9/11 Wine
Lieb Family Cellars on Long Island’s North Fork is bottling a wine to raise funds for the 9/11 Memorial in New York City. It is, not surprisingly, raising controversy as well.
“What’s next? A 9/11 pastrami sandwich?” asked Councilman Peter Vallone, Jr., (D-Queens).
“I don’t care about the small amount that they donate to charity. If anyone is profiting off of 9/11, then this wine leaves a very bad taste in my mouth.”
People have profited from 9/11, of course, almost from the first day. Everyone from t-shirt vendors to cynical politicians has leveraged grief and horror to advance their own interests. If you are so disposed, you could buy a 9/11 commemorative muscle car model, a variety of 9/11 commemorative coins, a commemorative 9/11 Marine K-Bar knife, or a 9/11 commemorative cribbage board. You can buy keychains or coffee mugs or counterfeit money – because nothing says “remember” like the almighty dollar. To feel a little more a part of history, you can even buy a commemorative 9/11 fireman’s badge. Grief, in a materialistic consumer society like ours, is a peculiar and in many ways unattractive thing.
By all accounts, Lieb’s issuance of 9/11 Merlot and 9/11 Chardonnay is entirely sincere. Mayor Bloomberg’s spokesman notes that the Lieb family was looking for a way to contribute, that the family lost friends that day. Ten percent comes off the top to be donated to the 9/11 Memorial, which approved Lieb’s petition to make the wine. Councilman Vallone’s objection is based on the fact that people along the value chain will make money. That’s how our society works. We don’t expect people to work for free; we are not all Albert Schweitzer.
I can’t help but think that at least some of the complaining has to do with the fact that this particular commemorative consumer good is wine, a product associated with joy and, in the minds of some, depravity. But each of us contributes to society in our own idiom, building houses or cleaning the streets or making wine. The urge to put some of that effort to use in memory of something passed is entirely natural.
But then there are those, like the 9/11 widow who said:
I don’t like it. It’s commercializing 9/11, and this isn’t an event that should be commercialized. I don’t care if it’s T-shirts or coins, I don’t like any of it.
But that’s the society we live in.
August 23rd, 2011 at 8:55 AM
Sincere gesture or marketing ploy? They would have sold the wine anyway with their normal Lieb label. They could then donate 10% to the memorial fund. But that route would have kept the focus on the memorial rather than Lieb. I sell stuff for a living and I know a marketing campaign when I see one.
August 23rd, 2011 at 9:51 AM
I think Wally is even more cynical than I am.
August 24th, 2011 at 9:54 AM
But not more cynical than I am.
His comment was my first thought upon reading this information–after that, my thoughts went from that kindly one down hill…
August 24th, 2011 at 9:57 AM
I’m not sure purity of motivation is a necessity. Maybe I’m the cynical one, but people’s motivation for taking action is often complicated. Motivation is often a tangle of contradictory reasons.
People work hard for charity not just because it help the charity, but because it makes them feel good about themselves. People go to fund raisers not just to support the charity but because they’re fun.
Is this a marketing ploy? Well, in effect, yes. It’s getting them a lot of publicity and they’re going to sell a bunch of wine. But did it start out as a marketing ploy? We can’t know that, but my guess is no. My guess is that winemakers pay tribute by making wine, and even if there’s no cash cost to what they’re doing there’s an opportunity cost, and even if there’s no opportunity cost it is putting money into worthwhile pockets.
I think you cut people slack when they’re doing something even partially noble, unless you have clear evidence that what they’re doing is’t noble at all. Most of the good things I, personally, do, I do for reasons that have at least a little to do with my own self-interest. Should I be scorned for that? The person who casts that particular stone had better be absolutely pure of heart — and I haven’t met anyone like that.
August 24th, 2011 at 10:28 AM
Tom, in my view, feeling good about yourself is a potent motivator for doing good, and no fanfare or calling attention to it may be the purest form of doing good.
Having said that, a case can be made for going public as a way to draw other people into doing good, either by shaming them or by charging them money.
I suppose, however, that in this so-called age of information, where it is increasingly more difficult to separate public relations from the public good, cynicism is bound to abound.
August 24th, 2011 at 1:01 PM
I give stuff to charitable causes. I let them put my name in as a donor if it is likely to help them bring in more money. Otherwise I ask them to please not mention my name and keep the focus on raising funds for the cause, not trying to drum up business for those who donated. Charitable contribution or marketing? My own ethics usually point the way pretty clearly and I generally am able to follow my conscience.
As for those who give and attend these “events”-
Accepting that the plural of anecdote is not “data,” I’ve found that the wealthier the people hosting the event are, the more they want other people to pay for their party to raise money for the opera, the symphony, etc.
September 1st, 2011 at 11:17 AM
Motivation, marketing, and charitable commercialization aside, I’m just puzzled by this manufactured intersection of somber (and sober) remembrance and a beverage typically (hopefully) associated with being a social lubricant, an accompaniment to a meal, and, perhaps, a bright spot in one’s day.
The collision of such diametrically opposed emotions forces at least this observer to wrestle with the contrast uncomfortably. The resulting knee-jerk impression: poor taste or poor judgement – or both.
I’m with the widow. And Wally. You want to pay tribute? Quietly write a check – and have a hopeful thought for the families.