Policy Review and the Hoover Institution were well matched. They shared a commitment to free and rigorous inquiry into the American condition, into the workings of government and of our political and economic systems and those of others, and into the role of the United States in the world. They both brought together scholars with an interest in current affairs and journalists interested in exploring our world in greater depth. They both take up topics not as exercises in theory, but for the purpose of better understanding the world and the betterment of people's lives. They both are committed to civil discourse, the airing of reasoned disagreement, and a vigorous and open debate. They both are diligently independent, not least in affirming and guarding the independence of those associated with them in the community of informed discussion.
But not everybody followed Hanway's argument. The eminent intellectual Dr Samuel Johnson, a devotee of tea, so disagreed with Hanway's 1757 essay that he published a hilariously satirical review of it in the Literary Magazine, a monthly journal. Johnson started of by admitting that Hanway should expect little justice, since Johnson himself was 'a hardened and shameless tea-drinker, who has for twenty years diluted his meals with only the infusion of this fascinating plant, whose kettle scarcely has time to cool, who with Tea amuses the evening, with Tea solaces the midnights, and with Tea welcomes the morning'. He then poured scorn on Hanway's suggestion that women are less beautiful than they once were, before considering the claim that tea-drinking has led to an increase in nervous disorders. Johnson suggested that rather than blaming tea, one ought to blame the 'general langour [that] is theeffect of general luxury, of general idleness', because those who are idle get no exercise, and are thus susceptible to nervous disorders. He argued that there is only a link with tea-drinking because tea-drinking is common among those who are already 'idle and luxurious'. Johnson was also perceptive enough to note that often tea-drinking was just an excuse for bringing people together: 'a pretence for assembling to prattle, for interrupting business' - but unlike tea's critics, who saw such gatherings as dangerous (particularly among the working classes), Johnson saw no harm in it. Thus he has much in common with many modern tea-drinkers, who delight in getting together with a cuppa for a gossip and a giggle.
Dear Pamela,As a Brit, it’s nice to see someone from ‘over the pond’ who’s got most of the information about Afternoon Tea correct for a change: I now live in Vinci, Italy (yes where Leonardo was born), and now offer afternoon tea to Italians in our home dining would take you to task on one item in your article,(there’s always a critic!) and that is about Cream Tea in which you say: “Cream Tea — A simple tea service consisting of scones, clotted cream, marmalade or lemon curd and tea.” Cream Tea traditionally consists of scones served with clotted cream and strawberry said that if people prefer to have their scones (and it’s pronounced ‘skons’ as far as I’m concerned),with an alternative, I have no problem with that, it’s a free world (supposedly)!For example I sometimes fill my Victoria Sponge with lemon curd instead of the traditional raspberry jam and fresh raspberries both of which balance well with a nice cup of sweet Luck with the book!