I am not wrong about white chocolate, and you really should be less condescending, Taste. There are lots of problems with white chocolate that leads to me not liking it. First and foremost is that...
I am not wrong about white chocolate, and you really should be less condescending, Taste.
There are lots of problems with white chocolate that leads to me not liking it. First and foremost is that it's commonly made to be entirely too sweet without a complex flavor to back it up like regular milk chocolate does. Sometimes it's not made with pure cocoa butter and it's strangely greasy with an unpleasant texture. And when it's great, it tends to be just an OK experience. White chocolate seems to be at it's strongest when added with sharp contrasting flavors.
The arguement that white chocolate isn't 'real' chocolate was always kind of dumb, yes, but to say that white chocolate is any more 'real' than milk chocolate is frankly even more dumb; even if the only thing you define as chocolate is 'made with products of the cocoa bean' then milk chocolate is more 'real' since it's made with both cocoa butter and cocoa solids. The fact of the matter is that when people say that white chocolate isn't real chocolate, they generally mean that they're not a good substitute for milk chocolate. Just in the same way that chocolate made with palm oil isn't a good substitute for chocolate made with cocoa butter.
I know there are fancy white chocolate brands that I can buy. Guess what? I'm not going to buy them. They're hard to find, extremely overpriced, and the quality of them isn't so drammatically better than what I can otherwise buy for a quarter to a tenth of the price. Especially after being tricked so many times into buying those stupid luxury milk chocolate bars that got popular a few years ago that taste like grass, moss, and burnt coffee in the middle of being composted.
This is another notable example of polemic rhetoric for clicks which actually goes against what the article is about. I can't think of a trend in writing for the web that I hate more, and as far...
This is another notable example of polemic rhetoric for clicks which actually goes against what the article is about. I can't think of a trend in writing for the web that I hate more, and as far as I can tell it is only ever a net negative for everyone experiencing the article, with the exception of the owners of the publications from which we consume articles, because for some reason being argumentative makes the view count go up.
You are almost certainly not wrong about how you feel about white chocolate, because whatever your feelings are about white chocolate, it is, as you've said, a matter of taste. You actually cannot be wrong about it, and that's the point; you look at the link, and you think, "I'm not wrong, what the fuck" and you click on it, and you look at what they're talking about, and maybe it has something interesting in there - personally I am interested in how there has been a lot of work done and things written about white chocolate not being real chocolate, to the point that it's memetic and vapidly repeatable while being at best debatable and at worst just a marketing play - but you've been duped into engaging in something from the point of view that it is an argument, and now you feel bad about the article even though you largely agree with the premise as you say in your third paragraph.
And this is just about fucking chocolate it's not even about something important. This is just another example of how the media that we consume prepares us for confrontation and not for learning, and that is an absolute travesty.
I love white chocolate. I've had some incredible single-estate white chocolate. It's very versatile as an ingredient, I'd argue even more versatile than dark or milk chocolates. You can encounter...
I love white chocolate. I've had some incredible single-estate white chocolate. It's very versatile as an ingredient, I'd argue even more versatile than dark or milk chocolates. You can encounter white chocolate all over a menu, other chocolates are usually only in the dessert area.
Vaguely related, I don't like dark chocolate. I am, by any measure, a Food Person. I've eaten at some incredible restaurants, I have a kitchen full of Weird Cooking Stuff, etc. But I do not like anything over about 65% cocoa solids. Just doesn't work for me.
it’s crazy good, right? i had to keep myself from buying a bunch of them. for the normal chocolate ones, i really like cornflake, strawberry, and the honeycomb ones… but the cinnamon has captured...
it’s crazy good, right? i had to keep myself from buying a bunch of them. for the normal chocolate ones, i really like cornflake, strawberry, and the honeycomb ones… but the cinnamon has captured my heart.
I just haven't enjoyed it very much up to this date. It tends to be cloying and I don't even like vanilla much either. In general, I enjoy my chocolate (I really enjoy my chocolate, it should be...
I just haven't enjoyed it very much up to this date. It tends to be cloying and I don't even like vanilla much either. In general, I enjoy my chocolate (I really enjoy my chocolate, it should be said) strong and quite bitter though still with some underlying sweetness. As an european I've gotten to eat dozens of brands of excellent chocolate throughout my life, including plenty of white chocolate, so I doubt I'm wrong about it!
Ritter Sport are not bad, but it's a ridiculously high price tag for what you get. Every time I see one I can just hear Ramesh from Fags, Mags and Bags in my head. Milka is far too sweet for my...
Ritter Sport are not bad, but it's a ridiculously high price tag for what you get. Every time I see one I can just hear Ramesh from Fags, Mags and Bags in my head. Milka is far too sweet for my taste but it's OK.
Sainsbury's carry Tony's, my local store has maybe 6-8 varieties of theirs. It's fairly expensive but it is guaranteed slavery-free and it's pretty good chocolate, especially without the taste of blood... Although they do this stupid pattern on it which means it's very hard to share because it doesn't break into evenly sized pieces. It's worth picking some up if you see some but don't expect to be blown away.
If we're talking fancy, I really like Rococo for bar chocolate, which you can sometimes get in Waitrose. They used to do an incredible lavender milk bar, and their white chocolate with cardamom is just mind blowing. I mean it's seven fucking quid a bar, and they are tiny bars. But oh lordy they are good. I allow myself maybe two a year. Almost as bonkers are Artisan du Chocolat who are only fractionally cheaper but they are still in the realm of "very special treat".
