Upload
tiffany-mayer
View
75
Download
1
Tags:
Embed Size (px)
DESCRIPTION
Research by Shilo Hills, Brock University
Citation preview
RHETORICAL HISTORY AND THEORIZATION: THE CASE OF ONTARIO
FINE WINE
Abstract
Although theorization has been identified as a crucial social mechanism in a variety of
context – from institutional creation and change to management innovation – it has rarely
been studied, and there is little that is known about the “how” of theorization. Our
contention is that a key aspect of theorization is strategic construction and deployment of
historical constructions in order to influence audiences, also known as rhetorical history.
We explore the role of rhetorical history in the context of actors’ attempts to theorize the
emerging Ontario wine industry as “world class”.
The notion of theorization has been used in a variety of research contexts within as well as
outside of institutional theory. It is the process whereby broad, abstract categories and
relationships between these categories are defined (Greenwood, Suddaby, & Hinings,
2002; Strang & Meyer, 1993), and it has been credited for playing important roles in such
diverse spheres as creating or transforming institutions (Greenwood et al., 2002; Hwang &
Powell, 2005; Strang & Meyer, 1993), legitimizing management innovations (Birkenshaw
et al, 2008), bridging diverse actors’ interests (Maguire et al, 2004), and so on. More
broadly, theorization enables actors to make sense of their institutional environments
(Weber & Glynn, 2006) and prescribes and proscribes certain actions (Suddaby &
Greenwood, 2005; Tolbert & Zucker, 1996), making some actions seem legitimate and
normal (Birkenshaw et al, 2008) and others unacceptable (Greenwood et al, 2002). Thus,
theorization has already been shown to be a very illuminating social mechanism (Davis &
Marquis, 2005).
However, in spite of the variety of contexts in which the notion of theorization has
been evoked, little is actually known about how it works. Typically it is seen as a step in
some more elaborate process – whether it be institutional change (Greenwood et al, 2002),
the development of a management innovation (Birkenshaw et al, 2008), or creation of a
new style (Svejenova et al, 2007) – but not a research topic in its own right. Continued
utility of theorization in organization studies as a mechanism for explaining various
phenomena is conditional upon the explication of how the mechanism itself works. Thus,
we propose a shift from what to how of theorization. Because theorization inevitably
involves some form of engagement with the past – whether in the form of advocating a
break with the status quo (e.g., Suddaby & Greenwood, 2005) or claiming that current
practices represent a continuity of the status quo (e.g., Lounsbury & Crumley, 2007), we
argue that a core theorization activity is the strategic construction of particular versions of
history in order to persuade audiences about the desirable relationship between the past,
current and the future states. In other words, we argue that an essential component of
theorization is the utilization of rhetorical history (Anteby & Molnar, in press; Suddaby,
Foster, & Trank, 2010), or “the strategic use of the past as a persuasive strategy to manage”
key actors’ perceptions (Suddaby et al, 2010: 157). It operates by constructing a particular
version of the past in order to rhetorically establishing either a continuity or a discontinuity
with past practices in order to legitimize and normalize one’s preferred course of action.
We examine the role of rhetorical history in theorization by studying the ways in
which rhetorical history is used by Ontario wineries in order to theorize the reputation of
Ontario fine wine as “world class”. We conduct a qualitative case study of rhetoric used by
Ontario wineries in the course of their routine communication through web sites and
newsletters. We find that as an emerging wine region lacking its own legitimate history of
fine winemaking, Ontario wineries tend to borrow the legitimate Old World winemaking
history while repressing the illegitimate local history of winemaking.
The remainder of the paper is structured as follows. First, we discuss the wide-
ranging but non-specific usage of theorization in organization studies. We then argue for
the importance of understanding the role of rhetorical history in theorization work. After
that, we introduce our case study of the Ontario wine industry and conclude by discussing
the implications of our findings for future research on rhetorical history and theorization
more generally.
THEORIZATION AS A PAST ORIENTED RHETORICAL ACTIVITY
Theorization in Organization Studies
Theorization refers to “the rendering of ideas into understandable and compelling
formats” (Greenwood et al., 2002: 75), a mechanism which develops abstract categories
and patterned causal relationships, and the interactions between them (Strang and Meyer,
1993). It may operate in either a top-down (i.e., by some authority figures) or a bottom-up
manner (i.e., by adopters themselves; Strang and Meyer, 1993), and the resulting categories
may provide the impetus for the large-scale adoption of an institution within a field by
specifying general organizational failings, justifying a possible solution, and asserting or
demonstrating the solution’s legitimacy (Greenwood et al., 2002).
It is noteworthy that various scholars have used theorization differently and for
different purposes. Strang and Meyer (1993) first defined it as “self-conscious
development and specification of abstract categories and the formulation of patterned
relationships such as chains of cause and effect” (p. 492), and they conceptualized it as an
ex ante (i.e., before actions took place) vehicle that facilitates diffusion of practices.
Greenwood et al’s (2002) influential article similarly emphasized the ex ante properties of
theorization – but as a vehicle for initiating institutional change that specifies past failings
and offers up solutions. These ex ante properties of theorization are also apparent in
Maguire et al’s (2004) study, where it is used to bridge diverse actors’ interests.
Yet, there are some studies that seem to conceive of theorization as ex post (i.e.,
retrospective). For example, Birkenshaw et al (2008) note that theorization could happen
after a management innovation has been developed and function to legitimize or rationalize
it. Similarly, Svejenova et al (2007) explain that theorization “takes place through record-
keeping, self-reflection, and categorization” (p. 541), which implies a degree of ex post
reflection. Elsewhere, Lounbury and Crumley (2007) highlight the role of theorization in
legitimizing mutual funds’ shift to active money management, and by highlighting the role
of media in legitimizing nouvelle cuisine, Rao et al (2003) also appear to acknowledge ex
post facet of theorization. In a slightly different take, Munir (2005) argues that theorization
could be an ongoing activity that takes on different forms at different phases of a change
process, thereby acknowledging both its ex ante and ex post proprties.
In some, we argue that there are in fact two facets of theorization. Ex ante
theorization is used to initiate or motivate some kind of a change activity, and ex post
theorization is used to legitimize and rationalize change oriented activities that have taken
place.
Theorization and Engagement with the Past
The other key facet of theorization involves a rhetorical construction of history,
whether for the purpose of motivating change or to rationalize and legitimize the changes
that have already taken place. Table 1 illustrates, what we would argue, is the inherent
connection between theorization and rhetorical history, or strategic deployment of historical
constructions in order to influence audiences (Anteby & Molnar, in press; Suddaby et al,
2010; Zerubavel, 2003). We note here the different ways that rhetorical history is used by
actors in prior studies of theorization.
Ex ante theorization that represents continuity with the past involves the proactive
assertion that the proposed changes will represent continuity with the past and attempts to
hide or obscure threats to the status quo that might result from these changes (see Table 1,
upper left). For example, Hargadon and Douglas (2001) describe the case of Edison’s
invention of the light bulb, as he actively worked to theorize it in a fashion similar to the
gaslights that were familiar to the consumers. Edison aided consumer identification of his
product by aligning it alongside existing categories that were easily understood by
audiences, thereby attempting to demonstrate that his radical invention was actually
consistent with the status quo. This form of theorization might be most useful where
audiences see the way things have been done in the past as legitimate and normal. Thus
theorizers may attempt to simultaneously reaffirm the legitimacy of the past practices and
assert that the new practices will not violate the accepted norms. Ex ante theorization
alongside normative constructions of a familiar past allow audiences to recognize and value
innovations by obscuring or lessening their perceived novelty. Thus, Campbell (2004)
argues that neoliberal tax policy was relatively easy to theorize in the US, because it could
be connected neatly to the categories of neoclassical economics that were already
entrenched in the culture.
