for the love of good: if everything is awesome, nothing is awesome

For better or worse (I argue the latter), we’re smitten with sharing naught but the supposed awesome of every moment of our lives. Social media and digital news feeds are a barrage of best day / spouse / thing EVER proclamations. Despite my want to believe in the positive and great, I’m suspect of any projected image wherein each day is the best, every dinner the most amazing, and all wines are awesome.

The lens through which I view life is one of optimistic realism. On the balance of probabilities, I accept that a “best” of something will occasionally cross my path while a “good” representation is most likely to be the encounter – with “not so good” also an option. Popular expectation of how much fantastic we’ll experience is severely out of whack. Subsequently, we have assigned a new and lower value to good. Nothing stands out from a crowd if the average is set at awesome. When did good lose its charm?

our language

In October 2014 I visited the Clare region of Nova Scotia, where my Acadian family speaks a localized French as our first language. Listening to my relatives chatter in Acadian-ese is both confusing and comforting; the cadence of their speech carries as much emotional expression as their word choice and, in some cases, more – such as when an English word is spoken with the Acadian accent. Adjectives are appropriated and change with emphasis, while nouns gain and lose syllables at random. Hello changes to ‘ello and ‘allo!, eventually becoming ‘ah-lo?! when popping one’s head into a neighbour’s house for an unannounced visit.

in awe of the atlantic: cause of countless shipwrecks with as many stories, and steps from my father’s childhood home

Among the many interesting discoveries in translating Acadian to English is a word used by my uncle with regularity: satisfied. From discussing his recent furnace replacement to sharing a favourite dining spot in Yarmouth, my uncle referred to being satisfied rather than stating he was happy (or happy with something). I’m paraphrasing, but a typical conversation involving his satisfaction would go like this:

Me: Did you like the clam chowder?

Uncle Anselme: I usually don’t order clam chowder, because I’m particular about clam chowder. But this was nice. I’m satisfied.

or this…

Me: How is your new furnace working?

Uncle Anselme: It’s more efficient than the last one and less noisy. I’d say I’m satisfied with my choice. 

We’ve come to accept happy as a new standard of moderate descriptor for satisfaction or acceptance, displacing where once we would have used good. My circle of friends, in casual discourse, would likely have said their clam chowder was good or that they were happy with their new furnace. Can a furnace make you happy? On a cold night, yes. In the quest for life happiness a furnace might rank slightly lower – that you are satisfied with its performance is a more appropriate statement. Chalk up a win for Acadian translation.

I became accustomed to my uncle’s satisfaction, and upon return to my home life I noticed its absence here. It was also more difficult to ignore the epic, awesome, and best that surrounded me.

the decline of our level of diction

Through the wonder of smartphones we have the world in our pockets – but instead of being inspired by this access to so much, we’re becoming lazy. Satisfied has been relegated to use in surveys, and not much else. Each year more words are accepted into the Oxford English Dictionary, yet we use fewer to describe our experiences and feelings. These best of / most awesome / epic days and events do us a disservice: not only do these descriptors set the bar unattainably high for daily living, we’re less likley to be curious about individual experiences because we anticipate those particular words will convey a larger picture – an understood, unspoken description. It’s a falsehood, and we erode our cultural wealth each time we make these simple statements.

Where packaged individualism is the new socially acceptable collective norm, we strive to show how individually normal we are by sharing our every awesome moment / meal / experience. Discovering the latest hot whatchamacallit can help your voice burn brightly in the new media spotlight; however, like a flare, its shine is short-lived. In this light, the new craft brewery making an epic IPA will briefly attract more attention than the new craft brewery making good beer. Is an IPA epic? Beowulf is epic. Homer is epic. An IPA is refreshing, citrus-y, and satisfying. Can a wine be awesome? A lightning storm is awesome. A volcano is awesome. A wine can be surprising, balanced, complex. I am satisfied with how it tastes.

for the love of good

I aspire to write well and have folks who read my writing think ‘that was good’. This is the benchmark I’ve assigned: good. It lives somewhere between a B- and B+, where a C is average and an A is exceptional. At times I’ll write something that resonates with a group of people, and occasionally a sentence is structured so beautifully I want to frame it. Those are rare exceptions, as are awesome and epic. I’m more concerned with whether someone will find their own level of enjoyment in something I’ve written about – like the aforementioned craft brewery’s IPA – than I am with the length of time the spotlight will be on what I’ve written.

