Revisiting The Question Of Whether To Say "Herbal Tea"

Back in early 2010, I wrote a post Is Herbal Tea Tea? in which I explain. Recently, I read a post Let’s go there, shall we? on Joie de Tea, which expressed a similar sentiment. However, this post gets into an interesting aspect of this terminology, the question of inclusiveness vs. divisiveness:

...I regularly see people having other people jump down their throats before they can even have a sip of their lovely herbal tea, because the herbal-tea-drinking people called it tea rather than a tisane or an infusion. How tedious.

Let’s be inclusive, not divisive...

I found this post resonated with me quite deeply, not just because I also call these drinks "herbal teas", but because I could relate to the question of inclusiveness. I also get a gut feeling of some sort of exclusivity or snobbishness when I hear people forcefully insist on the correctness of the terms "tisane" or "herbal infusion", and even more so when they frame their statements in the negative, insisting on the "wrongness" of the term "herbal tea", or, in the most extreme cases, making personal attacks on people who use the phrase "herbal tea", such as by claiming that they "don't know anything about tea".

Why do I react this way? Experience with other pushy groups sheds some light:

Language is complex and dynamic. The meaning and connotations of words evolve over time, and even at a given time, not all people will use the same word a certain way. Furthermore, many words have specialized meanings within certain subcultures. Often, these "subcultures" can constitute people of a particular political ideology, or of particular religious beliefs.

There's nothing wrong with having specialized terminology, when it is necessary. But specialized language and jargon can cause harm in several ways. One way such language can go wrong is when it is used to exclude others, such as when people are judged by whether or not they follow the linguistic conventions of a small subculture (even when those conventions go against the usage of similar words in mainstream society). Another way in which language can go wrong is when it is used to push an ideology onto someone else.

Examples of pushy language:

An example of pushy political language would be how far-right conservatives describe as "socialist" any more liberal policy which they disagree with, or how far-left liberals might describe as "reactionary" or "facist" any conservative policy they disagree with. These uses of language, which differ from the widely-accepted definitions of these terms, serve to advance the agenda of the person using them, because they paint the opposing viewpoint in a negative light. Religion can also be one of the biggest offenders when it comes to using these sorts of negative labels (think "unbelievers", "heretics"); I am confident you can think up many of your own examples here.

Pushy language, in religion, politics, and other spheres, is usually much more subtle. One Philosophy or movement that I find uses language in ways I react negatively to is Ayn Rand's Objectivism. This movement uses language in several non-standard ways: one, the choice of name implies that the philosophy itself is objective--rather than having a neutral name and allowing people to choose for themselves whether or not they personally find the philosophy to be objective. Secondly, the philosophy uses certain words, like selfishness, quite differently from the mainstream uses of these words. The word "selfish" has a strong negative connotation in mainstream society, yet within the "Objectivist" philosophy it has a positive connotation.

Non-standard uses of language can restructure a person's value system:

I find these non-standard uses of language to be pushy because they can restructure a person's value system without their consent. When people begin to use language in a different way, it changes how they think. I am a huge believer in continuously questioning your beliefs, but I believe that people reach healthier conclusions when they question their beliefs consciously, rather than allowing their beliefs to be unconsciously restructured through processes like using special jargon. I find this to be a particular matter of concern because groups often choose their jargon or special language in such a way as to promote their own agenda (like the political examples above). When people allow for their beliefs to be restructured unconsciously, they open themselves up to being influenced by people or groups who would manipulate them for profit or gain, against the person's best interest, and also in potentially untruthful ways.

I think that this potential for unconscious manipulation of value systems is a very legitimate reason that people have for reacting negatively and defensively to language that is used in non-standard ways.

The religious group my friends and I are in the process of founding has discussed these issues at length. From the start, there was a strong resolve in our group to do everything we could to avoid being pushy or overstepping people's boundaries in attempts to advance our views. Because of this, one of the core rules of communication that we agreed upon was to Use language and definitions based on societal consensus. We are hoping that this rule, which few groups of any sort embrace as centrally as we do, will help us to create a novel religious organization that will succeed at avoiding the pitfalls of pushiness more successfully than past organizations have done.