Ex post theorization that demonstrates continuity with the past involves denial of
assertions that newly implemented practices are abnormal or different from previous, older
and legitimate ones (see Table 1, upper right). Similar to the above, this involves
constructing past as desirable and relying on this perception of the desirability of the past to
legitimize the novel activities (Zerubavel, 2003), but in this case the continuity is asserted
after the fact. For example, Lounsbury and Crumley (2007) suggest that in order to
rationalize the shift from passive to active money management, mutual funds sought to,
retroactively, theorize their novel activities as being consistent with the traditional
understanding of what mutual funds did.
On the other hand, ex ante theorization representing discontinuity with the past
involves proactive assertion of the inferiority of the way things have been done compared
to the preferred new practices (see Table 1, lower left). The main task of such theorization
is demonstrating that the way things have been done is unacceptable, and that a new way of
doing things is needed and possible (Greenwood et al, 2002; Tolbert & Zucker, 1996). This
implies the need to construct a version of the past as “bad”, undesirable and needing to be
abandoned (Zerubavel, 2003). For example, in Greenwood et al’s (2002) study
professional associations are credited as playing key roles in identifying the problems with
the way things had been done in the field and theorizing solutions to such problems (c.f.,
Suddaby & Greenwood, 2005).
Finally, ex post theorization espouses discontinuity with the past by reflecting
retroactively on what has been done to demonstrate how newly implemented practices are
superior to the old ones (Hinings et al., 2004; see Table 1, lower right). Similar to the
above, it involves constructing an undesirable version of the past that is worth abandoning
(Zerubavel, 2003) and juxtaposing the novel practices to this negative construction, thereby
legitimizing them by their difference, rather than similarity, to the past. For example,
Birkenshaw et al. (2008) note the importance of retroactive theorization for legitimizing
management innovations, and Rao et al (2003) highlight the role of media in retroactively
conferring legitimate identities upon nouvelle cuisine chefs. In both cases, theorization
confers legitimacy upon novel practices by demonstrating how they represent improvement
over undesirable old ways of doing things.
As the preceding discussion illustrates, rhetorical history is a crucial theorization
mechanism. Whether at organizational (e.g., Birkenshaw et al, 2008) or field (e.g.,
Greenwood et al, 2002) level, and whether theorizers seek to emphasize or hide the
innovative aspects of the practices they seek to introduce, they construct a particular version
of the past in a strategic manner (Suddaby et al, 2010) – highlighting and obscuring parts of
the history in order to maximize its rhetorical power (Anteby & Molnar, in press;
Zerubavel, 2003).
Furthermore, because theorization can operate in either top-down or a bottom-up
manner (Strang & Meyer, 1993), we argue that the work of constructing and reconstructing
such historical narratives in the course of theorization work is quite routine, ongoing and
distributed. Accordingly, it is important to examine how actors utilize rhetorical history in
the course of their routine functioning within the field. To do so, we turn to our case study
of the Ontario wine industry.
METHODS
Research Setting
The setting for the study is the Ontario wine industry, and we seek to understand
how various actors in the field use historical constructions as rhetorical strategies to
theorize the product category of Ontario wine as “world class”. Although winemaking in
Ontario dates back to the middle of the nineteenth century, many attribute the birth of
“serious” winemaking in Ontario to the founding of Inniskillin Winery in 1975. In 1988,
the Free Trade Agreement with the United States threatened to destroy the Canadian wine
industry, but it also forced the local industry to uproot the cold hardy labrusca grapes, such
as Concord, that dominated Ontario vineyards but are not traditionally used in winemaking
in Europe. Instead, they planted vinefera grapes, such as Riesling, Chardonnay, and Pinot
Noir, associated with high-quality wines.
Since then, the industry has focused on producing high-quality wines in accordance
with global tradition. The challenges encountered by the Ontario wine industry have been
two-fold: (a) to overcome the perception, even domestically, that Ontario is too cold to
produce high quality wine, despite having a climate that is similar to that of Burgundy,
France, and (b) to erase the bad reputation that the pre-1988 wine had built among many
domestic consumers. Several Ontario wineries have since earned major international
awards and garnered critical acclaim from such sources as the noted British critic Jancis
Robinson, American critic Matt Kramer and the prestigious U.S.-based Wine Spectator
magazine, among others, and the region’s profile and prestige has been steadily increasing.
In 2009, the industry produced 13 million liters of wine with a retail value of $210 million.
The most famous and commonly exported Ontario wine product is Icewine, which in 2009
comprised 550,000 liters. The main export destinations for Ontario wine include US,
China, South Korea, UK, and Hong Kong, among others. Nonetheless, because Ontario
wine does not yet enjoy universal acceptance among consumers, wineries still have to work
to theorize Ontario wine as “world class”, at times attempting to overcome negative
perceptions. This ongoing and salient bottom-up theorization (Strang & Meyer, 1993)
makes the industry an excellent setting to study theorization. Furthermore, the mechanism
of interest, rhetorical history is quite interesting to study in this context because Ontario
wine industry does not have a “glorious” history that it can use strategically. Thus, we
thought it would be valuable to examine how the industry might be coping with the lack of
such a history and wanted to find out whether and how rhetorical history could still be used
by Ontario wineries in theorization work. The lack of taken-for-granted glorious history
makes Ontario wine industry an extreme case that allows researchers to examine the
processes through which historical constructions are developed, rather than simply being
available to actors, the way it might be the case in a more established wine region (e.g.,
Burgundy).
The focus of the present study is on the period of 2007-2011, which finds the
Ontario wine industry at an important juncture. The increased recognition of Ontario wine
by international critics, combined with greater enthusiasm among Canadian consumers,
which suggests that wineries’ theorization attempts have had some success in establishing a
credible narrative of what Ontario wine is or should be about.
Data Collection
The data sources used in this paper are excerpted from a broader study of the
organization of Ontario wine industry that has collected qualitative data in various forms
(interviews, observations and various documents) over a period of four years. This study
consists of the analysis of 326 electronic newsletters from 40 wineries and web sites of 15
wineries.
Although newsletters represent just one manifestation of theorization work, these
documents offer a unique opportunity for researchers to understand the discursive practices
through which organizations attempt to explain what they are about and how they operate to
their clientele. Newsletters allow researchers to uncover the actual discursive techniques
used by organizations as well as the implicit rules at the field level that guide the selection
and deployment of such techniques. We were especially interested in understanding how
wineries tapped into various historical resources in order to create theorizations that enable
specific Ontario wineries to claim that their products – and Ontario wine in general – are
excellent.
While newsletters typically target loyal customers and other individuals that have
ongoing relationships with particular wineries, web sites represent wineries’ attempts to
represent themselves in a desirable manner to a more general audience. Thus, this data
source offers a useful complement to the newsletters.
Analysis
To understand discursive activity, such as theorization, both the strategies employed
and the broader context of relevant societal discourses and their links must be examined and
analyzed (Phillips et al, 2004), and rhetorical analysis offers a method for doing so (e.g.,
Heracleous & Barrett, 2001; Sillince & Brown, 2009; Suddaby & Greenwood, 2005).
Because newsletters and websites have a persuasive intent and are designed
purposefully to influence attitudes and beliefs of audiences, attending to the rhetorical
devices used enhanced our understanding of the ways in which wineries are persuasively
using history. Repeated readings of the web sites and newsletters, in consultation with the
literature on rhetoric, allowed us to identify various rhetorical strategies identified in prior
rhetoric research that could be used as sensitizing devices in our data analysis. Although a
great many such devices is available, we found the following to be especially relevant in the
context of Ontario wineries’ deployment of rhetorical history, and we used these as a
starting point to sift through the plethora of text generated by the wineries.
Characterization refers to particular vivid and idiosyncratic representations of
persons as portrayed within the texts. We took this to “include direct methods like the
attribution of qualities in description or commentary, and indirect (or ‘dramatic’) methods
inviting readers to infer qualities from characters’ actions, speech, or appearance.
