Out of the Cellar...

Winemaker Interview

Paul Pontallier, Manager of Chateau Margaux

An exchange between Peter Smith and Paul Pontallier in the cellars of Chateau Margaux

What is your background?
I was born and raised in Bordeaux - actually my family owns vineyards near St. André de Cubzac, which is just north of the city and west of St. Emilion, in the "Bordeaux" appellation. I was educated in Bordeaux, then Paris, then I came back to University in Talence (a suburb of Bordeaux) to do my Ph.D. in Oenology, from 1978-81.

Who were you studying under at Talence?
I studied under Ribereau Gayon - a very well-known oenologist who was Director of Research at Talence at the time.

Where did you first work after you finished your education?
Well, at that time we still had Military Service in France (this is no longer a problem for the young French men, as the government just ended the program). I chose to do a "Peace Corps" style program, which meant that I spent two years in the service rather than one, but it gave me the opportunity of going to Chile. So, for my first job I worked part-time at the French Embassy, and part-time in the University of Santiago as Professor of Oenology.

How much French involvement was there in Chile at that time?
Nothing really, although France really has a long history of involvement in Chile. I visited old wineries not renovated since the '40's, and I found that even smallest equipment was French. All the oenologists were trained in France, all varietals were brought from Bordeaux in the second part of last century. Architects who built the old wineries were all French. I was very impressed by the strong French influence - in the country in general but in particular in the wine world, which was 100% French. This was in 1981-82, a very interesting period as industry was very poor, with many wineries in bankruptcy.

Was the transport of vines in the 19th century because of the Phylloxera threat in France?
No it was before (Phylloxera) appeared. This was an idea from wealthy Chilean families who had made fortunes in mining. They had the opportunity to go to Europe, and brought back vines and became wine producers to improve their social image. An interesting phenomenon, as it's what is occurring right now in California - as soon as someone who enjoys wine has money they feel obliged to become a winemaker....

And happened in France also...
Yes, of course - winemaking was always a prestigious way to lose money! Well, exactly the same thing happened in Chile; they decided to build chateaux and make wine, and they obviously turned to the country and region they loved most, and which were most famous, which was Bordeaux. Around 1855 to 1860 some of them went to France, hired the people, brought the varieties from the Médoc in particular, some 20-25 years before the Phylloxera arrived in France. These are the same rootstock still in use today in Chile.

Wasn't the Phylloxera present in the vines that went over there?
No, because the Phylloxera didn't exist in Europe before the vines came over in the late 1800's from California. The American vines are actually the resident host of this parasite - the carrier - and when the first vines arrived in Europe they brought the parasite with them. The French vines, Vinis Vinifera, are not resistant, and that's why the only solution was to graft the French vines onto the American rootstock which could survive the Phylloxera.

Were vines grafted in France before this?
No, vines were always propagated by cuttings before this - not only here but all over the world.

Why were the vines first brought over here from California?
I don't know; I suppose because someone wanted to try something new, to experiment, to see what would happen.

To get back to your own story; what happened when you returned from Chile?
I returned in early 1983, and almost immediately started to work at Chateau Margaux, in May or June. I started as Assistant Manager, before becoming General Manager a few months later.

Who are the other principal figures in the production of Margaux?
Well, obviously the Mentzelopoulos family - André from 1977-80, Laura his widow from 80-82, and since 1983 their daughter, Corrine. The family have undoubtedly done more than anyone to build the property to it's present standard, both in terms of the wine and the also the morale of the staff, which of course is vitally important.

Apart from the Mentzelopoulos family, there are other key people: Philippe Bascaulis our Assistant Manager, who for the past six years has shared responsibility for the vines and the oenology; the Chef de Culture Jean Pierre Blanchard, who's been here many years. Jean Grangerau retired as Maitre de Chais last year - he was the second generation of cellarmasters here from his family. He was replaced by Eric Marin, who is 36 years old.

I know that M. Grangerau had a very great influence on the winemaking here. How will his departure and replacement by a young, relative "newcomer" affect the way things are done at Margaux ?
A lot and a little... obviously, in a chateau like Margaux the addition or change of one person does not change things drastically, as there is a way we must always make our wine which is consistent with the historical style of Margaux. However, we do like to mix old and new "blood", and we consider it important to have the new ideas that someone can bring with them from outside the chateau, or even outside the region, to keep the tradition living and evolving.

Wasn't there a third generation of Grangerau to continue after Jean?
There is a third generation, yes, but M. Grangerau's son has his own career elsewhere, and it wasn't that important to us to continue the succession - it could have happened, and that would have been fine, but it's also fine to change!

What are you trying to accomplish in your winemaking?
Our primary duty is to reveal the potential of the "Cru" of Chateau Margaux, to follow the traditions of the great Margaux, but to evolve with the present technology. Technology is always important - even 200 years ago it was important. But it's equally important not to hide the character of the property by over-use of technology.

