the mind of the winemaker, and the demands of the market.