I’ve fallen into the awesome/epic/best trap on more occasions that I care to admit: in bite-sized statements meant for snacking, rather than multi-courses intended for a little more digestion (such as this). We snack on information more frequently than we digest stories. Platforms like Twitter and Facebook support these habits. I am not immune, although I do try to remind myself of the need for digestion.

When in the shadow of awesome, good can’t seem to catch a break. But I love good. We tend to poke and prod a little further when we stumble upon good; we’re more curious about good’s context, and the associated package defies an easy dismissal. Good is layered. Good is sexy. Good isn’t competing for your attention, because it doesn’t have to.

In a world where everything is awesome, nothing is. Let’s try for good, so we can be in awe more often.

~ Jeannette

in awe of art and the artist who lived this life: the reconstructed home of Maud Lewis, celebrated folk artist who lived outside of Digby NS
in awe of the artist who lived this life: reconstructed home of Maud Lewis, celebrated folk artist who lived outside of Digby

what’s in a name: designated viticultural areas

a golden view from Road 13 Vineyards, one of the wineries included in the proposed Golden Mile sub-appellation.

By international wine growing region standards, the Okanagan is young. This can be both a challenge and an opportunity: it’s not easy to be taken seriously, but it allows for a more generous playing field on which to innovate and invent. Yet to name the Okanagan as one region is misleading, particularly when there are such marked differences in soil and climate from tip (north Kelowna) to tail (south Osoyoos).

Enter designated viticultural areas, or DVAs; areas designated by distinguishable geographic features. At present, the entire Okanagan Valley is one big DVA. There has been increased chatter among wine-types about whether lumping all smaller growing regions into one large DVA does good service to consumer education, the growth of our wine industry, and accurate labelling.

In the current Okanagan Valley DVA, all wineries fall under the one big umbrella. Smaller producers and those with a site-specific focus aren’t permitted to list a sub-region on the label; if you grow in Okanagan Falls, you can’t label your region as such on the bottle. To include these areas (sub-regions) on the label, one would need to designate sub-appellations within the designated viticultural area. Europe has them, and California and Washington do too.

For those wineries in the pro-sub-appellation camp, having one big DVA can be restrictive for marketing/labelling in a way that will truly reflect their brand. It can also be somewhat misleading to consumers drinking a bottle of wine from what we think is one area of the Okanagan Valley but which is, in actuality, made from grapes grown in another. For example, most hearty red wines are ripened further south in the Okanagan DVA. How it happens isn’t a mystery – it’s a combination of climate, degree days, and terroir.

The following press release was issued today by Hawksworth Communications, announcing the first proposed sub-appellation in the Okanagan Valley DVA: The Golden Mile Bench.

This is a substantial step forward in our young wine industry.

~ Jeannette

For Immediate Release

Golden Mile Bench Proposes to become Okanagan Valley’s First Sub-Appellation

Oliver, BC (May 21, 2014) – Wineries located on the Golden Mile Bench wine growing area near Oliver in British Columbia have submitted a proposal to become the first official sub-DVA “Designated Viticultural Area” of the Okanagan Valley DVA. An in-depth scientific analysis by scientists from Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada, Pacific Agri-Food Research Centre – Summerland (AAFC-PARC Summerland) has shown the area has a combination of landform, landscape position, mesoclimate, air drainage and soil materials that make it distinct within the Okanagan Valley, contributing to the production of unique wines.

A group of producers in the area have been exploring the concept of proposing a Golden Mile Bench DVA since 2009. After much discussion, debate and an in-depth study of the region’s terroir by Scott Smith, M.Sc. Soil Scientist with AAFC-PARC Summerland in conjunction with Dr. Pat Bowen, Ph.D. Research Scientist, Viticulture and Plant Physiology also at AAFC-PARC Summerland, the final boundaries were decided. Wine consultant, Rhys Pender MW of Wine Plus+ helped to compile the proposal.

