One 6-minute steep vs two 3-minute steeps

Greetings, greetings,

First of all, thanks for the reply. I always enjoy reading text that has a little care taken over it, and it seems as if the tone is friendly. For not being aggressive, you have my thanks. It would be rude of me not to reply after such a message, so here goes:

I don't think the avoidance of absolutes in the context of tea brewing and drinking can be contested. De gustibus non disputandum est.

As you do later in your message, I appreciate when you tell me that you cannot understand my writing, because it gives me the opportunity to clarify. My point here was restated in a subsequent paragraph, but I introduced it gently in an attempt to avoid offence. I claimed that the "challenge question" is specious. You've gone some way to explaining the context surrounding your question, which is gratefully received.

I cannot second-guess your motives, of course, and my reply is based only on the superficial appearance of your responses in this thread. I don't have access to the "background discussion" that has, apparently, prompted this challenge, and, as I mention above, I'm glad of your rehearsal.

On a purely pedantic note, I should definitely challenge this given my assumption that surely more than one chemical alteration occurs simultaneously during excess boiling. The chemical properties of boiling water is not a field that I have spent any considerable effort researching, but it would surprise me if in the overwhelming majority of examples, only a single chemical alteration occurred (given the complexity of the solution).

Of course, I'm always willing to be proven wrong, and I would welcome any further information from someone who has spent some time researching boiling water.

This really is very surprising to me, and I welcome your opinion. I suppose that this is the crux of the discussion, and the singular point of interest, for me. I'm fascinated to hear that excessive boiling of water might not alter your perception of the taste of tea brewed using it.

Like you, I've had the dubious pleasure of some extremely chalky water supplies in the UK, in various districts. My home city was built on ground which is fenland and chalk, and it certainly has an unpleasant effect on the health of the long-term inhabitants - particularly kidney accumulatives and "stones".

I must confess to being sincerely surprised that this paragraph would cause difficulties, and I'm thankful that you raise it so that I can bear it in mind for Newsgroup writing in future. I suppose that, yes, this is the current state of Oxford English. I tested it out on 2.5 random victims (one being split between here and another place) and it didn't seem to cause too much agony. I'll be careful when posting in future, though, so again, thanks.

Honestly, if your motives are for an investigation of the topic without a desire to show off, the effort that you have taken is genuinely appreciated. We cannot guess your motives, but can only form opinions based on the text, which is borderline ostentation. If I promise to be more direct in my wording to reduce reader confusion, I would welcome a slightly more amiable approach to discussion of the investigation (though let it be said that the manners with which it is discussed are refreshingly good).

On this subject, I have absolutely nothing worthy of ostentation. I simply have not spent time with the literature in this area. As I mentioned above, contributions from those for whom this is one of their research topics are welcome - provided they are worded in a format that doesn't lead to discomfort. It's dangerous knowing a subject in detail

- it has to be communicated carefully, in order to avoid the audience jumping to undesirable conclusions. I certainly agree that this is a fun place, and I trust that the spirit of my reply has not offended.

I certainly wouldn't dream of adding to a killfile any poster who is able to provide good information in an area of which I have little technical familiarity. I prefer to provide a gentle prod towards making that valuable content appear in a more congenial form.

Addio, addio,

Hobbes

Very respectfully and with no malice or bad intentions, I would say that in my time here a few posters can be a bit too "heady" for their own good and really go overboard trying to sound important. Not to single out, but I could summarize most of what Dog Ma said in many of his paragraphs into single sentences in plain English.

At first a few posters here rubbed me the wrong way, but in general they are harmless. I've learned to just stay out of certain posters threads/topics and my enjoyment skyrocketed.

