toci wrote:
> Seriously, I agree with you about Earl Grey. Look on it as one of
> those tisane mixtures that not everybody likes. I'm not sure
> whether it's the bergamont or the mixture I object to. Toci


Earl Grey can definitely be an acquired taste. I didn't like it when I
tried it for the first time, either. Even now, it's something I don't
like all the time. I go through spells where I drink a lot of it
(mostly in the afternoons. Tried it at breakfast time once - BIG
MISTAKE!) and then I might go for months without drinking any Earl Grey
at all.

But before you dismiss Earl Grey totally as something you don't like,
bear in mind that there are many different blends of it available and
not all are created equal. Maybe you just tried the wrong brand? I
think most of the Earl Greys blended for American consumers are too
heavy on the bergamot, resulting in a soapy-tasting tea. It's worth
experimenting a bit to find the right amount of bergamot for your
particular taste. For me, Twinings seems to have just about the right
amount of bergamot. I also like the Republic of Tea's Earl Greyer,
though it is a bit pricy for the quality. Other brands like Stash,
Lipton and Bigelow have so much bergamot in them, it almost
anesthesizes the pallette.

Try Jackson's Earl Grey sometime, if you get a chance. The bergamot in
it is very subtle; just a hint, really. It's quite different from any
other Earl Grey I've tried. Jacksons used to claim that theirs was the
original Earl Grey formula, until they were taken over by Twinings, who
makes the same claim. Now that they're part of the same conglomerate,
they don't argue about this anymore.


> Blair P. Houghton wrote:
> > Seriously. Who's pulling this joke on the entire tea world?
> >
> > --Blair