“ (Baldick, 2008: 52). According to Burke (1962), it allows audiences to ascribe particular
moral qualities to an actor. In this way, we can ascertain that characterization involves
attempts to portray wineries and their representatives as having certain values, morals and
characteristics. These might include, for example, accounts of a winemaker’s heroic effort
to produce a superb wine and the sacrifices that had to be made to accomplish that.
In utilizing identification as a rhetorical device, we relied heavily upon Burke’s
(1962: 580) observation that: “you persuade a man only insofar as you can talk his
language by speech, gesture, tonality, order, image, attitude, idea, identifying your ways
with his,” thereby attempting to establish a shared sense of values with the audience. Thus,
wineries might try to ingratiate themselves to the audience or invite the audience to
participate in certain winery experiences that should be especially appealing to them.
Diatyposis, or “a rhetorical figure in which advice is given” (Mills, 2010; 115) is
used as a way to provide instruction to audiences through rules and precepts and indicates
that the wineries occupy a space of authority in their ability to provide such direction
(Whately, 1962). These include, for example, suggesting traditional pairings of particular
food with a certain wine. Denotation provides “the most literal and limited meaning of a
word, regardless of what one may feel about it or the suggestions and ideas it
connotates.” (Cuddon & Preston, 1998: 215). As Burke (1962: 24) suggests, “to tell what
a thing is, you place it in terms of something else. This idea of locating, or placing, is
implicit in our very word for definition itself: to define, or determine a thing, is to mark its
boundaries, hence to use terms that possess, implicitly at least, contextual reference.” Thus,
in providing literal definitions for audiences, wineries can work to define the boundaries of
meaning surrounding a word, and can ensure congruity of understanding among readers.
For example, wineries might explain in detail the meaning of a particular grape growing or
winemaking practice.
Personification refers to a rhetorical device that describes inanimate objects, and
other nonhuman concepts as having human characteristics and qualities (Baldick, 2008;
Cuddon & Preston, 2010). For example, wineries often endow wines with person-like
traits, such as “personality”. Imagery involves the use of language to represent various
sensory experiences that extend beyond mental pictures and may appeal to senses other
than sight (Baldick, 2008; Cuddon & Preston, 2010). As such, the use of imagery allows
audiences to participate in the texts on a deeper, sensory level that provides a different
experience as individuals can witness what the text describes. For example, wineries may
attempt to use such a device in order to help the reader to imagine herself in the vineyard,
experiencing the beauty, the sounds and other sensations that are associated with it.
The stages of analysis were similar for both the newsletters and the websites.
Similarities and difference between the two genres of texts were examined throughout the
research process because they are directed at slightly different audiences and might use
rhetorical devices in slightly different ways to theorize practices and activities. The first
stage of the analysis involved reading over the newsletters and websites to understand their
general content and format. While reading, general impressions were noted, possible
themes for coding identified, and notes taken on how and why these themes were
emerging. For example, the fact that wineries often use historical depictions of the land
upon which their grapes are grown was noted as a potential theme.
The coding stage of analysis entailed looking for words and phrases that were
frequently used within the newsletters and websites, primed by our research interest in
rhetorical history. For example, phrases involving the notion of terroir were quite
prevalent, and were easily coded under “terroir”. Themes within the websites and
newsletters were identified, as were broader ideas, concepts, activities, relations and
terminology used. Because rhetorical analysis requires grasping the significance of a
particular utterance in its context (Heracleous & Barrett, 2001), we designated the units of
analysis to range from a paragraph to a whole newsletter – whatever smallest passage that
could be interpreted meaningfully. Wherever a rhetorical strategy could not be identified or
no link to rhetorical history could be made by utilized, no further analysis on a particular
passage or even a document was undertaken. At this stage we began to use the
aforementioned rhetorical device to identify various discursive themes and interpretive
repertoires that emerged from the body of texts as a collection. For example, we intended to
understand what role actors’ use of terroir plays in the newsletters and websites, and how
and why they act rhetorically to persuade audiences. The notion of terroir here presented an
interesting role, as it is used by wineries to both conform to broader, traditional Old World
values while at the same time to confer a sense of distinctiveness and uniqueness to
wineries by appealing to a more local history.
As the newsletters and websites were further categorized, other themes were
identified and served as subcategories. For example, the notion of terroir, was sometimes
used in reference to soil composition as being similar to that of more legitimized wine
regions, while at other times it was used to highlight the uniqueness of local plots of land.
We attempted to substantiate the existence of shared discourses by comparing and
contrasting these themes and categories, and by moving back and forth between broader,
more general societal discourses and the specific utterances. For example, the use of terroir
may be related to the broader societal construct of geological history, which details the
origins and history of the development of Earth, and essentially describes time as sequential
in attempting to make sense of the events that have taken place in a region.
As a result of the above analyses, it became apparent that the biggest categories of
rhetorical strategies involved attempts to either connect to the global history of fine
winemaking or to the local cultural and/or geographical history. As the analysis continued,
and definitions of those categories were refined and new categories identified that did not fit
with existing categories of rhetorical strategies. For example, it became obvious that some
wineries were making explicit references to rule breaking and not adhering to tradition,
which fit neither into the connection to global history nor the local history. Thus, it became
necessary to identify to analyze this manifestation of rhetorical history as a. The similarities,
differences and patterns within and between subcategories were compared, contrasted and
noted. The process of category building continued, in order to examine and interpret the
newsletters and websites, until no new themes were found and a point of saturation was
reached.
We ensured the trustworthiness of the data in several ways. First, all data were
carefully managed using NVivo qualitative data management software. Second, we
continually triangulated the multiple sources of data (Miles and Huberman, 1994),
comparing and contrasting across the different sources to validate that a particular practice
reported to us in the interviews could be corroborated either by multiple interviews, our
own observations, or written documents. When disagreements emerged among the sources
with respect to the possible meaning of a particular passage or a particular assignment of
data to particular categories, we re-examined the data to understand the reasons for the
differences until a consensus was reached. Third, we used peer debriefing (Corley and
Gioia, 2004). Most of the analysis was done by the first author, who had no access to the
field and relied purely on the newsletters and web sites to do the coding. She periodically
engaged the second author who had conducted the interviews and observations to assess
the similarities and differences of the interpretations resulting from the researchers’
differences and the access to different data. As the study progressed, the second author also
independently analyzed a sample of the newsletters and web sites previously analyzed by
the first author. Disagreements were discussed, and the coding was refined. This allowed
the study to benefit from both, detached analysis of the first author and in-depth industry
insight acquired by the second author (Pratt, 2009).
FINDINGS
We found three primary categories of rhetorical history strategies that actors used to
theorize Ontario wine. The first category involves attempts of wineries to connect to the
global – especially European – history of wine. The second category pertains to the
attempts of wineries to connect to regional cultural and geographical history. The third
category involved an open rejection of historic tradition in favor of innovation and rule
breaking.
Connecting to Old World History of Wine
This category of rhetorical history strategies involves attempts to demonstrate
continuity between winemaking as practiced in Ontario and the idealized notion of a
traditional small scale and earth bound winemaking tradition that supposedly has thrived in
established wine regions, such as Burgundy and Bordeaux, for hundreds of years.
Statements are made that connect the actions of wineries with traditional methods, styles,
terroir-based approaches and links to family heritages of winemaking and grape growing.
Table 2 includes quotes that exemplify different manifestations of these strategies and the
associated rhetorical devices used.
Insert Table 2 about here
Terroir-driven and earthbound winemaking. Perhaps the most distinctive
hallmark of the fabled French tradition of fine winemaking is the notion of terroir, rooted in
careful historical construction of the narrative that certain plots of land are inherently
superior for wine production than others (Ulin, 1995; 2004). Terroir-based winemaking
places supreme importance on grape growing and farming, relegating winemaking to a
somewhat lesser role, and claims that one’s winemaking is terroir driven is deployed – at
least ceremonially (Robinson, 2006) by wineries all over the world.
