ChocoHATE? Don't mind if I do!
In the last flog entry, the lovely and talented Michelle confessed her love of white chocolate. Now, let me profess my contempt for the aforementioned confectioner’s imposter.
I looked up white chocolate in the dictionary. (Well, dictionary.com to be precise. Who actually owns a dictionary these days? The same people who still use kinetoscopes, phonographs and America Online.) Here is what I found.
white chocolate
n : a blend of cocoa butter and milk solids and sugar and vanilla; used in candy bars and backing and coatings; not technically chocolate because it contains no chocolate liquor
Huh??
chocolate liquor
n : the liquid or paste that is produced when cocoa beans are roasted and ground; the basis of all chocolate
I’m no philosophy major, but if “white chocolate” lacks the basis of all chocolate—how can it be chocolate? Answer: It can’t. Unless you want to go around saying that the basis of all chocolate, the sheer definition of chocolate, is meaningless; in which case I could say that I am chocolate. Ladies and gentlemen, I am made of chocolate. You could be chocolate. The entire cast of
Even your cell phone could be chocolate. (which is perhaps why Verizon Wireless thinks it can get away with it.)
But how do we remedy this dilemma? If you took away “chocolate” from the name “white chocolate,” it would just be “white,” and that’s already the name of a color. (or the combination of all colors of light, if you want to get into physics) I propose they change the name to “white wannabe chocolate” or “a waste of calories.” I guarantee there wouldn’t be so much controversy if white chocolate had the ability to not taste like a congealed combination of chalk, 30-year-old marshmallows and those lollipops from the bank. (And yes I know what that tastes like. Ever played truth or dare?)
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]
<< Home