With the Okanagan Valley DVA comprising around four-fifths of all British Columbia’s vineyard area, yet producing wines from many different mesoclimates and terroirs, it is a widely held belief that there is a need to break this large, single appellation into meaningful, scientifically unique sub-DVAs that produce distinctive wines. Golden Mile Bench is the first such application to the BC Wine Authority.

The proposal was submitted to the BC Wine Authority (BCWA) on May 20th. The BCWA will conduct consultations within the region and a vote by ballot amongst the relevant stakeholders within the proposed region’s boundaries. Once the due diligence has been completed and assuming the BCWA determines that all requirements have been met, it will then submit the proposal to the Minister of Agriculture for approval.

Any enquiries about the status of the proposal should be directed to the BC Wine Authority (

A question and answer section with more details is included below.


Questions & Answers:

When will the Golden Mile Bench DVA become official?
The proposal has been submitted to the BC Wine Authority who conduct the process as laid out in the Wines of Marked Quality Regulation. Assuming the Authority determines that the requirements of the Regulation are met, it will then submit the proposal to the Minister of Agriculture for approval. There is currently no existing time estimate.

Who conducted the scientific study to determine the proposed boundaries?
The boundaries were decided after in-depth analysis by Scott Smith, a soil scientist with the Pacific Agri – Food Research Centre (PARC) in Summerland in conjunction with Dr. Pat Bowen, a Viticulture Research Scientist also at PARC.

Will some vineyards or wineries be excluded from the new DVA?
As required under the Regulation, the area of the proposed DVA has been drawn up using a scientific basis. Some producers in the area have vineyards both in and out of the proposed DVA and some vineyards are even cut into two by the boundaries. Also, any winery who buys grapes from within the proposed DVA can use those grapes to make a Golden Mile Bench DVA designation.

Will there be more sub-DVAs created in the near future?
All those involved hope that this will be the start of creating a number of scientifically defined unique sub-DVAs that help tell the story of the unique regions of the Okanagan Valley.

What does a sub-DVA mean and how will it appear on labels?
When a sub-DVA is created, it applies to all of the vineyards within the defined boundaries. Any winery (not just those located in the sub-DVA) making wine from grapes grown within the sub-DVA could use the name “Golden Mile Bench” as an appellation of origin on the label of that particular wine.

Winery Contacts 
CC Jentsch Cellars – Chris Jentsch /
CheckMate Artisanal Winery – David Wilson /
Culmina Family Estate Winery – Donald Triggs /
Fairview Cellars – Bill Eggert /
Gehringer Brothers – Walter Gehringer /
Hester Creek – Mark Sheridan /
Inniskillin Okanagan – Josie Tyabji /
Golden Mile Cellars Inc. (Road 13 Vineyards) – Pam Luckhurst /
Rustico Farm and Cellars Ltd. – Bruce Fuller /
Tinhorn Creek Vineyards – Sandra Oldfield /

all that glitters: a note on wine awards

One of the most rewarding things for a producer of goods/services can be receiving recognition and/or acknowledgement in their field. It can come from an independent reviewer, a widely accredited organization, or your great aunt Margaret – wherever the praise comes from, it’s good to hear.

When those accolades are paraded before the consuming public with little explanation or context, I get slightly uncomfortable; it doesn’t negate the award’s value, but clarity in how it was achieved would be nice. Enter wine awards.

starting the day with 25 rosés has pros and cons – trust me

for consumers: the architecture of awards & judging

Most in the wine/spirits industry are familiar with the architecture of judging, but many consumers aren’t. Format and judging criteria can vary but competitions are, for the most part, a pay-to-play program: a winery chooses to enter wine and pay a fee, which is common. Not everyone chooses to enter. Fees range in price; they cover administrative costs and sometimes help to ensure qualified judges by offering an honorarium – depending on the size of the competition, evaluation process can take several days.