Ontario wineries routinely deploy this notion either explicitly or implicitly to show
the continuity between the idealized low technology, small scale and “hands-in-the-dirt”
winemaking tradition that presumably has characterized European winemaking for
hundreds of years and their own practices, as illustrated by the following use of
identification rhetorical device: “We are proud to offer you a wine that we believe defines a
time and place like no other.” Wine is supposed to be made primarily in the vineyard and
not in the winery, and the role of the winemaker is to merely facilitate such a process,
without much intervention. This is illustrated poignantly in the following quote from a
winery’s web site, representing personification rhetorical device: “The measure of a
winemaker is not his ability to speak for great vineyards, but rather his faith in the idea that
great vineyards can speak for themselves.”
Within the newsletters, it is often noted that wineries use minimal amounts of
technology in winemaking, relying instead, on traditional and laborious hands-on grape
growing and winemaking techniques. Hand pruning, tying, picking, sorting and bottling
tend to be described as essential to outstanding results. Furthermore, the usage of
technology and machinery is often downplayed, and wineries sometimes even disparage it.
This is apparent, for example, in the following quote:
When we first planted to vinifera grapes we knew that no mechanical harvesters
could pick these sensitive grapes and harvest would have to be manual. Then,
during our first harvest in 1985 new harvesting machines from Europe came to
Niagara and mechanical harvesting of even vinifera varieties became the norm. Over
the years we've done both, and find the quality from manual harvests is far superior
to mechanical harvesting. Today all our grapes are harvested by hand.
The above quote, reflecting denotation, also illustrates that the rhetorical connection
is made to the European history of winemaking, rather than to current winemaking
practices, as evidenced by the expression of dissatisfaction with the results obtained using
current European technology.
Slow grape growing and winemaking. Related to the above, wineries also tend to
emphasize that it takes a long time for wine to go through the various steps of wine
production. Growing, pruning, harvesting, processing, pressing and fermenting activities
are some of the various stages highlighted in the laborious procedure of winemaking.
Descriptions of these various events are prevalent throughout the newsletters, and indicate
the amount of time and effort required to produce fine wines. This is apparent, for example,
in the following quote: “We have finished our pruning and tying, and are now into the
hoeing and cultivating stage. The next major activity is to plant our replacement vines.
Then we are into the summer drudgery of shoot thinning, shoot placement, cluster thinning,
etc.” This “slowness” and labor intensiveness characterizes not only grape growing but the
winemaking techniques, as well, as illustrated by the following quote: “After hand
harvesting and after manual sorting a long, slow fermentation in tank was followed by
malolactic fermentation and 9 months aging in older 225L and 600L French oak barrels.”
Both of the above quotes, describing matter-of-factly and in detail the various steps taken to
ensure quality – hence reflecting denotation – tap into the Old World history of fine wine
by simply listing steps of winemaking process that would be recognizable to a wine
connoisseur familiar with European tradition of fine winemaking.
Furthermore, old vines, in contrast to younger vines, are privileged as wineries
boast of the link between terroir, age and premium wines. The root systems of older vines
are better apt to reach nutrients and water existing further underground, and thus produce
grapes from which wines of depth can be created. Commonly, the age of vines is heavily
related to quality and flavor of wines made by wineries, and wineries tend to emphasize,
when possible, how old the vines are, as seen in the following quote: “A remarkable wine
lending insight into the intimate relationship between the 30-year-old vines and the
premium terroir.” This statement, reflecting both personification and imagery, implicitly
taps into Old World history of fine winemaking, whose mythology constructs wine as a
living thing (Robinson, 2006).
Age is often seen as a virtue with wine, and it is not uncommon for consumers to
see fine wine as something age-worthy. This is another and somewhat different
manifestation of “slowness”. Consistent with the idealized Old World winemaking
tradition, there is a great deal of emphasis – especially with respect to high end wines – on
the amount of time a particular wine might have aged in a barrel and/or in the bottle before
being released to the public. This is illustrated by the following quote: “Each batch is
fermented and barrel aged separately to ensure the highest quality. Our cellar team
monitors the development of these wines noting their complexity, body, and mouth-feel.”
Further aging in the bottle is often recommended within descriptions even upon being
released to the public after large amounts time devoted to aging within wineries. The use of
French Oak barrels is often used by wineries to emphasize their commitment to producing
complex, full-bodied wines that are akin to those from more established wine regions. The
discussion of the specific aging techniques connects the current activities of Ontario
wineries with traditional methods of barrel and bottle aging.
Similarly, wineries often emphasize that particular wines or wines from a particular
vintage might be especially age-worthy, connecting to the traditional construction of wine
as a product that either gets better with age or that makes for a good memento of a particular
point in time. Vintages are represented as the culmination of labor-intensive work and
efforts on the part of wineries, and are often celebrated as marking the unique interplay of
weather, climate and winemaking processes of a years growing season and efforts.
Further, older wineries boast of wider back-vintage selections, establishing themselves as
prominent players in wine making history and exceptional wine quality.
Rejection of the local winemaking history. The history of winemaking in Ontario
is often referred to as new when compared to more established wine making regions of
Europe. Interestingly, despite winemaking history in Canada extending to the nineteenth
century, credit is only given to Canadian history of winemaking within the past forty years.
This relatively young portrayal of history of wine production in Canada can be seen as a
way to eradicate or repress the illegitimate history of, supposedly, poor quality wine
production in Canada prior to the 1980s, and it further underscores the concerted effort
undertaken by Ontario wineries to connect to the Old World history of wine. Even the
oldest wineries only make reference to their winemaking history in Canada that falls within
this timeframe that is characterized by emulation of French (and Continental European)
winemaking conventions despite the fact that many connect a family heritage of wine
making dating sometimes centuries prior in more established, European wine regions.
Thus, the eradication of the labrusca grape varietals (such as Concord), not found in
established wine regions, that flourished in and were dominant in the region until 1988 is
widely celebrated as a turning point that signaled a commitment to quality winemaking.
This is apparent in the following quote (characterization) from a winery’s web site:
In 1984 when our father, along with each of us (Matthew, Daniel and Paul), tore
out the Concord and Niagara grapes at our own expense, people thought we were
crazy. When we planted Riesling and Chardonnay under newly contoured hills and
under drainage, many said they would never grow. We knew, after studying the
heat scans and speaking with some of the other more progressive growers, that our
vineyard was not only suitable for these special varieties but also located on the
prime grape growing lands of the Short Hills Bench.
Wineries also emphasize their commitment to the classic European vinifera varietals,
implicitly distancing themselves from the winemaking of the old, as seen in the following
quote: “Vincor Canada's land holdings in Canada's largest wine growing regions, the
Okanagan Valley in British Columbia and the Niagara Peninsula in Ontario, are dedicated
almost exclusively to the production of European vitis vinifera.” This quote comes from a
winery that, unlike most Ontario wineries, uses many hybrid grapes (due to their ease of
production) in its low-end wines (that make up a significant portion of its business), and
helps to further underscore the “illegitimacy” of the local winemaking history. These claims
of emphasis on vinifera grapes are often supported by emphasizing geographical features of
Canada as being ideal, providing conditions in which consumer preferred vinifera varietals
are able to thrive. These explanations may at times involve comparing Ontario’s geography
to that of European wine regions. This is seen, for example, in the following quote
(characterization): “The similarities between the climates of Burgundy and the north
Niagara Peninsula encouraged him [the winery proprietor] to focus on grape varieties
typically to northeastern France.”
Connecting to the Local History
The second category of rhetorical history strategies captures that in spite of the
desire to distance current winemaking from the local winemaking history, there are attempts
to connect current winemaking to the local geographical and cultural history. Such
references to local history and regional heritage work to imbue wineries with a unique
connection to the region that distinguishes one winery from another. Table 3 includes the
strategies and illustrative quotes, along with associated rhetorical devices.
Insert Table 3 about here
Leveraging local history and events. Some wineries attempt to use local historical
events to tell interesting stories about their winemaking or to simply stand out from
competition. For example, one winery, Organized Crime, derives its name from a famous
feud between rival Mennonite denominations that took place in the 1800s, and another
winery documents and emphasizes the 150 years of farming that has characterized the
family operating it. Yet another winery explains the origins of its name on its web site as
follows, using denotation:
The roots go back to 1784 when United Empire Loyalists took over the land.
Recognition came from Lord Dorchester in 1788, when the area became one of four
numbered districts in Meckleburg. This name was changed in 1792 to Midland with
the districts becoming 19 electoral counties. At this time the island peninsular was
named after Prince Edward the Duke of Kent (1767-1820) the fourth son of George
III, who at the time was Governor of Upper Canada residing in Niagara. Prince
Edward County was subsequently incorporated in 1850 and became a municipality
prior to Confederation in 1867.
References are made frequently to historic buildings restored or used by wineries
that demonstrate commitment to traditional winemaking techniques as well as to the local
history of these heritage buildings. Scenery and tourism are also frequently linked to
heritage sites associated with or near winery locations.
Explaining and emphasizing local terroir. Although we note above that the
evocation of the notion of terroir constitutes an attempt to connect to the Old World history
of winemaking, the meaning of the term implies extracting uniqueness from a particular
wine producing location. Hence, to explain what makes the local terroir unique, wineries
attempt to communicate not only the specific tastes that are the manifestations of their
terroir, but also how that terroir came about. Significantly, they evoke the local geographic
history to do so. The emphasis is on highlighting, for example, how certain events during
prehistoric times created the kind of soil structure and mineral composition that putatively
makes the region conducive to excellent winemaking. Stoney and clay soils are often
described as providing unique nutrients that contribute to unique flavours of wine produced
from those soils. Further, prehistoric events are sometimes described as contributing, via
sedimentation and mineral remains, to the unique and distinct growing conditions and
terroir of wineries. All of these are illustrated by the following quote (denotation) from a
winery’s web site:
The geologic history of the Niagara Peninsula is the foundation of our region’s
finest wines. The forces of sun, wind and water, combined with the passage of
time, formed the area’s ancient bedrock more than 450 million years ago. Deposited
by continental ice drifts over the past 100,000 years, our glacial till soils are unique
in the winegrowing world. A complex blend of local sedimentary stone and
metamorphic rock from the world-renowned Canadian Shield, these soils help
define the distinctive character of Cave Spring wines.
Innovativeness
In spite of the above noted emphasis on following and demonstrating continuity vis-
à-vis the Old World winemaking tradition – though combined with some local cultural and
geographical elements – we also found the third category of rhetorical history strategies that
consists of wineries emphasizing innovativeness or breaking/modifying rules. Table 4
includes illustrative quotes representing and the specific rhetorical devices used by
wineries.
Insert Table 4 about here
Use of Technology. In contrast to the historical construction of wine as essentially
agrarian and technology free product, wineries do use a great deal of technology in their
work, and at times they highlight these technological advances in their newsletters.
Protecting grapes from pests, fungus and damaging weather conditions, such as rain and
frost, compel some wineries to utilize and prize their applications of innovative technology.
Modern techniques, such as screw caps over cork, are often portrayed as essential to
maintaining and enhancing quality of wine production, while they are clearly perceived by
many as going against traditional methods of making and bottling wine. Yet, these
emphases on technology are typically couched within the Terroir discourse, and as such, do
not represent complete break from Old World winemaking tradition. The following quote
(characterization) from a winery web site highlights such an attempt to blend technology
and the pursuit of terroir:
The use of high technology and leading edge techniques in the vineyard and winery
are the only way for us to maintain competitiveness while striving for quality. We
are constantly searching and developing new ways of improving our art form.
However, we have not lost sight of some of the more traditional aspects and
techniques of winemaking. Since it is an art form based on nature, in many cases it
is impossible to perfect. We continue to develop and refine our viticultural and
winemaking techniques so that our wines reflect our unique soil and are truly wines
of character and finesse.
Unorthodox methods, styles and grape varietals. Wineries sometimes promote
innovative and contemporary wines by explaining how the process of creating those wines
was unorthodox. In continuation, explicit valuations of not abiding by customs and rules
are made by some wineries. At times, wineries appear to value unusualness and originality
that allows them to create a sense of uniqueness that distinguishes wines and wineries by
creating a unique flavor experience. This is illustrated by the following quote
(characterization): “Blending several varieties and employing some unusual winemaking
techniques (he'll tell you all about them), Derek has produced something special.”
Some wineries highlight their use of weather resistant hybrids, despite those grapes
not having the “noble” Old World lineage. Such grapes are exalted by some wineries for
their resistance to weather and disease challenges, and for their heartiness and strength. In
addition, some wineries have developed unusual takes on well known grape varietals and
emphasize those unusual wines in the newsletters. For example, several wineries have
developed a more distinctive style of Gamay Noir, a grape traditionally associated with
Beaujolais region of France but enjoying relatively low regard among wine connoisseurs.
The distinctive “Ontario” take on the varietal makes it more full-bodied, complex and age-
worthy, and these aspects are emphasized in those wineries’ newsletters.
DISCUSSION AND CONCLUDING REMARKS
We argued that rhetorical history is an inherent aspect of theorization, because,
whether attempting to initiate change or normalize and rationalize changes that have taken
place, theorizers inevitably have to construct some kind of a version of the past that is
worth either preserving or uprooting. We then examined how actors use rhetorical history
in the context of their ongoing theorization work. Specifically, in our empirical context
actors do so in an attempt to theorize Ontario wine, an emerging product category that does
not yet enjoy universal acclaim and acceptance, as “world class”.
In the aggregate our findings indicate that as actors try to theorize the nature of
Ontario wine in a manner that enhances its reputation, they use and combine historical
constructions in a flexible manner. Thus, we find that wineries attempt to demonstrate the
continuity between Old World and Ontario winemaking histories, tapping into the cultural
understandings of wine as a traditional and age-old product. Further, we also find that
wineries seek to distance the region from the history of putatively bad winemaking, thereby
not only embracing Old World history but also attempting to suppress the local history.
However, even as they attempt to do so, on the one hand, on the other hand they still
attempt to tap into the region’s history and use the various historical and geographical
historical materials to endow Ontario wine with a sense of uniqueness. In addition, it is
interesting that wineries attempt to preserve the impression that they make wine in the same
low-tech, hands-on and earth bound way as has been done in Europe for supposedly
hundreds of years, on the one hand, while proudly displaying technological advances on
the other. Further, although they emphasize rigid compliance with tradition, they also
attempt to highlight innovativeness, rule-breaking and unorthodox approaches. It is also
important to note that the three categories of rhetorical history strategies are not mutually
exclusive, and the same winery might switch between different categories of strategies. For
example, a winery might emphasize its compliance with low tech winemaking conventions
during certain vintages, while highlighting some judicious technology use during
challenging vintages when technology might help “enhance” terroir.
By focusing on a region suffering from the stigma of “bad history” and aspiring to
align itself with the more glorious history of European winemaking while also integrating
local history and cultural elements, along with technological advances, we underscore that
history is not merely a revelation of the past or utilization of historical construction that are
already in existence, but rather is a malleable rhetorical construction of categories. We
further argue that the management of history is not purely an individual firm’s activity and,
accordingly, the investigation of rhetorical history is relevant beyond strategic management.
Rather, it lies at the very core of theorization or re-theorization of product categories, and
we make two arguments about the role of rhetorical history in theorization.
First, we argue that rhetorical history is inherently collective (c.f., Zerubavel, 2003).
