I tried to explain why I brew tea Gong Fu style to my Dad the other day
and I couldn't come up with a satisfactory explanation. I know from
first hand experience that Gong Fu is better than English style, but
it's difficult to explain to someone who doesn't really drink tea. I
know there are posters here who are extremely knowledgable, so I was
wondering what the various reasons are? The one that makes the most
sense to me at the moment is that changes within the tea are more
obvious when you brew with more leaf and less water. Brewing tea
English style, with less leaf and more water, makes these changes
considerably less obvious. What does everyone else think? Why is Gong
Fu better?

11/28/06


> I tried to explain why I brew tea Gong Fu style to my Dad the other day
> and I couldn't come up with a satisfactory explanation. I know from
> first hand experience that Gong Fu is better than English style, but
> it's difficult to explain to someone who doesn't really drink tea. I
> know there are posters here who are extremely knowledgable, so I was
> wondering what the various reasons are? The one that makes the most
> sense to me at the moment is that changes within the tea are more
> obvious when you brew with more leaf and less water. Brewing tea
> English style, with less leaf and more water, makes these changes
> considerably less obvious. What does everyone else think? Why is Gong
> Fu better?
>

Hey Dustin,

Aha! Gungfu *isn't* better. However, it
does afford an opportunity to experience
ever changing tastes from steep to steep,
which is in itself an adventure It also
forces the Gungfuer to pay close attention
to what he is doing, lest the steep be
ruined by overbrewing, and so on. This
attention is worthwhile because it focuses
concentration on the tea experience and
contributes to a meditative environment.
The things of Gungfu are beautiful,
chosen for their beauty and function.
That adds to the delight of the experience.
The rituals around tea service are perhaps
tighter and more constrained than English
service -- witness dem little bitty cups -- and
this furthers the bond among the drinkers.
These things to me make Gungfu cool. I
practice a loose form of Gungfu, hardly
Gungfu at all in the eyes of some. I am
familiar with highly codified and orchestrated
versions of Gungfu which some say are the
real Gungfu deal.

Anyway, perhaps these are some things
you can share with your Dad.

Michael

xDustinx wrote:
> I tried to explain why I brew tea Gong Fu style to my Dad the other day
> and I couldn't come up with a satisfactory explanation. I know from
> first hand experience that Gong Fu is better than English style, but
> it's difficult to explain to someone who doesn't really drink tea. I
> know there are posters here who are extremely knowledgable, so I was
> wondering what the various reasons are? The one that makes the most
> sense to me at the moment is that changes within the tea are more
> obvious when you brew with more leaf and less water. Brewing tea
> English style, with less leaf and more water, makes these changes
> considerably less obvious. What does everyone else think? Why is Gong
> Fu better?

Just my 2 leaves, but I tend to find that the complete freedom of the
leaves allows them to fully unfurl and show themselves. This not only
produces a better brew than in cramped confines, but it allows you to
get a very up-close and personal view of the leaves and the aromas,
instead of almost second-hand if it is further away in a dark cavelike
teapot with just the liquid in your cup up close.

There is a much more intimate feeling, it is more 1-on-1, and it
affords you the chance to really experiment and compare notes and
brewing since it is basically the same experience from one person to
another... where teapots and other vessels have many variables and
differences.

and my favorite response to such questions... "'cuz it is!" (I was a
bit of a holdout on the gaiwan for some time, until I really began to
understand and appreciate it myself)

- Dominic

Dominic 11/29/06


>
> xDustinx wrote:
>> I tried to explain why I brew tea Gong Fu style to my Dad the other day
>> and I couldn't come up with a satisfactory explanation. I know from
>> first hand experience that Gong Fu is better than English style, but
>> it's difficult to explain to someone who doesn't really drink tea. I
>> know there are posters here who are extremely knowledgable, so I was
>> wondering what the various reasons are? The one that makes the most
>> sense to me at the moment is that changes within the tea are more
>> obvious when you brew with more leaf and less water. Brewing tea
>> English style, with less leaf and more water, makes these changes
>> considerably less obvious. What does everyone else think? Why is Gong
>> Fu better?
>
> Just my 2 leaves, but I tend to find that the complete freedom of the
> leaves allows them to fully unfurl and show themselves. This not only
> produces a better brew than in cramped confines, but it allows you to
> get a very up-close and personal view of the leaves and the aromas,
> instead of almost second-hand if it is further away in a dark cavelike
> teapot with just the liquid in your cup up close.
>
> There is a much more intimate feeling, it is more 1-on-1, and it
> affords you the chance to really experiment and compare notes and
> brewing since it is basically the same experience from one person to
> another... where teapots and other vessels have many variables and
> differences.
>
> and my favorite response to such questions... "'cuz it is!" (I was a
> bit of a holdout on the gaiwan for some time, until I really began to
> understand and appreciate it myself)

I like what you say, but "Gung Fu" is not a thing
of Gaiwans, it is a thing of teapots, albeit little ones.
(I know some web sites show Gung Fu as a Gaiwan
enterprise, but they are wrong, at least in the classical
sense.)
Michael

Dustin, the big difference for me is:

English style - small amount of leaves, large amount of water.

Tea used to be rare - exceedingly rare. Only people of middle-class
and above would own tea, and the small quantity of leaves one was lucky
enough to own would be locked in a chest like every other expensive,
rare commodity. This was further exacerbated by the war, in which tea
was rationed like everything else (ref: George Orwell, "The Perfect Cup
of Tea", c.WW2).

In order to make a meaningful brew in the presence of a small amount of
leaf, English style brews it long, with a large quantity of water.


Gongfu style - large amount of leaves, small amount of water.

More leaves means more flavour. It also means shorter infusions, using
less water, which means less tendency to leech bitterness out of the
leaves. Such is the luxury enjoyed by most Chinese for the last two
thousand years.

One of my friends calls gongfucha the "espresso of tea", and while not
totally accurate, I can appreciate his point.


---

Regarding one of the above posts, in which it was suggested the leaves
have greater freedom in gongfu style than English style, I disagree:
both systems involve leaves roaming the pot. If anything, the larger
water:leaf ration in traditional English brewing results in greater
freedom of movement than in a packed zishahu.


Toodlepip,

Hobbes

Michael Plant wrote:
> I like what you say, but "Gung Fu" is not a thing
> of Gaiwans, it is a thing of teapots, albeit little ones.
> (I know some web sites show Gung Fu as a Gaiwan
> enterprise, but they are wrong, at least in the classical
> sense.)
> Michael

I have seen and always taken Gung (Gong/Kung) Fu to be about the
skillful brewing of tea. And quite often see brewing via gaiwan to be
considered so... both online and in RL. I do fully understand the small
yixing overflowing with leaves side, but that has never held the sole
ownership of the style in my eyes. It's all about the skill and care to
me.

- Dominic

"xDustinx" > writes:

> I tried to explain why I brew tea Gong Fu style to my Dad the other day
> and I couldn't come up with a satisfactory explanation. I know from
> first hand experience that Gong Fu is better than English style, but
> it's difficult to explain to someone who doesn't really drink tea. I
> know there are posters here who are extremely knowledgable, so I was
> wondering what the various reasons are? The one that makes the most
> sense to me at the moment is that changes within the tea are more
> obvious when you brew with more leaf and less water. Brewing tea
> English style, with less leaf and more water, makes these changes
> considerably less obvious. What does everyone else think? Why is Gong
> Fu better?

Why not just sit your father down and give him a gongfu session? If
he's open-minded, that should convince him that there's something
interesting going on.

/Lew
---
Lew Perin /
http://www.panix.com/~perin/babelcarp.html
recent addition: Da Ji Ling

HobbesOxon wrote:
> Dustin, the big difference for me is:
>
> English style - small amount of leaves, large amount of water.
>
> Tea used to be rare - exceedingly rare. Only people of middle-class
> and above would own tea, and the small quantity of leaves one was lucky
> enough to own would be locked in a chest like every other expensive,
> rare commodity. This was further exacerbated by the war, in which tea
> was rationed like everything else (ref: George Orwell, "The Perfect Cup
> of Tea", c.WW2).
>
> In order to make a meaningful brew in the presence of a small amount of
> leaf, English style brews it long, with a large quantity of water.
>
>
> Gongfu style - large amount of leaves, small amount of water.
>
> More leaves means more flavour. It also means shorter infusions, using
> less water, which means less tendency to leech bitterness out of the
> leaves. Such is the luxury enjoyed by most Chinese for the last two
> thousand years.
>
> One of my friends calls gongfucha the "espresso of tea", and while not
> totally accurate, I can appreciate his point.
>
>
> ---
>
> Regarding one of the above posts, in which it was suggested the leaves
> have greater freedom in gongfu style than English style, I disagree:
> both systems involve leaves roaming the pot. If anything, the larger
> water:leaf ration in traditional English brewing results in greater
> freedom of movement than in a packed zishahu.
>
>
> Toodlepip,
>
> Hobbes

One note -- Gongfu is NOT the way Chinese experienced tea for the past
two thousand years. In fact, I'd say it hasn't been that way at all
until the past 30 years, when this way of drinking tea became popular.

>From what I understand, in the Tang and Song, tea was compressed, for
the most part, and then grated to very fine powder or what not, and
then drank, sometimes with incense thrown into the tea. It was in the
Ming Dynasty when loose leaf became popular (we're talking... 14th
century onwards). Even then, leaves weren't used in large amounts like
they are now, but rather in small amounts in pots and aren't steeped
repeatedly for many times like we do now.

So..... Gongfu tea as we appreciate it today is a fairly recent
phenomenon as a widespread thing. Chaozhou people have been drinking
it this way, AFAIK, for a lot longer, but it's mostly a regional thing
that only became popular at a much later date.

MarshalN
http://www.xanga.com/MarshalN

As for Gongfu there is nothing more pleasing than a hole in the middle
of the table with a tube down to a spittoon to drain the boat. I saw
this on YouTube. For the rest of you using Yixing tie a string between
the lid and handle. Then you can pour at a steep angle like the pros.
And I thought this depended on the workmanship of the pot. I also saw
this on YouTube.

Jim

Dominic T. wrote:
> Michael Plant wrote:
> > I like what you say, but "Gung Fu" is not a thing
> > of Gaiwans, it is a thing of teapots, albeit little ones.
> > (I know some web sites show Gung Fu as a Gaiwan
> > enterprise, but they are wrong, at least in the classical
> > sense.)
> > Michael
>
> I have seen and always taken Gung (Gong/Kung) Fu to be about the
> skillful brewing of tea. And quite often see brewing via gaiwan to be
> considered so... both online and in RL. I do fully understand the small
> yixing overflowing with leaves side, but that has never held the sole
> ownership of the style in my eyes. It's all about the skill and care to
> me.
>
> - Dominic

11/29/06


>
> HobbesOxon wrote:
>> Dustin, the big difference for me is:
>>
>> English style - small amount of leaves, large amount of water.
>>
>> Tea used to be rare - exceedingly rare. Only people of middle-class
>> and above would own tea, and the small quantity of leaves one was lucky
>> enough to own would be locked in a chest like every other expensive,
>> rare commodity. This was further exacerbated by the war, in which tea
>> was rationed like everything else (ref: George Orwell, "The Perfect Cup
>> of Tea", c.WW2).
>>
>> In order to make a meaningful brew in the presence of a small amount of
>> leaf, English style brews it long, with a large quantity of water.
>>
>>
>> Gongfu style - large amount of leaves, small amount of water.
>>
>> More leaves means more flavour. It also means shorter infusions, using
>> less water, which means less tendency to leech bitterness out of the
>> leaves. Such is the luxury enjoyed by most Chinese for the last two
>> thousand years.
>>
>> One of my friends calls gongfucha the "espresso of tea", and while not
>> totally accurate, I can appreciate his point.
>>
>>
>> ---
>>
>> Regarding one of the above posts, in which it was suggested the leaves
>> have greater freedom in gongfu style than English style, I disagree:
>> both systems involve leaves roaming the pot. If anything, the larger
>> water:leaf ration in traditional English brewing results in greater
>> freedom of movement than in a packed zishahu.
>>
>>
>> Toodlepip,
>>
>> Hobbes
>
> One note -- Gongfu is NOT the way Chinese experienced tea for the past
> two thousand years. In fact, I'd say it hasn't been that way at all
> until the past 30 years, when this way of drinking tea became popular.
>
>> From what I understand, in the Tang and Song, tea was compressed, for
> the most part, and then grated to very fine powder or what not, and
> then drank, sometimes with incense thrown into the tea. It was in the
> Ming Dynasty when loose leaf became popular (we're talking... 14th
> century onwards). Even then, leaves weren't used in large amounts like
> they are now, but rather in small amounts in pots and aren't steeped
> repeatedly for many times like we do now.
>
> So..... Gongfu tea as we appreciate it today is a fairly recent
> phenomenon as a widespread thing. Chaozhou people have been drinking
> it this way, AFAIK, for a lot longer, but it's mostly a regional thing
> that only became popular at a much later date.
>
> MarshalN
> http://www.xanga.com/MarshalN

One could say the same for those fisted Oolongs
we now take as a standard, right? A relatively
recent development.
Michael

Space 11/29/06


> As for Gongfu there is nothing more pleasing than a hole in the middle
> of the table with a tube down to a spittoon to drain the boat. I saw
> this on YouTube. For the rest of you using Yixing tie a string between
> the lid and handle. Then you can pour at a steep angle like the pros.
> And I thought this depended on the workmanship of the pot. I also saw
> this on YouTube.

The clear plastic drainage tube reminds me
of some horrid surgical procedure performed
at table. I don't like it. I don't care how cool
it is. Nor do I care much for those wooden
slatted contraptions now all the rage. Nor the
now ubiquitous electric glass kettles. These
things make every tea table too similar to all
the others. That's my opinion.

Based on what Dominic said earlier, if you use
a little gaiwan or pot, and brew with attentive care,
you're Gungfuing along well enough. And, as
MarshalN suggested, these ancient practices go
back in some cases no more than 30 years, so
feel free to improvise the next ancient feature
of the Gung Fu table.

Michael

If GongFu is multiple infusions then my modified 1L tea press needed a
passport this morning. I don't like tossing leaves in near zero
temperature and snow. I easily got 2L of tea from leaves I use for
1/2L. The leaves-on-a-stem are so spent I'll eat them with a sprig dip
and a turkey sandwich for lunch.

Jim

Michael Plant wrote:
> Space 11/29/06
....for the dialup challenged...
> Based on what Dominic said earlier, if you use
> a little gaiwan or pot, and brew with attentive care,
> you're Gungfuing along well enough. And, as
> MarshalN suggested, these ancient practices go
> back in some cases no more than 30 years, so
> feel free to improvise the next ancient feature
> of the Gung Fu table.
>
> Michael

Michael Plant wrote:
> The clear plastic drainage tube reminds me
> of some horrid surgical procedure performed
> at table. I don't like it. I don't care how cool
> it is. Nor do I care much for those wooden
> slatted contraptions now all the rage. Nor the
> now ubiquitous electric glass kettles. These
> things make every tea table too similar to all
> the others. That's my opinion.
>
> Based on what Dominic said earlier, if you use
> a little gaiwan or pot, and brew with attentive care,
> you're Gungfuing along well enough. And, as
> MarshalN suggested, these ancient practices go
> back in some cases no more than 30 years, so
> feel free to improvise the next ancient feature
> of the Gung Fu table.
>
> Michael

I would actually not be OK with the tube action, personally. The excess
water and tea that find their way into the basin is a positive thing to
me. It fills the area with the added aroma of the tea in between cups,
if it's down a drain and under the table then you are losing that
aspect. Also, while I enjoy improvising at times or repurposing other
things for tea usage... I don't think that is exactly in the spirit of
Gong Fu either. Not that it can't be, ingenuity is always welcome and
could be seen as a skill of its own, but I'm not sure about it in this
sense.

I used to be pretty into the formal ceremony surrounding tea, but the
more I delved the more it exposed the huge flaws and gaping hipocrasies
in much of these "traditions." Many are forced or newer than they make
themselves seem, or are almost polar opposites to the actual
originations of the ceremonies. Some are just pompous and showy, while
others are just silly. Not to start trouble, but very analogous to
religions.

This brought me to find more enjoyment and comfort in the small
villages' customs, and family/tribe ritual. I find it to be more "real"
and down to earth and passionate. Just like any ethnic tradition, the
ones rooted in thousands of years of tradition and custom are much
richer than the aristocratic haughty imposed/forced "customs."

I know it may seem like I'm straying but it really does have a point,
and it really is the reason things like Gong Fu are more sacred to me
than any Japanese tea ceremony. It can be individualized, and adapted,
and appreciated from a number of perspectives and angles without so
many rules and black and white distinctions.

- Dominic

Michael Plant wrote:

> One could say the same for those fisted Oolongs
> we now take as a standard, right? A relatively
> recent development.
> Michael

Correct, that's even more recent, and heavily influenced by Taiwanese
tea making.

Anything over 10 years old form Fujian is probably a bit less rolled,
and anything 20 years old is much less rolled. It's called Oolong
because it was like a small "black dragon". A ball doesn't look much
like a dragon, and neither is the super light fermentation that is so
popular these days.

MarshalN
http://www.xanga.com/MarshalN

Dominic T. wrote:

> I would actually not be OK with the tube action, personally. The excess
> water and tea that find their way into the basin is a positive thing to
> me. It fills the area with the added aroma of the tea in between cups,
> if it's down a drain and under the table then you are losing that
> aspect. Also, while I enjoy improvising at times or repurposing other
> things for tea usage... I don't think that is exactly in the spirit of
> Gong Fu either. Not that it can't be, ingenuity is always welcome and
> could be seen as a skill of its own, but I'm not sure about it in this
> sense.
>
> I used to be pretty into the formal ceremony surrounding tea, but the
> more I delved the more it exposed the huge flaws and gaping hipocrasies
> in much of these "traditions." Many are forced or newer than they make
> themselves seem, or are almost polar opposites to the actual
> originations of the ceremonies. Some are just pompous and showy, while
> others are just silly. Not to start trouble, but very analogous to
> religions.
>
> This brought me to find more enjoyment and comfort in the small
> villages' customs, and family/tribe ritual. I find it to be more "real"
> and down to earth and passionate. Just like any ethnic tradition, the
> ones rooted in thousands of years of tradition and custom are much
> richer than the aristocratic haughty imposed/forced "customs."
>
> I know it may seem like I'm straying but it really does have a point,
> and it really is the reason things like Gong Fu are more sacred to me
> than any Japanese tea ceremony. It can be individualized, and adapted,
> and appreciated from a number of perspectives and angles without so
> many rules and black and white distinctions.
>
> - Dominic

All traditions are invented at one point or another. The Scottish
kilts that we know today are mostly a creation of the 19th century,
just to cite one of many, many examples.

MarshalN
http://www.xanga.com/MarshalN

[Michael Plant]
>> One could say the same for those fisted Oolongs
>> we now take as a standard, right? A relatively
>> recent development.
>> Michael
>
[MarshalN]
> Correct, that's even more recent, and heavily influenced by Taiwanese
> tea making.
>
> Anything over 10 years old form Fujian is probably a bit less rolled,
> and anything 20 years old is much less rolled. It's called Oolong
> because it was like a small "black dragon". A ball doesn't look much
> like a dragon, and neither is the super light fermentation that is so
> popular these days.
>
>

Not correct actually.

Traditional southern Fujian style oolong is tightly rolled, and curled.
Recent Taiwanese style oolong from early 80s is tightly rolled, and fisted.
The northern Fujian style oolong is tightly rolled, and twisted, similarly
is the Guangzhou oolong.

Mythology set right...
The "Black Dragon" in Oolong (Wu Long) does not indicate the shape of the
leaves, though Teaparker lightly mentioned the romantic notion in his book;
at that size, it would be more like centipedes...In one of the tales set in
the 17th century, it was said that a tea picker came across a large black
snake while picking tea for green tea. Frightened, the tea picker dropped
his basket of tea and ran away; he returned to the scene much later and
found that the leaves were slightly bruised and oxidized, with a strong
floral fragrance.

The other tale involved another tea farmer called Su Long who was well
tanned and earned the nickname Wu Long (Black Dragon). He and his family
picked tea one day but forgot to process a bushel. The leaves were left
overnight and when they discovered it the next morning, the leaves had a
floral fragrance.

Another tale involved it as a tribute tea. During the Ming dynasty
comrpessed tea were thought of as a decadent luxury of the bourgeois, it was
banned and the production of loose leaf tea was encouraged. Tribute tea was
called "Long Cha" (Dragon=Emperor, Emperor's tea), and as the leaves were
darker in colour, the adjective "Wu" (Dark) was added to the name, and hence
Wu Long Cha.

But tales are tales.

Danny

Michael Plant wrote:
> The clear plastic drainage tube reminds me
> of some horrid surgical procedure performed
> at table. I don't like it. I don't care how cool
> it is. Nor do I care much for those wooden
> slatted contraptions now all the rage. Nor the
> now ubiquitous electric glass kettles. These
> things make every tea table too similar to all
> the others. That's my opinion.
>
> Based on what Dominic said earlier, if you use
> a little gaiwan or pot, and brew with attentive care,
> you're Gungfuing along well enough. And, as
> MarshalN suggested, these ancient practices go
> back in some cases no more than 30 years, so
> feel free to improvise the next ancient feature
> of the Gung Fu table.
>
> Michael

I would actually not be OK with the tube action, personally. The excess
water and tea that find their way into the basin is a positive thing to
me. It fills the area with the added aroma of the tea in between cups,
if it's down a drain and under the table then you are losing that
aspect. Also, while I enjoy improvising at times or repurposing other
things for tea usage... I don't think that is exactly in the spirit of
Gong Fu either. Not that it can't be, ingenuity is always welcome and
could be seen as a skill of its own, but I'm not sure about it in this
sense.

I used to be pretty into the formal ceremony surrounding tea, but the
more I delved the more it exposed the huge flaws and gaping hipocrasies
in much of these "traditions." Many are forced or newer than they make
themselves seem, or are almost polar opposites to the actual
originations of the ceremonies. Some are just pompous and showy, while
others are just silly. Not to start trouble, but very analogous to
religions.

This brought me to find more enjoyment and comfort in the small
villages' customs, and family/tribe ritual. I find it to be more "real"
and down to earth and passionate. Just like any ethnic tradition, the
ones rooted in thousands of years of tradition and custom are much
richer than the aristocratic haughty imposed/forced "customs."

I know it may seem like I'm straying but it really does have a point,
and it really is the reason things like Gong Fu are more sacred to me
than any Japanese tea ceremony. It can be individualized, and adapted,
and appreciated from a number of perspectives and angles without so
many rules and black and white distinctions.

- Dominic

samarkand wrote:

> Not correct actually.
>
> Traditional southern Fujian style oolong is tightly rolled, and curled.
> Recent Taiwanese style oolong from early 80s is tightly rolled, and fisted.
> The northern Fujian style oolong is tightly rolled, and twisted, similarly
> is the Guangzhou oolong.
>
> Mythology set right...
> The "Black Dragon" in Oolong (Wu Long) does not indicate the shape of the
> leaves, though Teaparker lightly mentioned the romantic notion in his book;
> at that size, it would be more like centipedes...In one of the tales set in
> the 17th century, it was said that a tea picker came across a large black
> snake while picking tea for green tea. Frightened, the tea picker dropped
> his basket of tea and ran away; he returned to the scene much later and
> found that the leaves were slightly bruised and oxidized, with a strong
> floral fragrance.
>
> The other tale involved another tea farmer called Su Long who was well
> tanned and earned the nickname Wu Long (Black Dragon). He and his family
> picked tea one day but forgot to process a bushel. The leaves were left
> overnight and when they discovered it the next morning, the leaves had a
> floral fragrance.
>
> Another tale involved it as a tribute tea. During the Ming dynasty
> comrpessed tea were thought of as a decadent luxury of the bourgeois, it was
> banned and the production of loose leaf tea was encouraged. Tribute tea was
> called "Long Cha" (Dragon=Emperor, Emperor's tea), and as the leaves were
> darker in colour, the adjective "Wu" (Dark) was added to the name, and hence
> Wu Long Cha.
>
> But tales are tales.
>
> Danny

Danny:

I think we use the word "rolled" in a different sense -- I use it to
refer to exactly what produces the "fisted" shape. And I suppose by
doing so, I am not really distinguishing the difference between rolling
and twisting, but I wasn't thinking about that when I wrote the reply.
The curling, instead of fisting, of the tea is why I say it's not as
tightly rolled back then as it was now. At least this applies to teas
I've seen. I am not old enough to see a great number of 15-20 year old
oolongs, for obvious reasons. But from what I've seen there's been an
increase of whatever action that curls the tea up even more into
fisted, instead of curled, shape. Even tieguanyin from Southern Fujian
that are produced in more or less traditional method seem to be closer
to fisted than they used to be. That's what I meant by them being now
tightly rolled. What term would you use to describe the action that
produces the fisted, instead of the curling, shape? Tightly pressed?
Something else? Roll was the word that I thought of.

As for the oolong name -- yeah, tales are tales, and the tale I've been
told is what I related here . Do you know the source for the tales
you told here? I'm sure I can dig them up in gazetteers, and it'd be
interesting to see what they attribute it to.

MarshalN
http://www.xanga.com/MarshalN

MarshalN wrote:
> All traditions are invented at one point or another. The Scottish
> kilts that we know today are mostly a creation of the 19th century,
> just to cite one of many, many examples.
>
> MarshalN
> http://www.xanga.com/MarshalN

No offense meant, but ???. After readin all that I wrote that is the
response eh? Of course they are all invented... what I said was based
on HOW they come about. And I would find it undeniable that the more
traditional/regional/tribal customs have more heart and soul than the
ones created in times of prosperity and wealth and power. They are more
"real" to me and aren't so rediculous and riddled with logic flaws and
contradiction... because they are original ideas that have been in
effect from the start with an actual reason (mostly born out of
necessity) and not just imposed because someone could.

I have to claim ignorance, but rest assured I will read up on it now,
but I am sure the kilt has a real deep-seeded reason for its adoption
initially. I would bet that it had a utilitarian purpose and a real
need, and it then became a custom, and then a tradition, and there are
no flaws in the use of the kilt because it came about in that manner.
But no tradition that comes about in the manner I described above has
that same legitimacy IMO, they have no solid foundation... it was just
dreamt up and forced into use. These customs tend to be very rigid and
cold and serious, because if one scratches too far past the outer layer
there is nothing underneath to fall back on.

It's cool if you don't agree, I was trying to state why #1 It didn't
matter what the vessel was to me. When you see a truly skilled old man
use a gaiwan and brew tea that is extraordinary, that is Gung Fu to me.
and #2 A bit of extrapolation for the OP to help give some
human/opinion side to *why* Gung Fu and special means of brewing is
important and special. Maybe something I said will trigger thoughts or
emotions of his own that will better help him explain the
draw/fascination/appreciation to his dad.

- Dominic

[MarshalN]
> One note -- Gongfu is NOT the way Chinese experienced tea for the past
> two thousand years. In fact, I'd say it hasn't been that way at all
> until the past 30 years, when this way of drinking tea became popular.
>
>>From what I understand, in the Tang and Song, tea was compressed, for
> the most part, and then grated to very fine powder or what not, and
> then drank, sometimes with incense thrown into the tea. It was in the
> Ming Dynasty when loose leaf became popular (we're talking... 14th
> century onwards). Even then, leaves weren't used in large amounts like
> they are now, but rather in small amounts in pots and aren't steeped
> repeatedly for many times like we do now.
>
> So..... Gongfu tea as we appreciate it today is a fairly recent
> phenomenon as a widespread thing. Chaozhou people have been drinking
> it this way, AFAIK, for a lot longer, but it's mostly a regional thing
> that only became popular at a much later date.
>
On the contrary, it might have been the way the scholars, literati and upper
class of the Chinese society experienced tea for the past 2000 years.

Gongfu cha, whether it is modern or traditional, has traces of antiquity
that traced back to Luyu. The sensible and logical approach to slecting and
brewing tea as laid down by Luyu are similarly echoed in traditional Gongfu
style methods.
Chaozhou style can be traced back to the end of Ming and start of Qing
dynasties, notably from a poem written by historian Zhang Dai, and later
from poets such as Zhou Liang Gong.
Gongfu style was never a homogenous style, every region in southern China
has its variation to the style.
In the early years of emigration and sea-faring, peoples from the coastal
regions of southern China brought with them the gongfu style overseas, and
where they landed and took root, the gongfu styles were adapted to the
locality.
In Asia, gongfu style brewing was preserved as a heritage in countries such
as Malaysia and Taiwan, while in Hongkong it became something very
differently. As an elaborate ritual style of drinking, tea was the main
attraction, food or snacks was the fringe attraction. In Hongkong, the
emphasis was more on food than tea itself. In Singapore, the culture went
underground and overtaken by coffee.
The turbulent years in the history of modern China would have contributed to
near loss of this artform, hence in the 70s, we had to rely on the Taiwanese
to revive not only the gongfu style (with its Taiwanese variations), but the
art of enjoying tea.

Danny

Dominic T. wrote:
> I have to claim ignorance, but rest assured I will read up on it now,
> but I am sure the kilt has a real deep-seeded reason for its adoption
> initially.

And indeed it does:

" "The garb is certainly very loose, and fits men inured to it to go
through great fatigues, to make very quick marches, to bear out against
the inclemency of the weather, to wade through rivers, and shelter in
huts, woods, and rocks upon occasion; which men dressed in the low
country garb could not possibly endure."

The solid colour kilts of the Irish were also usually soaked in goose
grease to make them waterproof."

The ties to that exact people are more recent, because it was widely
used and only in the 19th century was it adopted as being something
expressly tied to the Scottish Highland. I love to research these kinds
of things so most likely a book or two will be added to my library now
on Scotland and Scottish history/dress.

All traditions change and adapt to the times, but I really personally
enjoy the real true ones that have some serious history and purpose
behind them.

- Dominic

[MarshalN]
>
> I think we use the word "rolled" in a different sense -- I use it to
> refer to exactly what produces the "fisted" shape. And I suppose by
> doing so, I am not really distinguishing the difference between rolling
> and twisting, but I wasn't thinking about that when I wrote the reply.
> The curling, instead of fisting, of the tea is why I say it's not as
> tightly rolled back then as it was now. At least this applies to teas
> I've seen. I am not old enough to see a great number of 15-20 year old
> oolongs, for obvious reasons. But from what I've seen there's been an
> increase of whatever action that curls the tea up even more into
> fisted, instead of curled, shape. Even tieguanyin from Southern Fujian
> that are produced in more or less traditional method seem to be closer
> to fisted than they used to be. That's what I meant by them being now
> tightly rolled. What term would you use to describe the action that
> produces the fisted, instead of the curling, shape? Tightly pressed?
> Something else? Roll was the word that I thought of.
>
Yes, you used the generalized term, as many would have done. But as you
mentioned before that we need to disseminate clearer and more correct
information, won't you say we should (since we understand Chinese as well)
to provide as clear as possible, these info?

"Pack Rolling" is the technical term I found for rolling it into curled
shapes and "Tight Pack Rolling" is for the fisted shapes; neither are any
clearer than what they suggest, hence I prefer to stick to 'rolling' as the
generic process, and then explain the shapes as the end result.

For traditional Tie Guan Yin in the curled shapes that is almost impossible
to locate in Anxi, you only have to look traditional Mushan Tie Guan Yin
from Taiwan.


> As for the oolong name -- yeah, tales are tales, and the tale I've been
> told is what I related here . Do you know the source for the tales
> you told here? I'm sure I can dig them up in gazetteers, and it'd be
> interesting to see what they attribute it to.
>
>
"Wu Long Cha" by Teaparker aka Chi Zhong Xian
"Wu Long Cha Jian Shang" edited by Zheng Li Sheng
"Pin Wei Qing Qing Cha Xiang" edited by Wang Jin
"Cha De Zi Wei" by Wang Kui Feng
"Tie Guan Yin" by Lin Zhi
"Zhong Guo Cha Yin" by Bo Fan
....

Danny

> Why not just sit your father down and give him a gongfu session? If
> he's open-minded, that should convince him that there's something
> interesting going on.
>
> /Lew

Good call. I actually did this after trying to explain to him why Gong
Fu is better. It's hard to tell with my dad if he's interested in
anything, but because he's sat down with me several times now, I
suspect he's at least mildly interested.

"xDustinx" > wrote in message
ps.com...
>I tried to explain why I brew tea Gong Fu style to my Dad the other day
> and I couldn't come up with a satisfactory explanation. I know from
> first hand experience that Gong Fu is better than English style, but
> it's difficult to explain to someone who doesn't really drink tea. I
> know there are posters here who are extremely knowledgable, so I was
> wondering what the various reasons are? The one that makes the most
> sense to me at the moment is that changes within the tea are more
> obvious when you brew with more leaf and less water. Brewing tea
> English style, with less leaf and more water, makes these changes
> considerably less obvious. What does everyone else think? Why is Gong
> Fu better?
>

I agree with Michael, it isn't necessarily better than the English style.
In fact I find it a boring chore to have to sit through a flowery display of
exaggerated movements and crappy chinese music to get a sip of mediocre tea.
These days, the term Gongfu style is more likely a set of elaborate rituals,
then days of yore, when gongfu style was a group of old folks sitting round
the table and preparing tea in a leisure unceremonious way. I missed those
days of my childhood, hanging around old folks listening to their gossips
and trading news from China, and yearning for a sip of tea.

The best way to explain to your Dad, is to share with him the Moment
preparing the tea. The focus is not on the preparation, but the sharing of
the moment.

Have fun.

Danny

samarkand wrote:
> [MarshalN]
> > One note -- Gongfu is NOT the way Chinese experienced tea for the past
> > two thousand years. In fact, I'd say it hasn't been that way at all
> > until the past 30 years, when this way of drinking tea became popular.
> >
> >>From what I understand, in the Tang and Song, tea was compressed, for
> > the most part, and then grated to very fine powder or what not, and
> > then drank, sometimes with incense thrown into the tea. It was in the
> > Ming Dynasty when loose leaf became popular (we're talking... 14th
> > century onwards). Even then, leaves weren't used in large amounts like
> > they are now, but rather in small amounts in pots and aren't steeped
> > repeatedly for many times like we do now.
> >
> > So..... Gongfu tea as we appreciate it today is a fairly recent
> > phenomenon as a widespread thing. Chaozhou people have been drinking
> > it this way, AFAIK, for a lot longer, but it's mostly a regional thing
> > that only became popular at a much later date.
> >
> On the contrary, it might have been the way the scholars, literati and upper
> class of the Chinese society experienced tea for the past 2000 years.
>
> Gongfu cha, whether it is modern or traditional, has traces of antiquity
> that traced back to Luyu. The sensible and logical approach to slecting and
> brewing tea as laid down by Luyu are similarly echoed in traditional Gongfu
> style methods.
> Chaozhou style can be traced back to the end of Ming and start of Qing
> dynasties, notably from a poem written by historian Zhang Dai, and later
> from poets such as Zhou Liang Gong.
> Gongfu style was never a homogenous style, every region in southern China
> has its variation to the style.
> In the early years of emigration and sea-faring, peoples from the coastal
> regions of southern China brought with them the gongfu style overseas, and
> where they landed and took root, the gongfu styles were adapted to the
> locality.
> In Asia, gongfu style brewing was preserved as a heritage in countries such
> as Malaysia and Taiwan, while in Hongkong it became something very
> differently. As an elaborate ritual style of drinking, tea was the main
> attraction, food or snacks was the fringe attraction. In Hongkong, the
> emphasis was more on food than tea itself. In Singapore, the culture went
> underground and overtaken by coffee.
> The turbulent years in the history of modern China would have contributed to
> near loss of this artform, hence in the 70s, we had to rely on the Taiwanese
> to revive not only the gongfu style (with its Taiwanese variations), but the
> art of enjoying tea.
>
> Danny

Having just read a whole bunch of older texts on tea... I don't think
this is how the upper class drank tea, at least not in the written
record.

While some of what we do nowadays echo some of the ideas in Luyu's Tea
Classic, much of the writing in between his time and the Ming talk
variously about pressed tea that need to be grated, with stuff added
in, etc, that we don't do these days. Tea were meant to be pressed
into form before consumption during the Song. That much seems pretty
clear from things like the Daguan Chalun.

In the Ming it is obvious that loose tea became the standard. However,
in terms of ratio of tea vs water, duration of brews, that sort of
thing, it would still seem that there's a significance between what was
done then, and what we do now. For example, silver or pewter was
recommended by one person who wrote on tea in the Ming.... whereas
these days we all think yixing clay is the best. There are lots of
specifics that are not the same at all.

Of course, the concept and the theory of tea brewing is still largely
there -- after all, I think the Taiwanese were inspired precisely by
the same texts that talk about this sort of thing. However, I think it
would be a stretch to say that what we do now bears a close resemblence
to what was done then.

MarshalN
http://www.xanga.com/MarshalN

The other thing I notice about fisted tea is often two-three leaves
with the stem. I wonder if this is from a mechanical harvest. I just
bought some YinHao green tea from FuZhou which is fisted and multileaf
stem. I first ran into multileaf stem last year from Taiwan which I
called a Bush in the Pot.

Jim

MarshalN wrote:
> samarkand wrote:
....
> > Danny
>
> Danny:
>
> I think we use the word "rolled" in a different sense -- I use it to
> refer to exactly what produces the "fisted" shape. And I suppose by
> doing so, I am not really distinguishing the difference between rolling
> and twisting, but I wasn't thinking about that when I wrote the reply.
> The curling, instead of fisting, of the tea is why I say it's not as
> tightly rolled back then as it was now. At least this applies to teas
> I've seen. I am not old enough to see a great number of 15-20 year old
> oolongs, for obvious reasons. But from what I've seen there's been an
> increase of whatever action that curls the tea up even more into
> fisted, instead of curled, shape. Even tieguanyin from Southern Fujian
> that are produced in more or less traditional method seem to be closer
> to fisted than they used to be. That's what I meant by them being now
> tightly rolled. What term would you use to describe the action that
> produces the fisted, instead of the curling, shape? Tightly pressed?
> Something else? Roll was the word that I thought of.
>
> As for the oolong name -- yeah, tales are tales, and the tale I've been
> told is what I related here . Do you know the source for the tales
> you told here? I'm sure I can dig them up in gazetteers, and it'd be
> interesting to see what they attribute it to.
>
> MarshalN
> http://www.xanga.com/MarshalN

samarkand wrote:
> I agree with Michael, it isn't necessarily better than the English style.
> In fact I find it a boring chore to have to sit through a flowery display of
> exaggerated movements and crappy chinese music to get a sip of mediocre tea.
> These days, the term Gongfu style is more likely a set of elaborate rituals,
> then days of yore, when gongfu style was a group of old folks sitting round
> the table and preparing tea in a leisure unceremonious way. I missed those
> days of my childhood, hanging around old folks listening to their gossips
> and trading news from China, and yearning for a sip of tea.
>
> The best way to explain to your Dad, is to share with him the Moment
> preparing the tea. The focus is not on the preparation, but the sharing of
> the moment.
>
> Have fun.
>
> Danny

Mr. Nail... meet Mr. Hit On Head.

You said it perfectly. It isn't the charade and the pomp and
circumstance that makes it nor is that what would ever endear anyone
who is uninitialted. Gongfu is exactly as you said it, an unceremonious
(yet still highly skillful) brewing of tea. And the perfect
accompanyment is not silly music or forced dialogue... but real
interaction and enjoyment of those sharing the moment with you and
having *meaningful* conversation and experiences with them.

I couldn't have summed up my feelings any better than you did right
there. Congrats. You win at the internet!

- Dominic

samarkand wrote:

> Yes, you used the generalized term, as many would have done. But as you
> mentioned before that we need to disseminate clearer and more correct
> information, won't you say we should (since we understand Chinese as well)
> to provide as clear as possible, these info?
>
> "Pack Rolling" is the technical term I found for rolling it into curled
> shapes and "Tight Pack Rolling" is for the fisted shapes; neither are any
> clearer than what they suggest, hence I prefer to stick to 'rolling' as the
> generic process, and then explain the shapes as the end result.
>
> For traditional Tie Guan Yin in the curled shapes that is almost impossible
> to locate in Anxi, you only have to look traditional Mushan Tie Guan Yin
> from Taiwan.

>
> Danny

I think the problem is that there's no "standard" terminology used...
and not likely to be one in English, I would think. When translating
from one language to another, especially talking about a topic such as
tea with a large number of more technical terms in Chinese, but a
relative lack of such terms in English, you just have to start using
whatever seems the most logical. It seems my statement of "rolled" and
"tightly rolled" isn't exactly off base given the terms you provided
just now

And I believe my comment about correct information was more related to
the publisher of the book being published, whose copy-editing skills I
have reservations with, than with the author of the book in question.
I hope that much was clear to you.

MarshalN
http://www.xanga.com/MarshalN

[MarshalN]
> Having just read a whole bunch of older texts on tea... I don't think
> this is how the upper class drank tea, at least not in the written
> record.
>
> While some of what we do nowadays echo some of the ideas in Luyu's Tea
> Classic, much of the writing in between his time and the Ming talk
> variously about pressed tea that need to be grated, with stuff added
> in, etc, that we don't do these days. Tea were meant to be pressed
> into form before consumption during the Song. That much seems pretty
> clear from things like the Daguan Chalun.
>
> In the Ming it is obvious that loose tea became the standard. However,
> in terms of ratio of tea vs water, duration of brews, that sort of
> thing, it would still seem that there's a significance between what was
> done then, and what we do now. For example, silver or pewter was
> recommended by one person who wrote on tea in the Ming.... whereas
> these days we all think yixing clay is the best. There are lots of
> specifics that are not the same at all.
>
> Of course, the concept and the theory of tea brewing is still largely
> there -- after all, I think the Taiwanese were inspired precisely by
> the same texts that talk about this sort of thing. However, I think it
> would be a stretch to say that what we do now bears a close resemblence
> to what was done then.
>
>
Nice. I recommend (Ming) Zhang Yuan's Cha Lu if you have not read it. Who
was it that proposed using silver or pewter? I assume you mean as the kettle
for boiling water, not tea? Silver & Gold were recommended as vessels for
boiling water in, I don't think there's a recommendation to use them as
teapots for brewing. That is a much later concept, I think the British came
upon this in the 18th century - silver at least.

You mentioned about the grating of tea into powder...up till the Song
period, this was largely because the powder would be place in a bowl,
whipped, and drank. From Ming period onwards teapots were introduced, along
with loose leaf tea, so there was no need to grate the compressed tea cakes
into powder any longer. However, if you recall the traditional style of
Chaozhou gongfu tea, powdered or crushed leaves was recommended, usually
about 15-20% of the total amount used. These were packed at the back between
layers of loose leaf. On a square piece of paper the brewer would separate
the whole leaves from the crushed ones, and layer them separately. If there
were less crushed leaves, some of the whole leaves would be crushed.

You mentioned also that Gongfu tea style is something the Chinese experience
tea only from about 30 years ago, and that Gongfu tea as we appreciate it
today is a fairly recent phenomenon as a widespread thing...I would agree
with the latter point, but not on the 1st point. I'm afraid you have to
quantify Chinese as a nation or ethnic race. I agree with you in the
communist regime of China up till 30 odd years ago, Gongfu style might not
be the way they experienced tea in China, but the Chinese in other areas
still continued the tradition, won't you agree?

Danny

samarkand wrote:

> >> Nice. I recommend (Ming) Zhang Yuan's Cha Lu if you have not read it. Who
> was it that proposed using silver or pewter? I assume you mean as the kettle
> for boiling water, not tea? Silver & Gold were recommended as vessels for
> boiling water in, I don't think there's a recommendation to use them as
> teapots for brewing. That is a much later concept, I think the British came
> upon this in the 18th century - silver at least.
>

The recommendation of using silver/pewter to make tea (and also boil
water) is from Zhicha Xinpu, written by Qian Chunnian during the Ming
-- I'm not sure which reign period. From the text it seems pretty
explicit that he is talking of the vessel that holds the leaves and in
which tea brews, and not just for boiling water.

> You mentioned about the grating of tea into powder...up till the Song
> period, this was largely because the powder would be place in a bowl,
> whipped, and drank. From Ming period onwards teapots were introduced, along
> with loose leaf tea, so there was no need to grate the compressed tea cakes
> into powder any longer. However, if you recall the traditional style of
> Chaozhou gongfu tea, powdered or crushed leaves was recommended, usually
> about 15-20% of the total amount used. These were packed at the back between
> layers of loose leaf. On a square piece of paper the brewer would separate
> the whole leaves from the crushed ones, and layer them separately. If there
> were less crushed leaves, some of the whole leaves would be crushed.

I know that Chaozhou cha tends to use crushed leaves as a "core", but I
think there is a very important distinction between that and the use of
matcha in the sense that in matcha, we are drinking the leaves along
with the liquid, while in the Chaozhou method, the crushed leaves are
crushed to increase the intensity of flavour extration, but the leaves
themselves are not meant for consumption. The separation of leaves and
water is, IMO, a signficant modification in the method of making tea,
and requires a whole different set of movements/skills to accomplish,
no?
>
> You mentioned also that Gongfu tea style is something the Chinese experience
> tea only from about 30 years ago, and that Gongfu tea as we appreciate it
> today is a fairly recent phenomenon as a widespread thing...I would agree
> with the latter point, but not on the 1st point. I'm afraid you have to
> quantify Chinese as a nation or ethnic race. I agree with you in the
> communist regime of China up till 30 odd years ago, Gongfu style might not
> be the way they experienced tea in China, but the Chinese in other areas
> still continued the tradition, won't you agree?
>
> Danny

I am really skeptical of the claim that what we now call Gongfu tea
style is a method that was practiced on any sort of large scale in the
past in "China", which would include Greater China, etc. I tend to
think that it is more of a locally/regionally focused method, along the
SE coast of China extending up to Minbei, perhaps. From my
grandfather's recollection tea was not prepared in anything like what
we do now when he was a child in our ancestral home near Suzhou, and
that certainly predates the Communist era. The tea they drink,
typically refined green tea of light flavours, also does not lend
itself well to what we do now. When you go further north, I think the
tea drinking tastes change as well. Beijingers generally drank floral
teas and green teas, and things like puerh were probably drunk by the
Manchus with milk mixed in.

I have also read an interesting description of a method to brew tea in
another Ming text, the Cha Shu (ç–�), by Xu Cishu. On the section on
making tea, he says:

"first take the tea into your hand, then after pouring water into the
pot, put the tea leaves into the water. Close the lid tightly, don't
let air leak out, wait a little, about three breaths, then pour it all
out into the holding vessel. Then, pour (this) back into the pot, this
way the fragrance will be immediately obvious and the colour will not
be dull and lacklustre. Wait about three more breaths, let it settle
(?), and then pour it into the drinking vessel...."

It's vaguely like what we do, but different on so many levels that... I
don't think I'm comfortable calling it the same style of brewing.

Now, we don't know if what he's describing is just what he does, or
what is generally done around his area/time. Both are possible, and
it's not obvious which one is the case here just by reading the text,
as it offers few clues. However, judging from the forewards to the
book, it seems that the person who wrote it has spent his life drinking
and studying tea, and is therefore quite knowledgable. I'd imagine
that what he wrote at least reflects one style of tea making. It is
difficult to tell if it's the prevalent style.

The most likely answer is that there was a large number of various
schools in how to make tea properly, and the differences among them are
probably much more substantial than the mostly cosmetic differences we
see now between different "schools". In this narrative, we have the
author telling us to put the leaves into the water, and not the other
way around. He also advocates the use of the water that we consider as
wash to pour back into the tea to make the real infusion... also an
interesting way to make tea that would be quite different than what we
do today.

What we are seeing these days, and what we practice these days, is
still largely the invention and formalization of one particular style
of tea making. I'm sure that as we move along in the revival of tea,
schools will splinter and different ways of making tea will surface.
But I think it is a little too romantic to think that what we do now is
in large part similar to how people a few hundred or even a thousand
years ago drank tea throughout China.

MarshalN
http://www.xanga.com/MarshalN

> ...while I enjoy improvising at times or repurposing other
> things for tea usage... I don't think that is exactly in the spirit of
> Gong Fu either.

[Michael] yes it is too!!!!!!

> I used to be pretty into the formal ceremony surrounding tea, but the
> more I delved the more it exposed the huge flaws and gaping hipocrasies
> in much of these "traditions." Many are forced or newer than they make
> themselves seem, or are almost polar opposites to the actual
> originations of the ceremonies. Some are just pompous and showy, while
> others are just silly. Not to start trouble, but very analogous to
> religions.

Hey, man! If you're gonna crtiicize at that
level, you need to be **much** more specific.
I only want to add that we take camera shot
out of time and define correctness based on
the photo. In reality, all the ceremonies permute
over time. What is silly and what is serious
depends on many things and many people.
I make a point of keeping my mind so wide
open that my brains pour out, relieving me
of any responsibility for my tea actions.

> This brought me to find more enjoyment and comfort in the small
> villages' customs, and family/tribe ritual. I find it to be more "real"
> and down to earth and passionate. Just like any ethnic tradition, the
> ones rooted in thousands of years of tradition and custom are much
> richer than the aristocratic haughty imposed/forced "customs."

If you're saying you'd rather drink tea in a
village with the old people than to drink at
the world's best tea at the rich man's table,
then we're on the same page here.
>
> I know it may seem like I'm straying but it really does have a point,
> and it really is the reason things like Gong Fu are more sacred to me
> than any Japanese tea ceremony. It can be individualized, and adapted,
> and appreciated from a number of perspectives and angles without so
> many rules and black and white distinctions.

Yes, it does have its spontaneous side, but
be aware that there is a far more formalized
version which is worth getting to know, and
some day I indeed will.

Michael

/29/06

> [Michael Plant]
>>> One could say the same for those fisted Oolongs
>>> we now take as a standard, right? A relatively
>>> recent development.
>>> Michael
>>
> [MarshalN]
>> Correct, that's even more recent, and heavily influenced by Taiwanese
>> tea making.
>>
>> Anything over 10 years old form Fujian is probably a bit less rolled,
>> and anything 20 years old is much less rolled. It's called Oolong
>> because it was like a small "black dragon". A ball doesn't look much
>> like a dragon, and neither is the super light fermentation that is so
>> popular these days.
>>
>>
>
> Not correct actually.
>
> Traditional southern Fujian style oolong is tightly rolled, and curled.
> Recent Taiwanese style oolong from early 80s is tightly rolled, and fisted.
> The northern Fujian style oolong is tightly rolled, and twisted, similarly
> is the Guangzhou oolong.
>
> Mythology set right...
> The "Black Dragon" in Oolong (Wu Long) does not indicate the shape of the
> leaves, though Teaparker lightly mentioned the romantic notion in his book;
> at that size, it would be more like centipedes...In one of the tales set in
> the 17th century, it was said that a tea picker came across a large black
> snake while picking tea for green tea. Frightened, the tea picker dropped
> his basket of tea and ran away; he returned to the scene much later and
> found that the leaves were slightly bruised and oxidized, with a strong
> floral fragrance.
>
> The other tale involved another tea farmer called Su Long who was well
> tanned and earned the nickname Wu Long (Black Dragon). He and his family
> picked tea one day but forgot to process a bushel. The leaves were left
> overnight and when they discovered it the next morning, the leaves had a
> floral fragrance.
>
> Another tale involved it as a tribute tea. During the Ming dynasty
> comrpessed tea were thought of as a decadent luxury of the bourgeois, it was
> banned and the production of loose leaf tea was encouraged. Tribute tea was
> called "Long Cha" (Dragon=Emperor, Emperor's tea), and as the leaves were
> darker in colour, the adjective "Wu" (Dark) was added to the name, and hence
> Wu Long Cha.
>
> But tales are tales.
>
> Danny

Come on, Danny. Cut to the chase.
Whatever happened to the damned
snake? Wait, wait, don't tell me!
They named a tea after him in WuYi.
BTW, in China, do they eat snake
tails? There's a tale whose time has
come.

Anything else I can do to help the
discussion along, let me know.
Seriously, enjoyed the tales.
Michael

[Danny]
>> Yes, you used the generalized term, as many would have done. But as you
>> mentioned before that we need to disseminate clearer and more correct
>> information, won't you say we should (since we understand Chinese as well)
>> to provide as clear as possible, these info?
>>
>> "Pack Rolling" is the technical term I found for rolling it into curled
>> shapes and "Tight Pack Rolling" is for the fisted shapes; neither are any
>> clearer than what they suggest, hence I prefer to stick to 'rolling' as the
>> generic process, and then explain the shapes as the end result.
>>
>> For traditional Tie Guan Yin in the curled shapes that is almost impossible
>> to locate in Anxi, you only have to look traditional Mushan Tie Guan Yin
>> from Taiwan.

[MarshalN]
> I think the problem is that there's no "standard" terminology used...
> and not likely to be one in English, I would think. When translating
> from one language to another, especially talking about a topic such as
> tea with a large number of more technical terms in Chinese, but a
> relative lack of such terms in English, you just have to start using
> whatever seems the most logical. It seems my statement of "rolled" and
> "tightly rolled" isn't exactly off base given the terms you provided
> just now
>
> And I believe my comment about correct information was more related to
> the publisher of the book being published, whose copy-editing skills I
> have reservations with, than with the author of the book in question.
> I hope that much was clear to you.

[Michael]
I can't possibly stand up beside lights the likes of you guys,
but I want to say, pictures would help here. Any photos
to demonstrate?

When I originally mentioned "fisted" Oolong, I meant the
tightly balled versiions popular nowadays especially in
Taiwan and by extension backward in Fujian (Anxi). I
associate the "twisted' Oolongs, long and slender, and
delicate albeit large, with the teas of the Phoenix Mountains.
Stubbier, rolled but not fisted teas in my experience are
most associated with WuYi teas in most of their permutations.
I have nothing but these anecdotal experiences to report. Of
course, translation accuracy, and a degree of specificity are
helpful, but I'd think extremely difficult when the whole
world of tea leaf shapes is in the flux we find it now.

Of Scottish kilts I know much, but I prefer not to share.

Michael

I'll reiterate I have several teas from China and Taiwan that would
meet a definition by either Danny or MarshalN of rolled or fisted.
What I have noticed it is multileaf attached to a stem. It seems to me
rolling or fisting is required to preserve the integrity of the leaves
and stem.

Jim

Michael Plant wrote:
> [Danny]
....
> [MarshalN]
....
> [Michael]
> I can't possibly stand up beside lights the likes of you guys,
> but I want to say, pictures would help here. Any photos
> to demonstrate?
>
> When I originally mentioned "fisted" Oolong, I meant the
> tightly balled versiions popular nowadays especially in
> Taiwan and by extension backward in Fujian (Anxi). I
> associate the "twisted' Oolongs, long and slender, and
> delicate albeit large, with the teas of the Phoenix Mountains.
> Stubbier, rolled but not fisted teas in my experience are
> most associated with WuYi teas in most of their permutations.
> I have nothing but these anecdotal experiences to report. Of
> course, translation accuracy, and a degree of specificity are
> helpful, but I'd think extremely difficult when the whole
> world of tea leaf shapes is in the flux we find it now.
>
> Of Scottish kilts I know much, but I prefer not to share.
>
> Michael

Michael Plant wrote:
> > ...while I enjoy improvising at times or repurposing other
> > things for tea usage... I don't think that is exactly in the spirit of
> > Gong Fu either.
>
> [Michael] yes it is too!!!!!!

I just don't like "modernizing" it too much, it kind of loses its soul
to me. Drain tubes, or (as I've seen) using product containers to store
tea (branded stuff like Pepsi, Lipton's, etc.), and such kind of remove
you from the experience. I find it distracting to have that kind of
stuff. Some tradition and respect has to be kept... that was more what
I was hinting at. Sure, some random product container may hold the tea
just fine, and it may be cheaper than a cherry bark tea container...
but it just kinda cheapens it a bit too much. Inventiveness in the
spirit of the ceremony or out of necessity is fine by me as long as the
skill is there.

> Hey, man! If you're gonna crtiicize at that
> level, you need to be **much** more specific.
> I only want to add that we take camera shot
> out of time and define correctness based on
> the photo. In reality, all the ceremonies permute
> over time. What is silly and what is serious
> depends on many things and many people.
> I make a point of keeping my mind so wide
> open that my brains pour out, relieving me
> of any responsibility for my tea actions.

I have a very open mind myself, and try and experience anything and
everything I can, however some customs/religions/traditions are just
forced. For example, Scientology... it is made out of times of excess
and has no basis in tradition or necessity. It is not deep, and it has
no soul or history. To me after my many years with it, the Japanese tea
ceremony has a lot of these same flaws and problems. It got changed and
many meanings and purposes were lost in favor of excess and opulence,
and it just isn't my "cup of tea."

> If you're saying you'd rather drink tea in a
> village with the old people than to drink at
> the world's best tea at the rich man's table,
> then we're on the same page here.

Then we're on the same page It doesn't even have to be "old" people
it could be shared happily with children or young folks who share the
same traditions and customs and beliefs. They don't even have to be in
poverty, I know many rich friends who do not show it nor care one bit
and still have both feet firmly planted on terra firma.

> Yes, it does have its spontaneous side, but
> be aware that there is a far more formalized
> version which is worth getting to know, and
> some day I indeed will.
>
> Michael

I guess I come from the other side here, I've seen that formal side of
the mountain and I didn't like it. Some formality is OK by me, the
extremes that can be experienced are not. The forced dialogue, or the
scripted comments on the surroudnings and process... spare me. I think
you'll come to find that you have the proper view of things as you are
now, and seeing that other side will only reinforce it. I could be
wrong, but from your comment above about the rich/poor table I'd
venture to guess it'll pan out that way. Heck, it managed to capture my
interest and admiration for quite some time, until research and digging
turned up some unpleasant information and B.S. then it all became too
apparent to even pretend to enjoy or respect.

It's all about balance and individual enjoyment and fulfillment for
most of us. Without many of us having huge groups in RL to share in the
delights, the best one can shoot for is happiness, harmony,
appreciation, and most importantly balance in our own tea pusuits. I
know I have learned a lot, experienced even more, grown, opened,
respected, and found calmness and personal satisfaction through tea and
learning the art of skillful brewing... Gung Fu.

So there is quite a bit to be gained in Gung Fu over just tossing a
teabag in a mug of tepid water and dousing it with refined white sugar
and milk. They are also the things that could never be explained to
someone who doesn't share in the experience and hope for them to
understand fully. While I can enjoy a scone and a cuppa... that could
never have brought me where the real art of tea has.

- Dominic

[MarshalN]
The recommendation of using silver/pewter to make tea (and also boil
water) is from Zhicha Xinpu, written by Qian Chunnian during the Ming
-- I'm not sure which reign period. From the text it seems pretty
explicit that he is talking of the vessel that holds the leaves and in
which tea brews, and not just for boiling water.

[Danny]
Hi MarshalN, do read that passage again, and compare it to the other texts
from the Song and Ming periods. From what I understand...if you mean the
line that says that "Cha Tiao, Cha Ping" is best made of Silver or Pewter...
"Cha Ping" is a vessel used for boiling water and holding hot water. The
only mention I found was from an article published in 1936, called "An
Overview of The Hidden History of Qing Dynasty" - Qing Chao Ye Shi Da Guang,
vol. 12, which mentioned that the teapot may be made of copper or clay. Its
reliability (as a book) is questionable, as it was copied from a wide range
of sources.

[MarshalN]
I know that Chaozhou cha tends to use crushed leaves as a "core", but I
think there is a very important distinction between that and the use of
matcha in the sense that in matcha, we are drinking the leaves along
with the liquid, while in the Chaozhou method, the crushed leaves are
crushed to increase the intensity of flavour extration, but the leaves
themselves are not meant for consumption. The separation of leaves and
water is, IMO, a signficant modification in the method of making tea,
and requires a whole different set of movements/skills to accomplish,
no?

[Danny]
No, but we have deviated. This discussion arose from your comments that
Gongfu style is a recent development, from about 30 years ago,as you wrote.
What I'm trying to point out is that the development of Gongfu style went
further back, and can be traced back as far as Luyu. Tradition is never
static, it evolves over time with the peoples that practiced it, so what the
Gongfu style we have now, which is still changing and adapting, is not
developed 30 years ago, but its genesis went much further back in history.

If you want to talk about eating and drinking tea, Chinese people these days
still eat tea, whether it is grated or whole leaves, from the tribal culture
in Yunnan to the sophisticated drinkers along the Zhejiang. But these has
nothing to do with Gongfu style.

In traditional Gongfu style there is one extra step that is no longer
practiced nowadays: after the leaves were in the pot and the hot water
poured in, a towel is used to cover the spout and lid of the pot, to prevent
the fragrance from escaping. In no modern day gongfu style have I seen
this, but I'm not going to dismiss it as un-gongfu. What the people in the
past started and practised, people through the ages modify and adapt.

[MarshalN]
I am really skeptical of the claim that what we now call Gongfu tea
style is a method that was practiced on any sort of large scale in the
past in "China", which would include Greater China, etc. I tend to
think that it is more of a locally/regionally focused method, along the
SE coast of China extending up to Minbei, perhaps. From my
grandfather's recollection tea was not prepared in anything like what
we do now when he was a child in our ancestral home near Suzhou, and
that certainly predates the Communist era. The tea they drink,
typically refined green tea of light flavours, also does not lend
itself well to what we do now. When you go further north, I think the
tea drinking tastes change as well. Beijingers generally drank floral
teas and green teas, and things like puerh were probably drunk by the
Manchus with milk mixed in.

[Danny]
You correctly pointed out that. Gongfu style is indeed a tea culture that
was confined to the SE China in the old days, and later Taiwan and the Asia
regions - however, you have to qualify what is Gongfu style, which in itself
is a confusing term. People futher west, especially in the Sichuan region,
used gaiwans, they have developed their own style which is nowadays accepted
as Gaiwan Gongfu style. In Suzhou and along the Zhejiang region there was
almost no Gongfu style on green tea, not that I know of, but you pointed out
that there was, probably originating from Xu Cishu:

>I have also read an interesting description of a method to brew tea in
>another Ming text, the Cha Shu (?), by Xu Cishu. On the section on
>making tea, he says:

>"first take the tea into your hand, then after pouring water into the
>pot, put the tea leaves into the water. Close the lid tightly, don't
>let air leak out, wait a little, about three breaths, then pour it all
>out into the holding vessel. Then, pour (this) back into the pot, this
>way the fragrance will be immediately obvious and the colour will not
>be dull and lacklustre. Wait about three more breaths, let it settle
>(?), and then pour it into the drinking vessel...."

>It's vaguely like what we do, but different on so many levels that... I
>don't think I'm comfortable calling it the same style of brewing.

If you go back to the beginning of the text where he talked about harvesting
and processing tea, you'll find that he was talking about the processing of
green tea. His method then makes sense. Pour the water first so the water
cools somewhat before throwing in the leaves. As the leaves will not all
sink, the brew has to be poured out and pour back in again to soak the
leaves completely this time. Have you seen this being done in China? I
have, countless of time in Shanghai, on green tea...

[MarshalN]
The most likely answer is that there was a large number of various
schools in how to make tea properly, and the differences among them are
probably much more substantial than the mostly cosmetic differences we
see now between different "schools". In this narrative, we have the
author telling us to put the leaves into the water, and not the other
way around. He also advocates the use of the water that we consider as
wash to pour back into the tea to make the real infusion... also an
interesting way to make tea that would be quite different than what we
do today.

[Danny]
Yes. but the point on "use of the water that we consider as wash to pour
back into the tea to make the real infusion" is part of the recent
development, old style Gongfu cha did not include this.

[MarshalN]
What we are seeing these days, and what we practice these days, is
still largely the invention and formalization of one particular style
of tea making. I'm sure that as we move along in the revival of tea,
schools will splinter and different ways of making tea will surface.
But I think it is a little too romantic to think that what we do now is
in large part similar to how people a few hundred or even a thousand
years ago drank tea throughout China.

[Danny]
Indeed, but neither you nor I say that it is a romantic notion or what we do
now is in large part similar to the past. My point is that the current
styles all have a starting point, and that point wasn't 30 years ago. Have
you read Lin Yutang's "Making Tea & Friends"? This would be the modern
classic on tea making, though there are several points that did not match
Gongfu style but green tea making from Zhejiang region - not sure if it was
deliberate, as Lin Yutang was from Fujian.

[Michael]
> Come on, Danny. Cut to the chase.
> Whatever happened to the damned
> snake? Wait, wait, don't tell me!
> They named a tea after him in WuYi.
> BTW, in China, do they eat snake
> tails? There's a tale whose time has
> come.
>

Hell no! What's a snake's tail when you can eat the whole body head down?

The snake is skinned and stewed in a starchy stew with chrysanthemum petals,
its blood drawn out earlier as a tonic drunk neat (anyone remember Danny
Boyle's The Beach, in which Leonardo DiCarprio dares and empties a shot
glass of snake blood? yup, that's like it), its gall extracted as medicine
against acute asthma and bronchitis...

I can't seem to come up with a tea-tale with mice in it...

:")

samarkand wrote:
> [Danny]
> Hi MarshalN, do read that passage again, and compare it to the other texts
> from the Song and Ming periods. From what I understand...if you mean the
> line that says that "Cha Tiao, Cha Ping" is best made of Silver or Pewter...
> "Cha Ping" is a vessel used for boiling water and holding hot water. The
> only mention I found was from an article published in 1936, called "An
> Overview of The Hidden History of Qing Dynasty" - Qing Chao Ye Shi Da Guang,
> vol. 12, which mentioned that the teapot may be made of copper or clay. Its
> reliability (as a book) is questionable, as it was copied from a wide range
> of sources.

Well, yes, normally I would also think Cha Ping is a vessel for holding
the water. But the way he described the Cha Ping in the text makes me
think that this is actually holding tea, not the water. Since he said
"if the ping is big, and you don't drink it, stopping and then starting
again, then the flavours will all be released and is no longer good".
Since the "ping" here is obviously something you are pouring water into
(and which he emphasized needs to be small) then it seems to me that
this is where the leaves are. After all, if it's just a vessel holding
water, then what does a ping's size have to do with flavours being all
released?

>
> [Danny]
> No, but we have deviated. This discussion arose from your comments that
> Gongfu style is a recent development, from about 30 years ago,as you wrote.
> What I'm trying to point out is that the development of Gongfu style went
> further back, and can be traced back as far as Luyu. Tradition is never
> static, it evolves over time with the peoples that practiced it, so what the
> Gongfu style we have now, which is still changing and adapting, is not
> developed 30 years ago, but its genesis went much further back in history.
>
> If you want to talk about eating and drinking tea, Chinese people these days
> still eat tea, whether it is grated or whole leaves, from the tribal culture
> in Yunnan to the sophisticated drinkers along the Zhejiang. But these has
> nothing to do with Gongfu style.
>
> In traditional Gongfu style there is one extra step that is no longer
> practiced nowadays: after the leaves were in the pot and the hot water
> poured in, a towel is used to cover the spout and lid of the pot, to prevent
> the fragrance from escaping. In no modern day gongfu style have I seen
> this, but I'm not going to dismiss it as un-gongfu. What the people in the
> past started and practised, people through the ages modify and adapt.

> You correctly pointed out that. Gongfu style is indeed a tea culture that
> was confined to the SE China in the old days, and later Taiwan and the Asia
> regions - however, you have to qualify what is Gongfu style, which in itself
> is a confusing term. People futher west, especially in the Sichuan region,
> used gaiwans, they have developed their own style which is nowadays accepted
> as Gaiwan Gongfu style. In Suzhou and along the Zhejiang region there was
> almost no Gongfu style on green tea, not that I know of, but you pointed out
> that there was, probably originating from Xu Cishu:
>
> If you go back to the beginning of the text where he talked about harvesting
> and processing tea, you'll find that he was talking about the processing of
> green tea. His method then makes sense. Pour the water first so the water
> cools somewhat before throwing in the leaves. As the leaves will not all
> sink, the brew has to be poured out and pour back in again to soak the
> leaves completely this time. Have you seen this being done in China? I
> have, countless of time in Shanghai, on green tea...

Yes, I know this is more or less about green tea, but this is also
green tea that is roasted, it seems. Maybe it's closer to Hojicha from
Japan? I'm not sure. He specifically uses the term we now use for
roasting teas, and he said that while frying the tea takes a short
time, roasting takes a long time, so you need more roasting stations
than frying ones. Chances are, it's not very like any tea we drink
these days.

As for the "throwing the water back into the tea after pouring it out
first", no, I have to say that even though my family's Shanghainese,
I've never seen people do it this way.

I think basically we're not disagreeing on the specifics, but rather,
the basic definition of "gongfu" brewing. I think I just took issue
with the line where you said we're drinking tea in ways similar to how
people have been drinking tea in "China" (which is, itself, a variable
and problematic concept, but that's another topic) for the past 2000
years. I think on many practical levels, that's not true. However, I
can agree that in the spirit of making tea, and the basic philosophy of
brewing tea, there are threads that link us back to Luyu and beyond.

In some ways, I think Chinese tea drinking is very practical -- it's
whatever makes a good cup. There's no set "ceremony" and no protocol,
as long as what you do makes a cup that you enjoy. Everything else is
extra. And on that, we can probably all agree.

MarshalN
http://www.xanga.com/MarshalN

samarkand wrote:

....

By the way, while this has been extremely interesting to discuss
interpretations of older texts on tea, I am afraid we might be spamming
other people's mailboxes when such texts are, unfortunately, not
available to them in any form

Maybe we can talk about this over a cup of tea in Hong Kong.

MarshalN
http://www.xanga.com/MarshalN

In article >,
samarkand > wrote:

>Gongfu cha, whether it is modern or traditional, has traces of antiquity
>that traced back to Luyu. The sensible and logical approach to slecting and
>brewing tea as laid down by Luyu are similarly echoed in traditional Gongfu
>style methods.

Samarkand, I'm glad to hear you say this. While Lu Yu frowned on onions
and pepper in tea as the mark of a barbarian, he included detailed
directions on when to add the salt. But he didn't say how much. So,
how much salt do I add?

I'm not being sarcastic - if anyone has an idea, I would like to know.
Also, does anyone know what kind of modern tea is closest to what he used?

Personally, I think that vacuum-packing is the best modern contribution
to tea. It really makes a difference.

Best,

Rick.