For the majority of the year when I'm not feeling rich, Montezuma are a bit more reasonable on the pocket but still decent, and they have shops in quite a few places in the UK now. The bottom end of what I'd consider really quality chocolate would be Gnaw who are well worth a look. They're local to me so are in lots of shops around here, but they do a pretty good deals on mail order if you buy several bars.
I am not wrong about white chocolate, and you really should be less condescending, Taste.
There are lots of problems with white chocolate that leads to me not liking it. First and foremost is that it's commonly made to be entirely too sweet without a complex flavor to back it up like regular milk chocolate does. Sometimes it's not made with pure cocoa butter and it's strangely greasy with an unpleasant texture. And when it's great, it tends to be just an OK experience. White chocolate seems to be at it's strongest when added with sharp contrasting flavors.
The arguement that white chocolate isn't 'real' chocolate was always kind of dumb, yes, but to say that white chocolate is any more 'real' than milk chocolate is frankly even more dumb; even if the only thing you define as chocolate is 'made with products of the cocoa bean' then milk chocolate is more 'real' since it's made with both cocoa butter and cocoa solids. The fact of the matter is that when people say that white chocolate isn't real chocolate, they generally mean that they're not a good substitute for milk chocolate. Just in the same way that chocolate made with palm oil isn't a good substitute for chocolate made with cocoa butter.
I know there are fancy white chocolate brands that I can buy. Guess what? I'm not going to buy them. They're hard to find, extremely overpriced, and the quality of them isn't so drammatically better than what I can otherwise buy for a quarter to a tenth of the price. Especially after being tricked so many times into buying those stupid luxury milk chocolate bars that got popular a few years ago that taste like grass, moss, and burnt coffee in the middle of being composted.
This is another notable example of polemic rhetoric for clicks which actually goes against what the article is about. I can't think of a trend in writing for the web that I hate more, and as far as I can tell it is only ever a net negative for everyone experiencing the article, with the exception of the owners of the publications from which we consume articles, because for some reason being argumentative makes the view count go up.
You are almost certainly not wrong about how you feel about white chocolate, because whatever your feelings are about white chocolate, it is, as you've said, a matter of taste. You actually cannot be wrong about it, and that's the point; you look at the link, and you think, "I'm not wrong, what the fuck" and you click on it, and you look at what they're talking about, and maybe it has something interesting in there - personally I am interested in how there has been a lot of work done and things written about white chocolate not being real chocolate, to the point that it's memetic and vapidly repeatable while being at best debatable and at worst just a marketing play - but you've been duped into engaging in something from the point of view that it is an argument, and now you feel bad about the article even though you largely agree with the premise as you say in your third paragraph.
And this is just about fucking chocolate it's not even about something important. This is just another example of how the media that we consume prepares us for confrontation and not for learning, and that is an absolute travesty.
I agree 100%. I'm reminded of this Parks and Rec scene.
Chocolate is a treat. White Chocolate is an ingredient for a treat.
I love white chocolate. I've had some incredible single-estate white chocolate. It's very versatile as an ingredient, I'd argue even more versatile than dark or milk chocolates. You can encounter white chocolate all over a menu, other chocolates are usually only in the dessert area.
Vaguely related, I don't like dark chocolate. I am, by any measure, a Food Person. I've eaten at some incredible restaurants, I have a kitchen full of Weird Cooking Stuff, etc. But I do not like anything over about 65% cocoa solids. Just doesn't work for me.
If you also like Horchata, you should try the Ritter Sport White Cinnamon Crisp. Its probably my favorite mixed white chocolate.
Thanks for recommending it. I just bought one on impulse, and I can confirm it's delicious, possibly the best white chocolate bar I've ever had.
it’s crazy good, right? i had to keep myself from buying a bunch of them. for the normal chocolate ones, i really like cornflake, strawberry, and the honeycomb ones… but the cinnamon has captured my heart.
I just haven't enjoyed it very much up to this date. It tends to be cloying and I don't even like vanilla much either. In general, I enjoy my chocolate (I really enjoy my chocolate, it should be said) strong and quite bitter though still with some underlying sweetness. As an european I've gotten to eat dozens of brands of excellent chocolate throughout my life, including plenty of white chocolate, so I doubt I'm wrong about it!
Ritter Sport, Milka and Dairyfine are very nice chocolate brands. I hear Tony's Chocoloney is good too, but you hardly ever see it in Britain.
Ritter Sport are not bad, but it's a ridiculously high price tag for what you get. Every time I see one I can just hear Ramesh from Fags, Mags and Bags in my head. Milka is far too sweet for my taste but it's OK.
Sainsbury's carry Tony's, my local store has maybe 6-8 varieties of theirs. It's fairly expensive but it is guaranteed slavery-free and it's pretty good chocolate, especially without the taste of blood... Although they do this stupid pattern on it which means it's very hard to share because it doesn't break into evenly sized pieces. It's worth picking some up if you see some but don't expect to be blown away.
If we're talking fancy, I really like Rococo for bar chocolate, which you can sometimes get in Waitrose. They used to do an incredible lavender milk bar, and their white chocolate with cardamom is just mind blowing. I mean it's seven fucking quid a bar, and they are tiny bars. But oh lordy they are good. I allow myself maybe two a year. Almost as bonkers are Artisan du Chocolat who are only fractionally cheaper but they are still in the realm of "very special treat".
For the majority of the year when I'm not feeling rich, Montezuma are a bit more reasonable on the pocket but still decent, and they have shops in quite a few places in the UK now. The bottom end of what I'd consider really quality chocolate would be Gnaw who are well worth a look. They're local to me so are in lots of shops around here, but they do a pretty good deals on mail order if you buy several bars.