I try to stick to actual topics about tea now, and I also keep in mind that this NG is very different than most with an almost absolute lack of SPAM and junk... as well as a group of different folks who all enjoy tea. I do my part to try to keep things light-hearted and fun, instead of going down these long dark roads to nowhere about minutia. I have read a number of great texts, and as always I reccomend "The Book of Tea" by Okakura (available free online at Project Gutenberg) or for $4 at a local bookstore. I also place myself in the mindset of ancient tea masters and the technology/techniques of the time when it comes to such discussions as these. Think about the tools, environment, technology, and surroundings. Think about how they would be using fresh spring water for the most part, think about what minerals/contents of that water would be. Think about using a wood fire and iron pot to heat the water, how would that affect the taste? Think about how they most certainly would reboil their water to conserve the heat and to minimize trips to a stream. Etc.

Tea is a very singular experience. Tea ceremonies are nice, but not what tea is truly about. Try to understand and appreciate other's experiences, but do not judge your own by them. IMHO trying to make tea a scientific endeavor is pointless. I also feel we spend too much time on semantics and minute unimportant details and are missing the bigger picture much of the time. All that said, though, I have learned a lot about other's experiences and also had some new teas opened up to me that would otherwise have not been known here at this NG and still enjoy my time here even with a few rough spots.

- Dominic

Well said, that man, and thanks for the reference from Project Gutenberg - I'm digging it out in my other window at the moment. :)

Toodlepip,

Hobbes

This book is turning out to be more interesting even than the tea scope that I anticipated, thank you - I spend a fair amount of my time on my black cushion, and the chapters relating it to Zen are fascinating. By pure coincidence, I've been writing on a similar topic in my diaries (though of course in an infinitely less accomplished fashion than Okakura).

It just goes to show that there are no coincidences. ;)

Thanks again - there are several Zen chums here who will enjoy this, too, so you've done more than one person a favour.

Toodlepip,

Hobbes

-__-

Here's the link, most likely you've found it already... but for others:

- Dominic

If you will allow me to reply to myself, I would like to publicly appologize in that I really was not trying to single out DogMa. I actually think he made great efforts to *explain* what he was talking about while he was posting, such as with reciprocity and the many other variables in real life to be factored into equations. I think at times to outsiders or less technical/scientific people it sounds a bit uppity and forced. I can be guilty of this too, which is why I'd never meant to take aim at DogMa.

I should have left all names out of my post, that was my fault. We all know those who can be abrasive, curmudgeonly, holier-than-thou, etc. and I guess that is up to each of us to decide on our own terms just like tastes in tea. The many backgrounds, nationalities, and tastes represented here is what makes it unique... and keeps me around.. good, bad, indifferent. Strong personalities and opinions are a good thing, and are what makes things interesting.

My appologies DogMa... I ain't mad 'atcha Dog. ;)

- Dominic

No offense taken, not that this Zen adept can be unsettled by mere words (excepting mystical incantations like "dan cong oolong" or "extra-bitter chocolate" or "free lunch." Besides, to paraphrase a young philosopher out of Wadham College:

... taking ritual at its superficial level can be misleading, or even harmful to the realization of Tea Mind. And while agreeing with some on the necessity for tea practice to reach outside the sphere of casual reading, which is in itself merely the intellect seeking to further reinforce itself, one should remember that "hard" scientific epistemology usually belongs to schools other than Cha Dao. Whether or not it is useful in achieving pleasure or insight is not for me to say, but that "direct tasting" has traditionally eschewed many intellectual practices carried out in the West.

-DM

Nice quote. And on the extra-bitter chocolate topic... last Christmas I bought my father (a huge dark chocolate fan) what I thought would be the holy grail when I found a German Dark Chocolate with 85% cocao... not realizing that more is not always better with dark chocolate. He said it was bitter as sin, and also darn near broke a tooth on the hardness of it.

"Free lunch" is a phrase that tugs at my heartstrings as well :)

- Dominic

LurfysMa, This area is too vast for one post, but this board has several great suggestions and it really comes down to the type and quality of tea (and your own taste vs. others). Good quality Chinese/ Tawainese are meant to be re-steeped, and the best taste often does not come from the fist steep.

A

LurfysMa wrote: