Wine critics are forever on a tightrope.
If they only write nice things about winemakers, they may enjoy a short career in what is essentially wine marketing, but soon enough their credibility will dissolve in a self-made open-top fermenter of 98pt scores.
On the other hand, if they deliver critiques that are less flattering, they will – at best – suffer perpetual character assassinations behind their backs from disenchanted wine merchants. At worst, these peeved and purblind producers will cut out the critic completely, retracting invitations to range reviews, and refusing access to their wines, rendering the wine critic unable to operate without prohibitive expenses to their operating costs.
(It's not just big tech that enjoys the benefits of censorship.)
This, of course, brings into focus the topic of the financial models employed by various wine critics. Wine writers, like most feral creatures, require shelter and sustenance to survive. They need to some sort of mechanism through which to earn money from their work. The trouble with this is that the moment one pays a critic – something that seems to be happening rather a lot in the world of wine – you have to ask who is paying them, what they're being paid for, and whether the answers to questions (1) and (2) undermine the purity of their motivations in delivering their critiques. These questions lead us onto the perennially-debated work of wine journalist, Tim Atkin.
A rare bird
Tim Atkin is a British-born wine critic and one of only 415 qualified Masters of Wine on the planet. As a wine critic, he has made the uncommon decision to review wines without charging the producers for his work. Sure, he earns his living from his wine writing, but at no point does he make the winemaker pay. As all good journalists should, he strives to produce work that is "in the public interest", with the end goal being that consumers and wine lovers see the value to his work and, ergo, pay to read it. Now whether this model works or not is another debate (especially with the rise of AI-generated content, and the plummeting economic value of human insight), but it does free him from undue influence, rendering him independent. ("Independence" is just one of the five ethical pillars in the classic definition of journalism).
Tim has also been visiting South Africa annually and writing focused wine reports for 11 years now. His body of work on the South African wine industry is amongst the most comprehensive in use today. His most recent report is just under 320 pages, and includes reviews of over 2 200 wines, from over 400 producers. This puts him in another rare position to deliver content that scores very highly on both the "Accuracy" and "Truth" indices; two more of those five precious pillars in classical journalism.
In fact, if one pieces all these snackeroos of bite-sized background info into a coherent whole, the picture painted of Tim Atkin reveals him to be not only qualified and competent, but also enormously motivated in his drive to critique and catalogue the world of South African wine.
But as hinted at earlier, Tim is not without his critics; mostly because Tim doesn't taste his wines blind, and is unapologetically biased towards certain wine styles. But what Tim doesn't have is motive to be anything other than earnest in his quest. And this is why he is so thoroughly worth engaging with.
I took time to catch up with Tim just before his annual 95+ tasting held in Cape Town in September 2023; gleaning a few insights that you won't find in his report. Here is the result of our chat:
Catching up with Tim Atkin
When your 2022 report was released, you mentioned that the quality of the 2022 vintage was largely unknown. On one hand you had WoSA (Wines of South Africa) saying that the 2022 was looking enormously promising, but on the other hand the producers you had spoken to were far less hopeful. So now that you have tasted more of the 2022 vintage, who was right?
The producers. 2022 was a tricky vintage. Some would say VERY tricky. Obviously some areas were hotter than others, but the heat waves were definitely a huge problem. I found a lot of the white wines to be a bit fat, and slightly sweet. I guess 2022 was mixed, but 2021 was a much better vintage.
Of course, now we're dealing with 2023, which is a completely different beast. I have a fair sense of that now, and it would seem the quality will depend on whether [producers] picked before the rains, or after them. The rains started in mid-Feb, and went all the way through until... well they're still going, aren't they?! (laughter)
Like 2022, the 2023 vintage is mixed, but a lot of people are saying that there will be very good white wines; at least with regards to those producers who picked before the rains.
In your 2022 report, you mentioned vintage variation as a rising phenomenon [i.e. subtle terroir-related changes in wines from year to year]. But the reality is that South Africa's winelands are hugely varied, thanks to their complex topography and geology. So it would seem that talking about the merits of a particular vintage as a coherent whole doesn't really make much sense. Can you drill down a bit, and give us more specifics on which regions managed to overcome the tricky ripening season?
Cooler areas that were closer to the coast definitely found things to be easier. That said, my White Wine of the Year was a wine by Chris Alheit from the Skurfberg area, which is hardly cool!
But to your point, JD Pretorius [from Warwick Estate] commented that, from about 2010 onwards, it no longer makes sense to talk about one single vintage characteristic in South Africa. One has to ask more specific questions; what was it like in Ceres Plateau? And was that different to the Cederberg? Compared to Elim.
And that's without even bringing the effects of climate change into it! When I chatted to Marco Ventrella [KWV's chief viticulturist, who works with vineyards right across the South African winelands], he commented that their team has almost stopped trying to predict anything, because the weather patterns are so variable, and seemingly perpetually anomalous. The thing about anomalies is that – by definition – you can't predict them!
Of course, we as journalists love to be able to say things like, "this is an X vintage, or that was a Y vintage", but currently comments like that are nigh on ridiculous.
Except me! I'm not ridiculous! (laughter) I'm just saying that generalising is an increasingly dangerous sport.
I want to shift our discussion from the topic of terroir over to the people that shape that terroir. Your Winemaker of the Year for 2023 is Bruwer Raats, of Raats Family Wines. He's been making wine for decades, so what was so special about his work this year that made you pick him?
Honestly, I just thought it was time. He's earned it. The trouble with making great wine for such an extended period of time is that you get taken for granted. And it was actually when I was preparing for a podcast with him that I began to realise just how much he has achieved! Did you know that he arrived in the Cape in about 1993, and he came with nothing but a backpack? He has built a business from nothing!
Did you know that he was one of the first people to get involved in the Polkadraai Hills? And when he started out people kept telling him, "You’re crazy. Polkadraai Hills is the arsehole of Stellenbosch!" So he was clearly taking a risk.
He was also one of the first people to get behind making great Chenin Blanc, along with guys like Ken Forrester; and he's been a major force with South African Cabernet Franc; and he was one of the first South African winemakers to produce a genuine icon wine, in the MR Compostella with a black winemaker as an equal partner... I mean, the list just goes on. He's just been such an incredible force for good!
You asked about this year specifically; well, he got three wines that earned 95+, and I moved him up to first growth as a producer. But aside from all that, it’s really just the fact that he's earned it. There were other winemakers who were in the running, but almost all of them are younger than him, and I thought to myself... their time will come.
I think, in order to win "Winemaker of the Year" you have to have a track record. You can't have just made great wine in this vintage.
On the topic of track records, it would seem that the wine industry – by necessity – moves incredibly slowly. In many senses, innovation and progress are limited by the pace of the changing seasons. However, some producers seem to show the agility, and adaptability to change, progress, and improve much faster than others. So if your report had a "Most Improved Award" for winemaker and producers, who would be on your short list?
I think that DGB deserves a lot of credit for what they've done. If you look at some of the other bigger companies, they really haven't been very agile at all. Whereas DGB has done the opposite. In fact, I think they deserve more credit than I actually give them.
I would also say that winemakers who are forced to work with new vineyards each year deserve a special mention. Hannes Storm [from Storm Wines] was telling me the other day that he feels like it takes at least five vintages to get to know a vineyard, before one can make accurate calls on when to pick or when to prune.
So with that in mind, one thinks about a guy like Pieter Walser [from BLANKbottle] who is often dealing with new vineyards all over the place from vintage to vintage, and I think he manages them brilliantly. He's a juggler, for sure, working across such a huge range of regions. I think his adaptability is something that other winemakers can learn from. Especially because of what we said about climate change earlier. We just don't know what climate change is going to throw at us over the next five years. Or the next five months for that matter!
One of the elements that I respect most about your work is that your thirst for discovery never seems to wane. You're perpetually excited about highlighting the rising stars, and exposing the hidden gems. Can you share with us a few of the newest members in your 95+ showcase?
There was one particular one that completely surprised me, because I have never thought of them in that category, and that was Louisvale. I really liked their Cabernet Sauvignon. Tim Hillock is another very promising newcomer. One producer that I am so pleased to have in the [95+] tasting is Fairview, because they have been knocking on the door for a very long time. They have a Grenache Blanc from Piekenierskloof which is brilliant! When I awarded Charles Back the "Winemaking Legend" award back in 2021, he came to me and said, "Thanks, but what the fuck do I have to do get a 95+ pt wine?! Well, you've got one now, Charles! (laughter)
I think, in total, there are about 8 producers who have a 95+ pt wine for the first time. On the other side, there are a couple of white wines from the 2022 vintage that usually score over 95 points, and this year they didn't. Because I thought to myself, "They're just not as good as usual." I like to think that my playing field is very fair, and that if the quality is there, then I'll reward it.
You've been saying for some time that there is a need for greater precision in the demarcation of appellations; to highlight smaller regions that are particularly special. Now I am sure you know this, but marketing bodies like WoSA are going in the opposite direction; angling for the increasing use of simple, larger appellation structures. And their rationale makes sense, because there is the risk that one can confuse the wider international market by using more specific names like Paardeberg, Piket-bo-berg, or Piekenierskloof, instead of a far more recognisable term like "Wine of Origin Swartland", which currently has decent brand power internationally.
