Very, very bad sex tea, not Lydian at all

[Coffee Break]

I encountered the sentence "Very, very bad sex tea, not Lydian at all", but am struggling to understand it. Could you please let me know what it means? Here is the excerpt:

We boiled water in the microwave oven—two minutes. Then dipped Earl Grey tea bags in the boiling water—one minute. Within seven minutes, we were done with tea. Bad sex tea. Very, very bad sex tea, she repeated, not Lydian at all.

- André Aciman, Eight White Nights, Fifth Night

This is a novel published in the United States of America in 2010. It is narrated by a nameless male protagonist. He meets Clara at a Christmas party in Manhattan. Four days after the party, Clara comes to his house. But she is now complaining to the taste of the tea he gave her.

I wonder what the underlined part means.
I assume "bad sex" is being used like an adjective modifying "tea", but I just cannot understand why the taste of the tea is described as "bad sex".
And I wonder what "not Lydian at all" used to describe the taste of tea might mean.

 

[Tarheel]

I've never heard of sex tea before. Apparently, this sex tea didn't work. (Maybe it was supposed to be an aphrodisiac.)

 

[emsr2d2]

Remind me never to read that book!!

Anyway, back to the point. Do they have sex after they've finished the tea?

 

[Tarheel]

Remind me never to read that book!!

Anyway, back to the point. Do they have sex after they've finished the tea?

Apparently not. It's bad sex tea.

 

[Tarheel]

Remind me never to read that book!!

Anyway, back to the point. Do they have sex after they've finished the tea?

I suppose it could be tea you drink before bad sex, but that's a weird idea. (It fits with the rest of that book, so I wouldn't be surprised.)

 

[jutfrank]

I wonder if it's the fact that the tea drinking only lasted for seven minutes that makes it bad sex tea, and also which makes it unLydian.

 

[emsr2d2]

OK, here's my alternative reading of it (hence my question about whether they went on to have sex after drinking the tea). I thought of it in the same way we say "Bad dog! Very, very bad dog!" when chastising a dog. I thought perhaps they were chastising the tea. I imagined that, having drunk the "sex tea", they had seven minutes of sex and blamed the tea!

(Off-topic: how on earth they ever thought they'd get a decent cup of tea by heating water in the microwave and then dunking a teabag in it is beyond me! The water you pour on a teabag needs to be boiling. That's why we use kettles in the civilised UK!)

 

[Coffee Break]

@Tarheel, @emsr2d2, and @jutfrank,

Thank you very much for the explanations.

Do they have sex after they've finished the tea?

No, I am afraid not. They don't have a sexual intercourse throughout this book. All they physically do is kissing, as far as I understand.
But if they indeed had sex, it is very plausible that they are pretending to be blaming the tea, while actually they are actually criticizing the bad sex.

But because they didn't have sex, would it be that perhaps, Clara is just comparing the short period required to prepare and consume the tea to a bad sex which might be completed within a short period of time too, so that, overall, she feels that the tea is not "Lydian (=sensuous)"...?

(Off-topic: how on earth they ever thought they'd get a decent cup of tea by heating water in the microwave and then dunking a teabag in it is beyond me! The water you pour on a teabag needs to be boiling. That's why we use kettles in the civilised UK!)

And by the way, sure enough, heating water in the microwave would have certainly been another reason why it was "bad sex tea".

 

[Ostap]

We boiled water in the microwave oven—two minutes. Then dipped Earl Grey tea bags in the boiling water—one minute. Within seven minutes, we were done with tea.

Hello, I have a little off-topic question here. Why doesn't the boldfaced "tea" take the definite article? It's been mentioned before, and it's specific.

 

[jutfrank]

Why doesn't the boldfaced "tea" take the definite article? It's been mentioned before, and it's specific.

It isn't actually specific in the way I suspect you're thinking. Here, tea refers to the general activity of preparing, brewing, and drinking. Not to the specific thing itself.

 

[Tarheel]

@Coffee Break Say:

They don't have sexual intercourse at all. All they physically do is kiss.

Let's see if I understand. If they had had sex and it was bad they would have blamed the tea. So I guess it would have gotten the credit if it was good.

(Please note the changes in the sentence.)

 

[Ostap]

It isn't actually specific in the way I suspect you're thinking. Here, tea refers to the general activity of preparing, brewing, and drinking. Not to the specific thing itself.

But why did he suddenly shift to general activity? I still don't understand. It's like if he omitted "the" before "boiling water":

We boiled water in the microwave oven—two minutes. Then dipped Earl Grey tea bags in the boiling water—one minute.

We boiled water in the microwave oven—two minutes. Then dipped Earl Grey tea bags in boiling water—one minute.

This is how I see a way of shifting to general activity:

We boiled water in the microwave oven—two minutes. Then dipped Earl Grey tea bags in the boiling water—one minute. Within seven minutes, we were done with the tea. I have never done with tea within seven minutes before.

 

[jutfrank]

But why did he suddenly shift to general activity?

He didn't. The prior context describes the ritual of the tea-making process. 'Tea' refers to the whole ritual, the whole activity.

I still don't understand. It's like if he omitted "the" before "boiling water":

No, because boiling water refers to a specific thing.

This is how I see a way of shifting to general activity:

We boiled water in the microwave oven—two minutes. Then dipped Earl Grey tea bags in the boiling water—one minute. Within seven minutes, we were done with the tea. I have never done with tea within seven minutes before.

If you were to use the definite article, tea would have a different reference. Instead of referring to the general activity, it would then refer to the specific thing itself.

 

[Ostap]

Is it correct then that it's zero article because it's this meaning of "tea" (a meal)?

 

[jutfrank]

Not exactly, no, (since in that sense 'tea' is a meal) but it's similar, yes.

It's the same thing with other 'meal' words, such as breakfast and lunch. They can refer to the specific thing (understood as a physical object) or to the whole experience or activity, as a general process.

Within seven minutes, we were done with breakfast.