Do you see technology being over-used in other parts of Bordeaux?
That's a very difficult question for two reasons. .Firstly I don't have time to get out and see very much of what other producers are doing, so I shouldn't really comment on their methods. Secondly you have to remember that Bordeaux is made up of many varied terroirs, and that conditions change quite drastically sometimes between locations and between vintages. What do we mean by too technical?

If technology is used to mask the typicity of the wine, yes, that is wrong. If it is used to mask the problems that a wine may have, it's OK. By masking problems in the wine we can actually help to bring out the typicity of the terroir in the wine, so if used judiciously technology actually helps to preserve the tradition of the wine, not to destroy it.

Here at Margaux we are lucky, in that we are blessed with superb terroir, and we don't usually need to give it too much help. We have to realize that for many other properties things are not so easy, and therefore they are obliged to sometimes use more technology in their winemaking than we are - so in fact they have a harder job than us, and a more delicate decision to make!

How do you view the effect of regulation on the way you work? Do you feel that you are restricted in methods which you'd like to use, and in particular do you feel you are at a disadvantage as opposed to California and other countries who don't have the same restraints?
The reason that we have more regulation in France is that we have more to protect. This may sound arrogant, but it's purely a matter of history and, again, tradition.

California will develop it's own regulation once it's image has been built - even now Napa has begun introducing geographic regulation, as it's become apparent that different areas produce different styles and qualities of wine. The winemakers and consumers begin this process themselves, with certain vineyards and regions earning a reputation of their own. Once that reputation is earned, naturally you want to protect it.

Regulation of vine types will undoubtedly come at some point in the future, when there has been time to establish which varietals prosper best in each area - again, certain areas are already known in Napa and Sonoma, and indeed in the rest of California, as producing generally the best of a certain varietal.

The system of regulation took centuries to develop here. Only in 1935 was the geography and cépage of the Bordeaux region established by law within the system of Appellation Controllée, long after the classification of 1855. When things are going well there's no need to regulate, but in periods of difficulty, such as the 1930's, control was needed to maintain the quality and more importantly the traditional character of the wine.

Again in the hard times of the 40's and 50's, many growers were tempted to use new hybrids which gave greater yields, so the regulations were important for the long term health of the vines. It's important to recognize that changes are not forbidden, but equally that they must occur slowly, with great deliberation, to be sure that they're good changes. The effects may not be really judged for maybe 20, 30 or more years, after we've had a chance to see how the wine really develops. Therefore we need to protect an already great product and move slowly and carefully to improve it even further without taking risks. This is a fundamental issue in the tradition of winemaking in our region.

How important is the US market to Chateau Margaux and the other Bordeaux producers?
Of course, it's very important. This market has been a great influence in the world, both because it is very large, and also because it has typically been very versatile. That is to say it has been big on "big" vintages, but doesn't want to buy the "small" years. The American press is very influential worldwide, in particular Robert Parker and the Wine Spectator, who are read in many countries worldwide.

Is it important enough for Chateau Margaux to adapt it's style to appeal to this market?
No, the market expects different things from different chateaux. For many producers I'm sure this can be true, but here we are in the lucky position not to have to adapt to any particular market, but concentrate on making what the world expects from us, the classic wine of the terroir of Chateau Margaux. There is a danger, I feel for the smaller winemaker who follows a particular market, as they can change quickly. If you're not in a classified region it doesn't matter, but classified chateaux need to always remain aware of the traditional qualities for which they were granted that classification, because in the long term this is what the world expects of them.

What about the '95 vintage?
We're very happy with the success of the vintage, and of course with the sales, though I am always concerned with speculation in a year like this. However I feel particularly comfortable this year that most buyers are "real" buyers, not speculators, and I also feel that we have the quality of wine to support this serious buyer.

How do compare the '95 with other vintages?
Of course it's far too early to really judge, but at the moment it seems to have a character between the 1985 and 86. The '82, '89 and '90 vintages were sweeter, softer and rounder, but this is more of a classic vintage - a wine with depth, structure and tannins to last, but with a charm and finesse typical of a great Margaux.

What about the 1994? Is it being overshadowed by the '95?
I've always said that the '94 is a very good vintage, but it's not a "great" vintage. There's a subtle difference between these two wines - the "Je ne sais quoi, le presque rien" (the "I don't know what, the next to nothing") - that was the title of a book by the famous French philosopher Vladmir Jankelevitch.

What about the other wines of the '90's?
The '93 is very harmonious, light but very good. The '92 is rather like the '87, a good wine but not for long aging. "Off" years often give a wine with early harmony, like the '87 is doing now. This is very important to remember when you're buying wine to enjoy, not to keep, and not even to "taste". Very often you will get more real pleasure from drinking a wine from a smaller year, because you drink it at it's best moment, and unfortunately many wines from the great vintages are drunk before their great potential is really apparent.

It really depends on the particular wine - for instance the '82 Margaux is ready to drink now, and gives great pleasure, but it will evolve over the next 10-20 years to give different pleasures. Also different palates enjoy different styles of wine, and palates change as they become more "educated". The point is to remember that we drink wine for the pleasure we get out of it; this is the most important of all!