So, in an effort to find the middle ground between simplicity and accuracy, can you list just three micro-regions – or sub-appellations – that you think have the most potential to be successfully marketed internationally?
I would start with Stellenbosch and the Swartland. And within the Swartland, it would make a huge amount of sense to have the Paardeberg as a demarcated region. In Stellenbosch I would pick out Polkadraai Hills and the Helderberg as worthy of highlighting.
And within the Helderberg I would get even more specific! Thinking in terms of a concept like "Grand Cru", I think the areas around Taaibosch and Uva Mira are very special indeed. But there are more; Sinai Hill [where Scions of Sinai is based] is amazing! And perhaps I'd carve up Elgin a little as well.
Finally there is the Hemel-en-Aarde... But they have actually gone and done it already [they have demarcated the wards of (1) Upper-Hemel-en-Aarde, (2) Lower-Hemel-en-Aarde, and (3) Hemel-en-Aarde Ridge]. So they're ahead of the curve on this one.
But really, you make it sound like it's one or the other, and I ask the question: "Why can't we do both?" We can keep the generic [nomenclature] for certain tiers of wines, but when you are producing the sorts of wines that really draw in your geekier, more engaged consumer – like you or me – then producers can make the choice to be far more specific; getting as granular as possible, even so far as to mention which portions are on granite soils, and which ones aren't; and which sub-zones face south, or south-east...
Mike Ratcliffe [from Vilafonté] is of the opinion that there is no price ceiling on South African wines in the international market. If you get the marketing right – and Vilafonté has certainly got the marketing right – then international wine buyers will be willing to pay top-dollar, so to speak. But if you want to sell at that level [R2 000 per bottle] you have to be giving the consumer a lot more information, and this is where more specific demarcation is important.
As it stands in the South African wine industry, producers are already able to label wines as "Wine of Origin Polkadraai Hills", or "Wine of Origin Paardeberg", but often lack the confidence to do so, choosing instead the adopt the more generic "Wine of Origin Stellenbosch" or "Wine of Origin Swartland". Hopefully they will hear this and adapt accordingly.
Tim, I know we have to end off soon, but I wanted to get your thoughts on the current state of Pinotage. As far as I'm concerned, the grape finds itself in an awkward adolescence, unsure as to whether it wants to grow up into a high-octane blockbuster affair, like the Kanonkop Black Label Pinotage [Tim Atkin’s Red Wine of the Year in 2013], or to follow in the dainty, aromatic footsteps of its parents – Pinot Noir and Cinsault. Where do you stand on the issue?
Well, for starters, I think I like the grape more than I did back in 2013. But I would also say that the styles I enjoy have changed. I think I like the bigger styles less. One wine that stands as fantastic examples of the lighter expression is a Pinotage from Lucinda Heyns [of Illimis Wines], made from Polkadraai Hills fruit. Another one is the Liberté Pinotage from B Vintners – also from Polkadraai Hills, funnily enough.
I would say that, firstly, Pinotage has been influenced by Pinot Noir in South Africa. Secondly, it's been influenced by the rise of South African Syrah [with its lighter, more elegant style]. These factors have changed the way winemakers think about Pinotage. Eben Sadie talks about "making tea, rather than making coffee." Less extraction. Cooler ferments. Lower alcohol levels. All these factors have made the Pinotage more diverse. And I'm still a fan.
When judging for the IWSC earlier this year, I was interested to note the international judges criticising the lighter styles of Pinotage for "lacking typicity". In their minds, Pinotage was defined by "ripe fruit, big structure, rich oak, and high alcohol." It felt odd to have Pinotage explained to a South African by Europe-based wine judges. But it did make me philosophise a little on who gets to define the typicity of a cultivar. Your thoughts?
I have no idea who those wine judges were, and I would never criticise an individual, but that just strikes me as an utterly stupid comment. It shows ignorance of the category and also ignorance of the variety. I mean look at its parents! How many deeply coloured Pinot Noirs do you find around the world!? How many deeply coloured Cinsaults do you see!?
I think, historically, what people did to Pinotage in South Africa was against its nature. Putting too much colour, and too much extraction, and too much oak... Pinotage doesn't need that. Even with Kanonkop's Black Label, which you mentioned earlier, and which I love... It's almost as if the wine is "Pinotage dressed as Cabernet". Luckily Abrie Beeslaar [Kanonkop's winemaker] is a very good Cabernet Sauvignon maker... But I think that the lighter styles, produced by the likes of Ashbourne, or Illimis, or B Vintners, or even Scions of Sinai, with their Feniks Pinotage, are the wines that I favour.
Is it my favourite of South Africa's red cultivars? No. I would say that Syrah is, currently. And even Cabernet Franc and Grenache show more potential than Pinotage right now. But I still maintain that it has the potential to be a trump card for South Africa.