Canada has nationwide awards and regional competitions; some of our Canadian wineries also choose to compete on an international stage in the US and Europe. Professional competitions mandate wines be judged blind, and judges are distributed into small panels or groups to evaluate groups (flights) of wine within pre-determined categories.

Scoring varies by competition. Some allocate number scores, and the cumulative score for each wine represents its place on the podium. Others allocate a group of letter-grade equivalents similar to our school systems. Multiple wines can “win” a gold because that category represents the number value of what in scholastic terms would be a letter grade of “A”.

Confused yet? I’ve participated in regional wine judging and it can be a challenge even from the inside. A good evaluation system is clear and should have measures in place to help judges overcome style biases. We shouldn’t assume a professional evaluator can always overlook her/his style bias – human nature is flawed, and that’s okay. Having more than one panel evaluate a flight (if possible) or submitting finalists to another panel for judging can be time consuming, but these measures can help keep things somewhat objective but this duplication isn’t always possible.

making changes: doing the best with what you have

The Okanagan Wine Festivals Society has recently concluded the 20th annual Spring Okanagan Wine Festival Best of Varietal Awards. I was asked to participate as a panel judge, making this my second judging experience for the Festivals. Recently, the Festivals have changed their format for evaluation and who is invited to judge. What was previously a peer-evaluation with winemakers has become an industry panel of sommeliers and restaurateurs, including a couple of us writer types who apparently drink enough to qualify. (although I’ve done that WSET thing)

The “best of” model used here is a somewhat subjective sensory evaluation of wines in categories based (mostly) on varietal (read: grape/type). The best is that which best portrays the characteristics of the varietal or type. A number (20%) of the remainder are awarded the title of finalist, in no particular order. Panelists were asked to come to a consensus for each of our categories, and other panels would be responsible for their allocated categories. While it would have been nice to send our finalists on to another panel, that would have meant us tasting more wines too – and with around 100 samples on our day’s agenda this could become a multi-day experience. That could increase the cost to administer and subsequently the fee to submit wine.

Disclosure: I agreed to judge for no compensation other than a surprise swag bag that included a bottle of the delightful Sumac Ridge 2008 Stellar’s Jay. by the way, thank you for the swag OK Wine Fests!

smaller flights meant fewer finalists, and tougher decisions

what it all means

This year’s Best of Varietal winners is a motley group of consumer-friendly sips and wine-geeky love affairs, which is very Canadian. It means we’re struggling to be politely firm about what we should be encouraging our growers to focus on, maybe because we know they need regular sellers to keep their business afloat so they can explore what makes us British Columbia. Stylistically this group is all over the map. So is our BC wine style – we don’t have one yet.

It’s wise to remember that this doesn’t represent the best of everything BC has to offer, because not every BC winery entered each of their wines in the competition. Some hadn’t bottled their latest vintage by the time the deadline rolled around, so they missed out. By not having everyone enter these competitions it allows for people like me to find undiscovered gems and share them with the consuming public. There’s value in that.

Awards like these are helpful to consumers while they navigate an ever-expanding selection of BC wine. When you find a “best of” label, it means a group of wine-type people evaluated that particular wine against at least a few others of its style and proclaimed it to be one of the better expressions of its kind. There’s value in that, too. As a wine enthusiast and one who lives in the heart of BC wine country, I also get overwhelmed by selection and new faces. This experience of blind tasting was invaluable; after the competition, judges keep their notes and have access to the answer key. Something that might not have been as high on my radar before this can be bumped up a slot.

When it comes to selecting something to fall in love with, only you will be best judge of who wins what in your house, backyard, or sitting around the campfire this summer. When you’re in a shop and see a note saying “winner” next to a bottle of wine, take closer look. Not all that glitters is really gold – and not all that sits quietly on the shelf isn’t worthy of sharing that spotlight.

~ Jeannette

sparkling water with crackers and bread help a palate stay fresh – and lots of spitting (photo taken by Nikos of Theo’s Restaurant)