In our study, for example, it is not up to any one winery to create the imagery of glorious
history of Old World winemaking and “bad” local winemaking. Rather, there is a collective
understanding of these two “histories” that is shared among and reproduced by wineries,
critics, consumers and other actors in the field. Thus, we found no evidence of wineries
embracing the pre-1988 winemaking history of Ontario or of attempts to question the
soundness of following the age-old European conventions of winemaking. Individual
wineries then are not-so-much as constructing these histories but are reproducing,
subverting or modifying these histories that are not properties of any one of them but of the
collective. In this regard, the notion of rhetorical history connects to the more familiar idea
of institutional work (Lawrence & Suddaby, 2006), in that the production and reproduction
of histories is an important aspect of institutional work. Historical constructions can only
persist to the extent to which enough actors in a particular field continue to reproduce them.
Individual actors, in turn, have some flexibility with respect to being able to tweak or
modify these constructions to suit their needs, but such tweaking must not stray too far
from the widely accepted narratives. However, we do know that historical narratives
change, and individual actors might then be able to alter them. Future research then should
explore the extent to which individual actors might be able to exercise agency in
transforming historical narratives.
Second and related, we argue that rhetorical history is inherently ideological because
histories are constructed in ways that define what is “good” and “bad” (c.f., Anteby &
Molnar, in press), often creating caricature-like accounts. In our study, for example, it is
apparent that the constructions of “glorious” Old World winemaking history and “bad”
local history do not necessarily stand up to critical scrutiny. Thus, although the Old World
tradition is constructed as very hands-on and small scale, there are and have been large
scale industrial wine producers in France, and the quality of Bordeaux wine has not always
been perceived as excellent (e.g., Ulin, 1995). Furthermore, the large scale wine production
in the Old World has relied, to an important extent on technological advances (e.g.,
Nossiter, 2005; Robinson, 2006). In addition, with respect to the construction of the local
winemaking history as “bad”, in spite of the public repudiation of all non-vinifera grape
varietals, several wineries have demonstrated that it is possible to produce critically
acclaimed wines from hybrid grape varietals. The implication of this casual critique of the
two “histories” is to underscore how a potentially arbitrary construction of history
nonetheless has very real disciplining and dominating effects (Lawrence, 2008) on the
actors in a particular field. Our findings suggest that particular historical constructions and
meanings attached to them that might be seen as natural or traditional in a particular field
become so through a systematic and selective suppression and marginalization of rival (and
perhaps equally viable) historical constructions and associated meanings. The disciplining
and dominating effects of historical narratives further problematize the above point about
the likelihood of individual actors being able to transform historical narratives. The
implication is that future research needs to examine how actors acquire the ability to
question what appear to be objective chronology of the past (Zerubavel, 2003) that does not
appear to be subject of debate, because without such questioning they seem especially
unlikely to be able to transform extant historical narratives.
In addition, our research offers some broader research implications by connecting to
the sociology of globalization. While that research tends to be conducted at very macro level
(e.g., Ritzer, 2007), our study examines some micro-processes of globalization.
Specifically, building on Ritzer’s (2003) argument that globalization involves both the
colonizing of the local by the global and the resistance to that imposition on behalf of the
local, we show some micro level manifestations of that dialectic. Thus, on the one hand
Ontario wineries appear to be eager to embrace the global history, connecting to it to the
point of marginalizing or erasing their own local history. Yet, on the other hand, they
attempt to express the unique local cultural and geographical elements of Ontario, albeit
within the confines of the globally imposed (and locally embraced) templates.
With respect to our attempts to start fleshing out the “how” of theorization, we note
that rhetorical history is but one aspect of theorization. It is apparent that wineries use
rhetorical history not to construct a theorization that conforms to cognitive schema (e.g.,
through demonstrating continuity with the global history of fine winemaking) but that is
also emotionally resonant (e.g., by connecting the product category to the region’s history
and folklore in an attempt to intrigue the audience or to enhance the emotional bond
between the consumers and the producers). An important future direction in investigating
how theorization works might then involve examining its emotional underpinnings.
REFERENCES
Anteby, M., & Molnar, V. In Press. Collective memory meets organizational identity:
Remembering to forget in a firm’s rhetorical history. Academy of Management
Journal.
Baldick, C. 2008. The Oxford dictionary of literary terms. New York: Oxford University
Press.
Birkinshaw, J., Hamel, G., & Mol, M. J. 2008. Management innovation. Academy of
Management Review, 33: 825-845.
Burke, K. 1962. A grammar of motives. Cleveland, Meridian Books.
Corley, K. G., & Gioia, D. A. 2004. Identity ambiguity and change in the wake of a
corporate spin-off. Administrative Science Quarterly, 49: 173–208.
Cuddon, J. & Preston, C. 1998. A dictionary of literary terms and literary theory.
Oxford: Blackwell.
Foster, W., Suddaby, R., Minkus, A., & Wiebe, E. 2010. History and tradition as
organizational resources: The case of Tim Hortons. University of Alberta Working
Paper.
Greenwood, R., Suddaby, R., & Hinings, C. R. 2002. Theorizing change: The role of
professional associations in the transformation of institutionalized fields. Academy of
Management Journal, 45: 58–80.
Hargadon, A., & Douglas, Y. 2001. When innovations meet institutions: Edison and the
design of the electric light. Administrative Science Quarterly, 46: 476-501.
Heracleous, L., & Barrett, M. 2001. Organizational change as discourse: Communicative
actions and deep structures in the context of information technology implementation.
Academy of Management Journal, 44: 755-778.
Hinings, C.R., Greenwood, R., Reay, T., & Suddaby, R. 2004. Dynamics of change in
organizational fields. In M.S. Poole, & A.H. Van de Ven (Eds), Handbook of
organizational change and innovation: 304-323. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Hwang, H., & Powell, W. W. 2005. Institutions and entrepreneurship. In S. Alvarez, R.
Agarwal, & O. Sorensen (Eds), Handbook of Entrepreneurship Research
(179-210). New York: Springer.
Lawrence, T. B. 2008. Power, institutions and organizations. In R. Greenwood, C. Oliver,
R. Suddaby, & K. Sahlin (Eds.), The Sage handbook of organizational
institutionalism (pp. 170–197). London: Sage.
Lounsbury, M., & Crumley, E.T. 2007. New practice creation: An institutional perspective
on innovation. Organization Studies, 28: 993-1012.
MacMillan, M. 2008. The Uses and Abuses of History. Toronto: Viking Canada.
Maguire, S., Hardy, C. & Lawrence, T. 2004. Institutional entrepreneurship in emerging
fields: HIV/AIDS treatment advocacy in Canada. Academy of Management
Journal, 17: 657-679.
Mills, M. 2010. Concise handbook of literary and rhetorical terms. Estep-Nichols
Publishing.
Nossiter, J. 2005. Mondovino. THINKFilm.
Phillips, N., Lawrence, T. B., & Hardy, C. 2004. Discourse and institutions. Academy of
Management Review, 29: 635–652.
Potter, J. 1996. Representing reality: Discourse, rhetoric and social construction.
London: Sage.
Pratt, M. 2009. For the Lack of a Boilerplate: Tips on Writing up (And Reviewing)
Qualitative Research. Academy of Management Journal, 52: 856-862.
Rao, H., Monin. P. & Durand, R. 2003. Institutional change in Toque Ville: Nouvelle
cuisine as an identity movement in French gastronomy. American Journal of
Sociology, 108 (4): 795–843.
Ritzer, G. 2007. (Ed.). The Blackwell companion to globalization. Oxford: Wiley-
Blackwell.
Robinson, J. 2006. The Oxford Companion to Wine (3rd Edition). Oxford: Oxford
University Press.
Sillince, J.A.A., & Brown, A.D. 2009. Multiple organizational identities and legitimacy:
The rhetoric of police websites. Human Relations, 62: 1829-1856.
Strang, D., & Meyer, J. W. 1993. Institutional conditions for diffusion. Theory and
Society, 22: 487–511.
Suddaby, R., Foster, W.M., & Trank, C.Q. 2010. Rhetorical history as a source of
competitive advantage, in B. Silverman (ed.), The Globalization of Strategy Research
(Advances in Strategic Management, Volume 27), pp.147-173. Emerald Group
Publishing Limited.
