But I’m going to anyway. Charles Shaw. Or Two Buck Chuck, as it’s affectionately referred to by lovers and haters of the wine.

Whatever you call it, it’s inexpensive yet also responsible for 15 percent of American wine sales in 2003. That doesn’t seem staggering unless you realize wine is an unmatched product as far as variety is concerned. Still, there isn’t much out there for two dollars. Are people only choosing the Shaw based on its price?

Here in Vineland, USA, it’s actually two dollars (hence the nickname). In far off places such as New Jersey and Missouri it usually sells for three to four dollars (because of shipping costs and state taxes).

The nickname is somehow synonymous with the wine regardless of where it’s sold and at what price. Many claim it’s still a bargain at four bucks because, first and foremost, people do actually enjoy the wine.

After trying some myself, I wondered if people enjoy it because they’re told to enjoy it. Americans are easily influenced by reviews. It’s hard not to be. It’s hard to argue with something if it’s enjoyable and inexpensive.

I only argue if it’s not enjoyable.

Another reason for the Chuck fix is the fact that Americans love to gossip (myself included). There are a few conspiracy theories, so to speak, floating the idea that there’s something Two Buck Chuck is hiding from its drinkers. Two involve airlines and another involves the real Charles Shaw.

The theories
One rumor goes that several large airline companies were forced to get rid of their wine supplies following 9/11 because corkscrews were no longer allowed on planes.

So the Charles Shaw Winery bought the whole stash for next to nothing, added new labels and the rest is history.

Wrong.

Another rumor runs along the same lines, but singles out United Airlines. Apparently they were feeling the brunt of fewer people traveling due to the terrorist attacks and needed fast cash. They sold off their entire supply of Two Buck Chuck to Trader Joe’s dirt cheap.

Still wrong.

The Mr. Shaw theory has some truth to it. He did lose his winery, which produced very good wine for a while, in a divorce settlement. Some believe he flooded the market with good wine for a scrapheap price right before his ex-wife took control so the winery would lose value.

Wrong, wrong, and sort of disturbing.

Another rumor involves 9/11 in a whole other way.

Apparently, the government couldn’t provide enough monetary relief for people who lost work as a result of the attacks. Instead, they decided to push a line of incredibly inexpensive alcohol to make people think less of the defense spending and miss work on their own because of hangovers.

Just plain wrong all around.

The scoop
The incredibly ordinary reason Charles Shaw is so freaking cheap is because of California’s fluctuating economy. After Silicon Valley flopped, fewer people were pampering themselves (which for some reason involves buying less wine). But because of the wealth Silicon Valley once created, many people had started wineries and planted vineyards before the collapse.

And thus we have The Great Grape Glut of the Gameboy Generation.

Fred Franzia, owner of Charles Shaw Winery, bought all those extra grapes at a flea-market price and America’s favorite cheap indulgence was born. Oh, and that defense-spending rumor ... I made that one up.

Had you guessing for a minute, though.

Franzia bought the winery in 1995 from the former Mrs. Shaw for a mere 18 grand. She was desperate for cash. Last year, the Charles Shaw label netted $150 million.

Since I started drinking wine, I have managed to steer clear of the Chuck simply because I don’t like to get caught up in hoopla (I didn’t even go to the Senior Prom). I also don’t trust a $2 wine even if everyone loves it. But, I decided to give in when I heard that Charles Shaw’s Cabernet Sauvignon recently won high acclaim at an international wine-tasting competition. As with most wines, I wanted more info before I popped the cork.

I’ve discovered that people either love it like a pet dog or detest it worse than April 15. And as for Franzia, he’s angered a lot of people in Napa Valley as a result of the wine.

Not because it’s a "super-value wine," but because he cellars and bottles it in Napa which gives the impression that it’s a Napa Valley wine (although none of the grapes actually come from Napa since they are too expensive for "super-value wines").

Consumers tend to get eagerly caught up in the wine and forget about the real Charles Shaw. He’d probably like it that way out in Chicago, where he works in the software industry. He doesn’t particularly hate the wine as much as he hates that his name is associated.

Or does he hate the fact that he’s making nothing off it? A winemaker once himself, Shaw has friends who are involved in a lawsuit over the Napa usage on the bottle, and he doesn’t want to be connected.

The verdict
As for the wine, I was less than impressed but certainly not mortified. I went to Trader Joe’s and bought a bunch of inexpensive wine to compare and contrast, give it the old college try.

The three Charles Shaw wines I purchased — 2003 Shiraz, 2003 Chardonnay and 2001 Cabernet — were not undrinkable or unenjoyable.

I also picked up a $3 bottle of 2001 J.W. Morris Cabernet Sauvignon, a $.50 Purple Moon 2003 Shiraz, a $4 Amber Hill 2002 Chardonnay and an $8 2001 Blackstone Cabernet Sauvignon. All are from California.

It was less fun than a lot of things I’ve done in my life, but very interesting none the less. A common thread throughout was that these are wines that come in and leave fast.

There’s not much to talk about: fringe friends who you just say hello and goodbye to. There could be 20 or more sources for the grapes of these wines and, as a result, their quality drops.

I frequently ask two friends to taste wine I open in order to get other opinions. So I asked them to try all this cheap stuff with me. They’re a young couple who drink wine regularly, but wouldn’t collect or spend much more than $15 for a bottle.

In a blind tasting, both of them guessed which one was Charles Shaw two out of three times, which, they both admitted, was because they liked it the most. After smelling the Chardonnay, the guy said it reminded him of a shampoo called "Glistening Pear."

I guess there’s a new alternative to Herbal Essence, and it’s only a couple of bucks.

Max DeNike is 22, works for a winery and believes wine isn’t just for old people. Contact him at svreeken@santacruzsentinel.com.