Seeing Bats

In November 1921, right here in Los Angeles, Charles Alexander See opened a candy shop whose products were made according to recipes from his elderly mother, Mary Wiseman See. As most of you know, See’s became a beloved and profitable candy company known throughout the land. My own grandmother, Dorothy Miller, loved See’s candies and always had them on hand at her home. And my great grandmother, Julia Burley, bore a striking resemblance to the mirthless Mary See herself.

So it seemed obvious that I should include a See’s product among the candies that I review this month. And so it was that I drove over to a See’s shop not far from the original store and purchased a See’s Marshmallow Jack O-Lantern.

1. Packaging. Once again, we’ve got a cellophane wrapper that allows you to see the candy before you decide on whether to buy it. I always count that as a plus. Then, they’ve decorated the package with white bats bearing grins suggesting the deleterious effects of rabies. It’s reasonably Halloween-y. 2 points.
2. Appearance of the Treat. Well now. The shape isn’t especially evocative of a pumpkin. It’s more like a circle with a slight bump on the top. The chocolate coating appears to have been applied with a butter knife, with no effort to mimic the vertical lines of a real pumpkin.

And then there’s the orange icing, which seems to have been hurriedly applied by Lucy and Ethyl while working at LA’s See’s candy factory. (The famous episode of I Love Lucy was actually filmed there.) The eyes and nose, which presumably were meant to be triangles, are barely recognizable as such. The mouth is just a quick squiggle, looking for all the world like Mr. Furley’s EKG graph when he mistakenly things Jack made a pass at him. And there are a few random orange spots marring the face like a bad case of acne. I can’t in good conscience condone such sloppy work. No points.

3. Taste. Here’s the opportunity for See’s to redeem itself. See’s is known for quality candy, with fresh ingredients and recipes that have stood the test of time.

The first thing that struck me upon biting into the candy was the satisfying crack of the chocolate coating. This was good, thick chocolate, unlike that ersatz stuff used by Russell Stover. See’s milk chocolate is reliably rich and smooth and satisfying, like a cup of good, hot cocoa on a cold morning.

The second notable thing about eating this treat is that the marshmallow filling is light and tasty — notably better than the Russell Stovers version. Combined, this was a very satisfying treat. I’ll give it 3 points.

4. Value. This pumpkin set me back $3.75, which at 2 ounces seems pretty steep, even for quality candy. You wouldn’t be inclined to hand these out willy-nilly to the little rugrats darkening your doorstep on Halloween. And you wouldn’t even be inclined to eat more than one or two of these yourself for the whole Halloween season. To put it bluntly, these are not a good value. They’re not a ripoff, but they’re not a bargain either. 1 point.

Steve’s Sweetoberfest Score: 6 out of 12 points, which we call a TREAK. Maybe you could buy yourself one, just to see what all the fuss is about. But don’t make a habit out of it.