Suddaby, R. & Greenwood, R. 2005. Rhetorical strategies of legitimacy. Administrative
Science Quarterly, 50: 35–67.
Svejenova, S., Mazza, C., & Planellas, M. 2007. Cooking up change in haute cuisine:
Ferran Adria as an institutional entrepreneur. Journal of Organizational Behavior,
28: 539–561.
Tolbert, P., & Zucker, L.G. 1996. The institutionalization of institutional theory, In Clegg,
S., and Hardy, C. (Eds), Studying Organization: Theory and Method. London:
Sage, 169–184.
Ulin, R. C. 1995. Invention and representation as cultural capital: Southwest French
winegrowing history. American Anthropologist, 97(3): 519–27.
Ulin, R. 2004. Globalization and alternative localities. Anthropologica, 46: 153-164.
Van Leeuwen, C., & Seguin, G. 2006. The concept of terroir in viticulture. Journal of
Wine Research, 17(1): 1-10.
Weber, K., & Glynn, M.A. 2006. Making sense with institutions: Context, thought and
action in Karl Weick’s theory. Organisation Studies, 27: 1639–1660.
Whately, R. 1963. Elements of rhetoric: Comprising an analysis of the laws of moral
evidence and of persuasion, with rules for argumentative composition and
elocution. Southern Illinois University Press.
Zerubavel, E. 2003. Time maps: Collective memory and the social shape of the past.
Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Zilber, T. 2008. The work of meanings in institutional processes and thinking. In R.
Greenwood, C. Oliver, R. Suddaby, & K. Sahlin (Eds.), The Sage Handbook of
Organizational Institutionalism: 151–169. London: Sage.
Zuckerman, E. 1999. The categorical imperative: Securities analysts and the
illegitimacy
discount. American Journal of Sociology, 104: 1398-1438.
TABLE 1: EX ANTE AND EX POST THEORIZATION AND CONTINUITY/
DISCONTINUITY
Ex Ante Ex PostContinuous Proactive assertion that new
practices will be consistent with those seen as normal and acceptable in the past (e.g., Hargadon & Douglas, 2001)
Retrospective denial that current practices are abnormal or different from those seen as normal or acceptable in the past (e.g., Lounsbury & Crumley, 2007)
Discontinuous Proactive assertion that new practices will result in improvements over those seen as normal and acceptable in the past (e.g., Greenwood et al., 2002; Suddaby & Greenwood, 2005)
Retrospective reflection to demonstrate that new practices have resulted in improvements over those seen as normal and acceptable in the past (e.g., Svejenova et al., 2004; Birkenshaw et al., 2008; Hinings et al., 2004)
TABLE 2: CONNECTING TO OLD WORLD HISTORY OF WINEStrategy Illustrative Quotes [rhetorical devices]Emphasizing Old World ContinuityIdealized old World Traditions “This wine was produced in the traditional method
with the fermentation occurring in the bottle. It was disgorged after resting on the lees for three years.” [denotation]
“Our Merlot Bianco is produced in the classic European style made famous in places such as Provence and Spain - that is by having only about 20 hours of skin contact to give that light pink colour, and fermented dry with no residual sugar. [denotation and imagery]
“Our Winemaster, Marc Bradshaw, was able to draw on some Old World techniques from France and Italy to help create this superb wine.” [characterization]
Traditional Farming Methods Used “It`s been a 4 year love affair with this wine, let us just say that it involved a lot of hand holding (read: hand picking, hand sorting, hand bottling, hand labeling) but it was certainly worth all the effort because we think the result is outstanding.” [characterization and personification]
“Early on we made the decision not to use herbicide for weed control in our vineyards. Instead mechanical, tractor driven, grape hoeing is used followed by a little manual hoeing. In this way we have avoided years of herbicide accumulation and soil fatigue.” [imagery]
“Other ‘tried and true’ measures we practice every year include carrying a small crop, which provides the vine with more carbohydrates and improves its winter-hardness, and hilling up the soil over the lower trunk of the vine. Hilling the soil provides protection of basal buds but provides no protection to the buds located higher on the vine.” [denotation]
Terroir-based “The return is a wine that expresses the diversity and age of our vines, complexity in our soils and the vagaries of Mother Nature — all adding up to be a very fine wine!” [personification and imagery]
“Wine has been associated with its point of origin for hundreds of years and is often referred to as an “expression of place”. Recognizing that the character of a wine is directly influenced by where the grapes are grown, European countries with a long history of winemaking slowly evolved appellation systems to identify different wines for consumers. The "terroir" — the combination of location, soil, topography and climate — is an important indicator of the character of a wine and in many cases, its quality.” [denotation]
“With his knowledge and passion for winemaking, his style of traditional winemaking focuses on creating wines which showcase the purity of fruit and exhibit the unique terroir, or environment, in which the grapes are grown.” [characterization and imagery]
Slow Grape Growing and Winemaking “We undertook additional care during processing. Essentially, the grapes are hand-sorted prior to going into the destemmer to remove any damaged fruit, debris, leaves and lady beetles. We then pressed at low pressure to minimize undesirable extracts. The juice after pressing was then allowed to settle overnight in our cold storage, racked off the solids, bentonited, settled a second time and again racked. At this point the juice was visibly clear and ready to be fermented.” [characterization]
“Grapes were harvested from multiple small vineyard blocks throughout Niagara at an average 22.5° brix. The grapes were gently pressed and fermented on the skins in stainless steel tanks. The individual vineyard components were put in predominantly French oak barrels (56% new wood) and aged for an average of 22 months. Blending trials were conducted throughout August of 2009 with the final blend Bottled September 4th 2009.” [denotation]
“The grapes where harvested and destemmed on October 25th. Two days later we picked the Viognier. After destemming the grapes, they were gently pressed and all the Viognier wet skins were added to the Syrah and fermentation was started. Fermentation and skin contact lasted for 26 days. The wine was aged in French Oak barrels for 18 months.” [denotation]
Old Vines “The 2006 Unoaked Chardonnay brings forward the newest vintage of our most popular wine. Made from our youngest vines (still 20+ years old, the same age as most “Old Vines” in Ontario), it represents Chardonnay at its purest.” [personification and imagery]
“Minerality, elegance, and complexity have come to define the wines crafted from our Old Vines. These qualities are a direct result of the deep roots, stony soils, and winemaker Derek Barnett's dedication to producing a sincere expression of these venerable vines.” [characterization and imagery]
“Made from our oldest blocks of vines (30+ and 40+ years old) only in the best vintages, the Signature Chardonnay has received critical and customer acclaim wherever it’s been poured!” [denotation]
Barrel and Bottle Aging “The 2006 spent nearly three years in barrel, giving it depth and maturity despite its bottle youth.” [personification]
“Sourced only from the oldest vines in the best vintages, and aged in French oak for 18 months, its depth, power, viscosity and complexity are unmatched.” [imagery]
“A barrel performs two important functions for the wine placed in it. It allows the very slow introduction of oxygen into the wine (micro oxidation) and it imparts the character of the oak as the wine ages. For example, the barrel lacktones impart a subtle coconut flavour, the eugenal results in the clove-like flavours you can often pick up, and the ketones give the wine a vanilla-like flavour.” [denotation and imagery]
Vintages “As we wrap up a challenging but promising harvest, we look now toward the wines that have finished their journey from vine to bottle. The next few months will feature periodic releases of the winemakers' efforts from the 2005, 2006, and 2007 vintages.” [personification and characterization]
“Therefore as we are working we can view the vineyards, which are pruned and ready to go for another year. Thus the anticipation of another vintage begins...” [imagery]
“We have all been waiting patiently for the wines from one of the most fantastic vintages Niagara has ever had. We were only able to bottle one of our 2007 Red wines before the start of harvest, the rest will have to have to rest a little longer in barrel.” [characterization]
Rejection of “Bad” Local HistoryNew Canadian Wine History “When compared to the likes of France, Italy, and
Greece, all of which have hundreds or even thousands of years of wine making history under their belts, Canada has a mere 40 or so years of solid wine making roots to draw from.” [denotation]
“In the wine world, Canada, and more specifically Niagara, is a relatively young wine producing region.” [denotation and personification] “By the spring of 1987 we managed to get the balance of the farm planted to Gamay. As is typical of farming, the weather is never constant and we experienced our share of “good years” (1991, 1993 and 1995) and poor years – with hail and winter injury (1992 and 1996). In 1992 an adjacent 8 acre property became available. With some hesitation we purchased it and planted half of it to Cabernet Franc and Cabernet Sauvignon in 1993 and the balance to Chardonnay in 1996.” [characterization and imagery]
Vinifera Over Labrusca Grapes “At the time vinifera grapes were not yet as popular as they are today and so the decision to grow only vinifera grapes was a difficult one for us to make, but we were encouraged by our mentor Paul Bosc at Chateau des Charmes.” [characterization]
“Mountainview speaks to our location which is nestled against the escarpment while having a commanding view of Lake Ontario in the distance. These two geographical features create the ideal conditions for growing premium vinifera grapes.” [denotation]
“During the day we tore up the original vineyards planted by Henry a century and a half before, we chased the sheep off of the farm and shovel planted the initial 65 acres over a few summers with our friends (then later we planted a hundred more).” [characterization]
TABLE 3: CONNECTING TO LOCAL HISTORYStrategy Illustrative QuotesConnecting to Regional History
Local History and Stories “You will experience the history of 19th century homes, views of the Niagara River, both country and Old Town properties.” [identification]
“This historic building was the inspiration for our new wine boutique which mirrors the original cupola of the carriage house as well as interior design elements of the Victorian era. Klaus was inspired to create a building reminiscent of the works of William Morris who was the principal founder of the Arts and Crafts movement of the Victorian era, embracing simplicity, clean lines, and good design. Klaus feels this movement is not only reflective of Reif's commitment to winemaking techniques and thirteen generations of craftsmanship but also remains true to the history of the estate.” [characterization]
“In 1842 Nicholas’ youngest son Henry built an Inn, tavern and carriage house (which serves as our tasting room and wine boutique today). The construction of the Inn approximately coincided with plantings of vineyards, some of Niagara’s first. When signing for the tavern’s liquor license Henry Smith dropped his last name, choosing the moniker Henry of Pelham to both recognize his ownership of the toll road he lived along and what must have been a tongue-in-cheek reference to the recent British Prime Minister, Sir Henry Pelham. The joking moniker stuck and Henry Smith was referred to thereafter in official archival documents as Henry of Pelham.” [characterization]
Local Terroir
Local Geographic History “The vineyards are located in the Niagara River sub-appellation which is mapped as the warmest area of the region with the highest number of growing degree days in the Peninsula. The sub-appellation also contains lighter, well-drained red shale soils which warm rapidly in spring. In fall, winter and spring, the heat capacity of the enormous flow of the Niagara River creates convection currents and moderates temperatures of adjacent vineyards on clear calm nights.” [denotation and imagery]
“The Niagara Escarpment is a limestone ridge, a prehistoric dorsal fin composed in layers of petrified armoured fish and tiny crushed crustaceans. They lend their mineral remains to our soil in the Short Hills Bench, the same soil my settler and pre-settler ancestors are buried in, the same soil we spread our father’s ashes on, the same soil I may one day be added to myself. Around here we believe you are what you drink; you might even be related to it.Our lands soils are the residue of an eroded mid-continental mountain range dragged here by prehistoric glaciers. Shards of limestone ground fine off of the escarpments rock face by icy glacial teeth are tossed up in forty feet of dark bronze clay.” [imagery, characterization and identification]
“Soils are a complex series of glacial, fluvial and lacustrine sediments underlain by Queenston shale.” [denotation]
Unique and Distinct Terroir “When you taste these wines we want you to taste the essence of the Reif Estate Vineyard.” [identification]
“The distinct essence of the Niagara terroir captured with purity, passion and precision.” [imagery]
“This enables us to produce outstanding wines with a distinct sense of place and time. This is what the French call terroir.” [denotation and imagery]
TABLE 4: INNOVATIVENESSStrategy Illustrative QuotesFlexibility and experimentationFlexible rule following “It's a project that satisfies our inherent need to
break all the rules, to act in defiance of established customs, and it happens to be a tribute to our founding Rogue.” [characterization]
“As you might know, Flat Rock Cellars doesn’t believe in tradition for the sake of tradition - we use that which makes our wines better and disregard the rest.” [identification and characterization]
“Tradition may run deep at Henry of Pelham but we are not static.” [characterization]
Unorthodox Methods “Naturally, German ingenuity and frugality got hold of him and Hans decided to harvest the grapes anyway. Initially the grapes were meant to produce a late harvest wine. These grapes dry out on the vines over time and loose some of their water content and the sugars and flavours get more concentrated. But now Hans had an unusual dilemma whereby these frozen grapes had no water content... they were solid ice! Hans was pressing like a mad man and he only managed to get a drop of concentrated syrup-like juice from each grape... insert German swear words here... . Thus far into the process Hans decided to start fermentation on this sticky sweet juice to show his boss that he did at least try his best. Well, the rest is history!!!” [characterization and imagery]
“We created the Whimsy! label in order to give our winemakers a place to experiment, to play, to push the limits, to work with tiny batches of special things. The wines' subtitle is ‘The Winemaker's Palette’ - suggesting both the "range of colours that an artist uses" and, in an alternate spelling, the ‘penchant’ or ‘taste’ of the winemaker. However you spell it, these wines are unusual, quirky, and yes, whimsical. They are made in limited quantities and they are always interesting.” [characterization]
Grape Varietals “Frankly, when it comes to this variety we’re competing against ourselves. If our ‘98 Foch set the mark for power and our ’99 set the mark for structure, this ’07 raises the bar on both fronts.” [characterization]
“A rounder, fuller, richer take on gamay. Dark crimson in colour, with dried currant, cherry syrup, clove and hickory aromas. Plum, ripe raisin, rhubarb and raspberry treat the palate. The finish is satisfyingly lengthy.” [imagery]
Modernity
Use of Technology “The use of leading techniques and technology in both the vineyard and winery are central to allowing the terroir to express itself while also allowing our ever evolving house style to remain a contemporary classic.” [denotation]
“In pursuit of superior quality, we are working with a company in southwestern Ontario that manufactures products for the Ginseng industry to develop a structure that will protect the grape clusters from damaging rains, which so often occur after veraision.” [denotation and characterization]
“The quality of the grapes, the level of ripeness, the flavour profiles knocked our socks off! In fact, when Colin (our wine-maker) handed me the lab results from the grape testing I swore he had made a mistake somewhere and sent him back to retest and you know what?? The numbers were correct!!!” [characterization and imagery]
Modern Techniques “Thomas’s attention to detail and cutting edge winemaking techniques have garnered him special attention from top wine critics such as Robert Parker, John Szabo MS ,Winespectator, and Jancis Robinson MW with many of his wines scoring in the mid 90’s.” [characterization]
“As the grapes begin to ripen we will be spraying “Prep-501” (cow horn silica) on our vineyards. This will enhance the ripening process this season and allow us to harvest more ripe, richer fruit and produce wines with stronger, purer and more vibrant aromas and flavors.” [denotation and imagery]
“The crown cap eliminates cork taint, keeps more bubbles in solution, it`s safer (you don`t have to worry about projectiles), and frankly it just looks cool." [denotation and imagery]
This notion refers to “the relationship between the characteristics of an agricultural product (quality, taste, style) and its geographic origin, which might influence these characteristics” (Van Leeuwen and Seguin, 2006: 1).