Back to tea: what exactly is the mainstream definition of tea?

The mainstream definition of tea is a broad one. The word tea is not only used to refer to true teas, but also to a wide variety of other beverages prepared in the same manner as true tea. You can check the Dictionary.com definition of tea, which pulls from a number of different mainstream dictionaries, to verify this. The strict definition of tea as only referring to true teas made from the Camellia sinensis plant is one that is only agreed upon in a small subculture.

In conclusion: yes, I do think that insisting "tea" only be used to refer to true tea is divisive:

I hope I have convinced some people that there is indeed something inherently divisive about insisting that the word "tea" only be used to refer to true tea. I am a huge advocate for pure teas, and I have done and continue to do a lot of things to promote them, both in terms of sharing them with my friends, in terms of what I recommend to others, and in terms of how RateTea is structured. But I think that when people get too pedantic about the use of the term "tea", it actually harms this cause. It makes people react defensively, and it creates an inclusion-exclusion dynamic. This sort of decision harms the advancement of tea culture, and, if carried out in a business context, is a bad business decision because it can alienate potential customers.

You don't need to use the word "herbal tea". If you don't like it, then use whatever other term you'd like (tisane, herbal infusion, etc.). But, if you're going to criticize the use of this term, be mindful of how this criticism will be perceived...you may be having the opposite effect that you actually want to have!

How Into Tea Are You? How Is Being Into Dance Like Being Into Tea?

Lately I've been thinking a lot about my level of depth, interest, and focus, in various aspects of my life. A discussion on the Tea Trade Forums led me to an LA Times story on rare tea enthusiasts, which sparked some of this thought. When I first started working on RateTea, I was interested in tea, but was early on in the process of learning about it. Now, I know a fair amount about tea, having spent a few years researching it in a fairly intense manner, sampling different teas, and becoming tied into the tea industry in various ways. But I would not consider myself a tea expert, and I regularly encounter people who know far more about tea than I do, and perhaps more importantly, who are more into tea.

These people are more excited about tea than me. Tea is their passion. I will be the first to admit, tea is not my passion. Yes, that's right, I'm not that into tea. Just how much am I into tea? I'm into tea in much the same way I'm into dance. Here is a picture of one of the styles of dance that I like to do regularly, called lindy hop, a type of swing dance. This photo was taken at Rittenhop, an event run by the Lindy and Blues organization, whose tuesday night dances I nearly always attend:



There are some people who are really into dance: they dance many nights a week, and on weekends they frequently travel to various big dance weekends, which include weekends focusing on workshops and dance lessons, as well as those focused on social dancing. Some of the people with the highest level of enthusiasm for the dance scene will lose a lot of sleep at these events, and between their work and dance, they have little room for other hobbies and social activities.

When I dance too much:

There is such a thing as too much dance. I have gone to physical therapy twice for dance-related injuries, and they were both not acute injuries, but rather, injuries associated with chronic over-use. I've stayed up later than I normally would because of dance, and felt bad and off-kilter for the following day or two. And I've had moments when I realized that my whole social life revolved around the dance scene, and that I felt a strong need to diversify my social circles. And I cut back from dance and diversified my life in all of these circumstances.


I'm more interested in balance in my life. I like dance not for its own sake, but because I like the exercise and the social interaction, I like the sort of community of quirky, intelligent, creative people that the dance scene attracts, and I like the dance form as something that can be a source of creativity and inspiration in my life. I like dance because it produces good results in my life. But I am not interested in attending every big dance weekend, not even every one in my own city. I do not care about being the "best" dancer (if there is such a thing), and I do not feel like I'm missing out if I miss a major dance event. I value my sleep, I value having a broad range of hobbies, and I value having a diverse social life. I want to dance only to the degree that it enhances, rather than detracts from the other elements of my life.

My interest in tea:

My interest in tea is similar. I like tea not for its own sake, but I like tea because I like how it tastes, and how it makes me feel. I like the effect that drinking tea has on my life. And I like the effect that paying attention to how tea tastes, and learning about where my tea comes from, has on my life.

