Message 25940 of 39188 in General Discussion

Share on Facebook |  Save to del.icio.us

> Also i dislike the idea of throwing together distinguished 
> spirits, just for the hell of it. If I'm actively questioning the 
> choices in my own recipes and those of others and constantly trying 
> to think of ways to imrpove them or making them work better - I find 
> it hard to be encouraged by stupendously putting together random 
> ingredients.

And I would say this is a misconception on your part, as bad as judging a team 
by its fans.

Several anti-posters have called the recipe random or brutish. 
It may be true that the very first version was thrown together by chance or 
serindipity, but that doesn't mean the actual result was bad.
Your preconceptions or your pallette may tell you combining 5 different taste 
profiles in one result is always a bad idea, but I actually love the way that 
real balance is produced from chaos.
Make a LIIT without the rum, and you have a worse drink - the gin comes 
through too much. Without the gin, it's too sweet overall. Make it witout the 
triple sec and it's a bit bland. I find it lacks a certain zing without the 
tequila, but I won't raise that debate again.

THUS, all those ingredients have a reason for being there. Possibly it was 
one time the result of randomy throwing everything together to get drunk 
quick, but we know that 98% of those recipes do not catch on. This one did, 
and its staying power DOES say something about its inherant worth as a recipe, 
beyond even the social history and drinking habits we've identified here.

Who's to say it wasn't actually the result of a calculating mixologist 
experimenting again and again to find what would happen if this was put with 
this and this .. and this? We've all done it, and most often failed. The LIIT 
is a fluke, but worthy of veneration just because of that!

.dan.