However, I am not interested in getting so focused on tea that it would detract from other elements of my life. For example, I'm not interested in drinking so much tea that I have trouble sleeping because of the caffeine, and I'm not interested in spending so much money on tea that it takes away in any substantial way from money that could be better put to use elsewhere. And I'm not interested in thinking or learning so much about tea and where my tea comes from, that I start thinking less about my food and where it comes from.

My interest in tea fits in a holistic way into my life. And at times, I find myself obsessing over tea, and I realize this is too much, and I need to hold back.

What I want to encourage in others:

I want to encourage this approach in others. I want people to become interested in tea, not to become interested in tea for its own sake, but so that they start paying more attention to food and drink in general. I want people to start listening to their bodies and raising awareness of their mind and bodies through paying attention to how tea makes them feel. I want people to drink tea with others and to take a break in their day to enjoy tea, and I want people to see the mental and emotional and spiritual benefits of taking these sorts of breaks.

And I think this is a good general rule to follow, when asking yourself how interested you want to be in something. Is your interest in this one thing making your life as a whole better? If so, then keep being that interested or more interested. If your interest is detracting from your life as a whole, by taking away from other aspects of your life, then scale back. This point will be different for different people. But I'm about at that point for tea. I'm not interested in being any more interested in tea, nor any less interested; I'm content where I am.

How about you?

What Happened to Admari Tea? And Some Subtle Points On Language In Tea Marketing

I recently learned that Admari Tea has undergone a fairly radical transformation. Admari tea was a small tea company based in Midland Park, NJ. The company has moved to Miami, FL, but perhaps more importantly, it has shifted its focus dramatically, discontinuing its sales of all loose-leaf teas, and instead selling only tea bags.



Admari Tea's new website has two quotes that I want to highlight:

“A Buddhist monk once asked his master, ‘No matter what lies ahead, what is the Way?” The master quickly replied, “The Way is your daily life.’ This is the very essence of The Way of Tea. The principles of the Way of Tea are directed towards all of one’s existence, not just the part that takes place in the tearoom.” (Excerpt from Tea Life, Tea Mind by Soshitsu Sen XV)

And later on the page:

The way of tea is your daily life; your daily existence. The beautiful ritual of tea and respect for a simple ingredient, when done with reverence, can carry over, and bring meaning to every aspect of your life. At Admari Tea we recognize that in the modern world, the ritual must sometimes take a back seat to the hectic pace of life. So we are bringing the quality, the beauty and the reverence to you.

I totally understand that there is a large market for tea bags in this country, and globally, including a market for high-quality whole-leaf tea in pyramid sachets, and that companies are going to want to fill this business niche. However, there is something about the message being put forth by Admari tea that does not resonate well with me.

I want to go into depth about how I perceive this company's new message and marketing, because I think that the company's marketing has some negative elements to it that may alienate potential customers, and I think they can make a few simple modifications to the language in their new marketing that would help them to engage with potential customers in a more positive way. My remarks here may seem nitpicky, but I think they are important: sometimes tiny changes in wording can produce profound differences in how people react to language. I think the case below is one where a few very small changes could produce very large improvements in perception.

What are tea bags about?

Tea bags are about convenience. I have never heard any compelling argument in favor of tea bags, other than the convenience argument. Tea bags standardize the brewing process, save time, and allow people to brew tea with less equipment--all of these boil down to convenience. But tea bags require resources, which makes them inferior from a value and sustainability perspective. They also take away the control and flexibility of measuring out an exact amount of leaf, and they take away some of the possible benefits of using different brewing vessels or methods, such as mug brewing of loose-leaf tea. They are associated with a faster pace of life, which emphasizes quick and convenient consumption of food. On a spiritual level, they disconnect people from their tea and its origins; they move away from experiencing tea as a whole food and as slow food and move towards experiencing tea as an industrial product or consumer product.

It is certainly possible to experience tea more richly while using teabags, by being more mindful of the aromas, experiencing it as slow food, seeking out higher-quality tea, and putting care into brewing it, as I did in my post Multiple Infusions of a Tea Bag. But this type of experience is somewhat at odds with the experience of convenience and the fast pace of life.

A contradiction in marketing and message?

I think Admari tea is presenting a bit of a muddled message or apparent contradiction in their marketing. On the one hand, they're citing one of the quotes from the Sen Sōshitsu, referencing Buddhism, and talking about the "way of tea", the ritual of tea, respect for tea as an ingredient, and presenting a general approach of mindfulness about one's food. But on the other hand, they are caving into societal pressures. When they say: "...the ritual must sometimes take a back seat to the hectic pace of life." this seems like a cop-out to me.

And not only does this statement feel like a cop-out, it also feels like an intrusion or affront, like it is directly assaulting some core aspect of my beliefs or value system, and I imagine that many others may react similarly, even if they are not able to articulate it as thoroughly as I do here. Why?

A key issue is how they present "the hectic pace of life" as if it were a universal, immutable aspect of the world. Life is not inherently hectic or fast-paced. It can be fast-paced, or slow-paced, depending on who, where, and when you are talking about. A more honest way of wording this would be "...if your life is hectic or fast-paced..." or "...the hectic times in your life..." I also particularly object to the wording of their statement, using the word must. The hectic pace of our modern society is not inevitable, and, while some people are still caught up in it, it is not necessarily a good thing. And even when presented with hectic or fast-paced circumstances, people can respond in different ways, and often, the most productive and healthy way to react is to take a brief time for a meditative break, which, incidentally, one can sometimes do by taking the time to brew a cup of tea and drink it mindfully.

I think that statements that imply that the fast pace of life is somehow innate, universal, and unchangeable, actually cause harm by legitimizing the fast-pace of things even when it is harmful to people on a spiritual, physical, or emotional level, or harmful to society as a whole. And they cause harm by making people believe that life is always that way, and that one must cave into societal pressures to act and live that way, even when this way is destructive. A healthier viewpoint is one in which a person realizes that life will sometimes be fast-paced and other times slower, and that one can be empowered to influence the pace, speeding it up when it is too slow and slowing it down when it is too fast.

More, on the use of the term "reverence":

Another point which I object to occurs in the following sentence. After all the grandiose talk about the way of tea, their claim: "So we are bringing the quality, the beauty and the reverence to you" seems overstated, particularly in the use of the term reverence. Admari Tea is bringing a tea bag to the marketplace; it may have quality to back it up, and beauty, but reverence is something that you cannot package or sell as a product. Reverence is something that people must bring of their own accord to the way they experience tea. And I think that packaging a product in a tea bag actually places a barrier that makes it more difficult (although not impossible) to experience reverence for one's tea. To use this word, which typically is reserved for spiritual or religious topics, in the context of a consumer product, I think oversteps a boundary for me, and also elicits a negative reaction. Their use of the word reverence in this context seems to cheapen the word, and it strikes me as a bit irreverent.

Integrity in marketing:

I'm a big fan of honesty and integrity in marketing. Companies can and do market top-quality whole leaf tea in high-quality sachets. There is no guarantee that loose-leaf tea is better in quality than tea bags. Also, there is large existing market demand for tea bags, and I would not negatively judge a company just because they chose to sell tea bags (as I explain more in my recent post). But I do think that Admari Tea is trying to pull itself in two different directions here.

I think integrity in marketing is not just a question of simple factual matters, but also encompasses the spirit of the marketing. I object to some of their use of language in marketing, and as I am someone who tends not to be easily offended, I suspect that others may also react negatively as well, especially to their combination of referencing Buddhism and the Sen Sōshitsu, and using the word reverence, in the context of a move that most people would probably see as moving in the opposite direction, away from these concepts.

A recommendation for Admari Tea:

I think Admari Tea would benefit from softening their use of marketing in such a way that is more honest and avoids some of the apparent contradictions that I raised here, and I'd also suggest that they still offer some loose-leaf tea for sale, even if it is a slight inconvenience or results in a small financial loss. While it is understandable, given the constraints of market demand in our society, that some tea companies would choose to focus on tea bags, I think that it is important to always at least allow shoppers the option of the best possible choice, especially from the perspective of value and sustainability, which is loose-leaf tea. Both of these changes would make me think more favorable of them as a company. The indirect benefits to Admari Tea in terms of greater perception among serious tea drinkers and those with a more religious or spiritual inclination would more than offset any small financial loss associated with making these changes.

What do you think?

How do you react to the examples of Admari Tea's marketing that I gave here? How about other companies using similar language and rhetoric to market their products? Do you agree with my suggestions, or do you think you'd make different suggestions? Do you think that my suggestions would result in a tangible economic benefit to Admari Tea?

Tea, Spirituality, Language, and Culture

Adam Yusko recently raised some fascinating questions in his blog post titled two tea perspectives. In this post, he discusses a distinction between two ways of looking at tea. One perspective views tea primarily as a caffeinated beverage, and sometimes focuses on the "health benefits" of tea as well. The second view looks at tea more for the experience, and has a more spiritual experience of it. He then suggests that this reflects some sort of divide between western (British) and eastern tea cultures.

While I think there is a considerable amount of truth in Adam's analysis and interpretations, I want to present a subtly different perspective.

How important is the language that we use?

I'm cautious about concluding that people in a culture do not think about a certain concept (like "qi" or "energy") just because they do not refer to it using the same language.

A long time ago I wrote a piece called language in religion in which I argued that when it comes to religion and spiritual matters, people often use different language to refer to the same concepts, but at other times, they use similar language to refer to vastly different truths. I came to these realizations after spending time talking to Christians from many different denominations and traditions, and comparing the language and ideas people in these communities talked and thought about with the perspectives of others who identify as irreligious, agnostic, or members of other (non-Christian) religions. But I think this same phenomenon also occurs more universally, in topics of a more spiritual nature (which I think many people would say includes the notion of "qi"), because they are intangible and rather subtle.

As an example from my personal experience, I remember thinking about foods in some sort of "warming/cooling" properties of foods, a lot like the "yang/yin" dichotomy, long before I heard of those concepts. I often would feel a craving for certain types of foods, and seek them out because I felt my body needed them to bring myself back in balance. For example, if I had been eating lots of starchy, meaty, and heavily cooked foods ("warming" foods) I would experience a craving for fresh, raw, "cooling" foods, like fruit, or fresh mint from the garden. It was only years later that I learned that in Chinese traditional medicine, there was a whole theoretical framework that gave names to these things.

British tea culture...spiritual perhaps?

Given how important tea is to the British, I would say I am virtually certain that at least some people from this culture experience it in a more spiritual manner. It is not just about the caffeine, but also about the community, and the experience and ritual of drinking the tea. The ritual is very different from, say, the Japanese tea ceremony, or Gongfu Cha, and in many cases (but not all) focuses on people and family, and provides a time period for rest and reflection, just like the tea traditions in many eastern cultures.

Also, given that most of western Europe comes from an area where the major religious dichotomy is Christian vs. secular, and that tea does not figure prominently in Christian traditions, it would make sense that people would use mostly secular language to talk about tea. But this may just be an artifact of language; it does not necessarily mean that people do not experience tea, or the ritual of drinking it, in spiritual ways. Furthermore, even within Christian tradition, there are some grounds to suggest that some people would actually experience tea in spiritual terms, especially considering the concept of God being present in all things.

Consumerism vs. Spirituality:

From my perspective, regardless of the culture, religious tradition, or lack thereof, that a person comes from, it is possible to experience tea (like any kind of food or drink) both in a more reflective, aware, connected (and I would say spiritual) way, as well as to experience it in a more mechanical "chug-it-and-go" consumerist way.

This is not about an east-west divide. To use a glaring counterexample, Japanese culture can be just as fast-paced and consumerist as American culture, and China has also taken some unfortunate consumerist turns recently, due to globalization. Southeast Asia is by no means a universal preservation ground for traditional culture; as an example from tea, I actually recently reviewed a bottled Japanese tea, produced in Singapore. Yet the countries in this region also have rich traditions which focus on taste, meditation, and a spiritual view of food and drink, including tea. I think it is not really possible to generalize about whole cultures.

Personally, I do see the dichotomy between tea as a consumer product, and tea as a whole experience. I think this distinction exists in virtually all aspects of life in which there is some sort of product for sale. And...personally, I think the more spiritual view has a number of benefits, and I think the consumerist view is problematic in a lot of ways (not the least of which being sustainability). But I think it also does not matter as much what you call it, or what culture you are coming from. What matters is that you pay attention to your food and drink, think about it, where it comes from, how it makes you feel. And I think in that point I am 100% with Adam in his original post. I'm definitely someone who experiences tea, and indeed, all food and drink, in this way.

Tea Bags - Spiritually Disconnecting You From Your Tea

I was inspired to write this post by reading a thread on LeafBox Tea, started by Peter, titled The 1 Big Reason Why I Think Tea Bags Are Stupid (now available only on archive.org). Something about this discussion sparked me to recall my first semester of college, in which I read some early works by Karl Marx (pre-Communist Manifesto). One thing that jumped out to me as particularly sane and insightful about Marx's philosophical ramblings was the concept that a modern industrial society alienates people from the product of their labor, and that this alienation is on a spiritual level.

Sounds a bit metaphysical and new-agey, right? The concept of "spiritual" is hard to pin down, but I find that it's a useful concept to encompass that deep sort of connected feeling that drives us to feel an experience is filled with meaning and purpose. It's a sort of fulfillment that transcends the sensory world, and it has immense power in terms of motivating people, helping them endure hardship, and helping them to experience potentially difficult personal growth. And I've found, from my personal experience, that when things are spiritually alienating, there's often something wrong on a more concrete level as well. In the spiritual sterile desert of modern life, driven by money and formal structures rather than purpose, we humans succumb to depression, becoming less creative, and becoming less able to cope with the challenges that life inevitably presents us with.

How does this relate to tea? Tea and spirituality have been linked by so many different cultures. The Japanese Tea Ceremony is an ancient, traditional example of this. And Jason Witt, author of Spirituality of Tea also argues, in a more contemporary context, that there is something innately spiritual about tea. I recently read a review of the book "Tea Time with God" on Angela McRae's blog Tea With Friends; that book seems to emphasize the concept of a break or pause, as having spiritual significance. But the modern concept of a tea bag approaches tea differently: as a product, marketed to "consumers": the convenience takes away from the spiritual element.

Tea Bags: Disconnecting You From Your Tea

Pictured below is a tea bag of Floral Jasmine Green from T (www.tealeaves.com). I picked this one to photograph and mention here because it was exceptionally good for a tea bag, but if you read my review you'll find my final question asking whether or not it's really worthwhile to buy good tea in a tea bag.



In the forum thread referenced at the start of this post, Peter remarked that:

...there is something awesome about digging your fingers deep down into a tin of loose, dry tea. The rough texture on your hand really is cool. When you do that, you are feeling the texture of a product that was unchanged from the day it left the farm. How cool is that? You want natural? You want to feel close to the source? Dump your loose tea into a big bowl and dig your dirty fingers down into the bottom of it. Let the tea run out of your hand, watch how it falls. Someone, on a rural farm, may very well have handled your tea in a very similar manner as he or she dumped into a container or packaging. Talk about experiencing your food.

When I read this, it struck me that perhaps the problem with our industrialized food supply is also a spiritual problem. Just as the industrialization of work results in a spiritual alienation of people from the product of their labor, the industralization of our food supply results in a spiritual alienation between the people consuming the food and the food itself, not to mention those who produced it.

There are a lot of tangible problems with the food culture in America--health problems associated with poor nutrition, environmental problems associated with production that is unsustainable ecologically, and a barren culture in which people have forgotten how to taste, how to smell, and have lost the rich food traditions of earlier generations. But are these root problems, or are they symptoms? The concept of spirituality is inherently unifying and is thus empowering and liberating. When we think on a spiritual level, we see that these problems are not isolated, but rather, are all symptoms of one deep problem: we have become disconnected from our food.

Using loose tea rather than tea bags is one way to become reconnected again.