Unit 4: Food is Art?
I’ll start off by saying I do think that food, in some contexts, should be considered art. Tefler defined art in “Food as Art” as a “thing intended or used wholly or largely for aesthetic consideration” (Tefler 14), meaning to be evaluated beyond the basis of merely satiating hunger. The creator (the chef) works tirelessly on combining and transforming ingredients into something that will “produce a particular kind of pleasure, one which depends upon a discerning appreciation of the flavour and how they combine and succeed one another” (Tefler 14). The chef does not seek to just fill the belly of the diner, but rather encourage the diner to critically evaluate the aesthetics (taste, texture, temperature, etc) in order to appreciate the work as something more than just a vehicle for delivery of caloric energy. There is an entire network on cable that is devoted to the culinary arts. These shows that judge a chefs ability to create a work of olfactory art (many experts say that our sense of smell and taste are inseparable). People wouldn’t be interested in these shows if the objective was to see who can most efficiently provide a meal with the necessary calories to provide sufficient energy until the next meal.
In a sense, the person eating the food is the most important aspect of the art form. If they are not driven to consider the meal in a way that extends beyond their full belly, but instead to appreciate and contemplate the combination of flavors, textures, colors, temperatures, etc, then there is no art. Modernism as discussed in Dissanayake’s essay “What is Art For?” aligns with this idea that “there is no appreciation for art without interpretation” (Dissanayake 19). This idea that art is only as important or credible as a how it is interpreted and appreciated by those who will critically evaluate it is what allows food to be considered a form of “art”.
I definitely agree with you that food is art, but to a certain extent. Chefs use ingredients to create the food that they serve to their customers; it’s an art. Especially when you go to a nice restaurant or anywhere where they make the food when you order it, the food will usually take a while to be prepared. The chefs who take the time to create their dishes are artists, would you agree? And their food is the art, right? Would you agree that food that is premade and just warmed up and thrown together isn’t art? Like fast food for example. The fast food presentation definitely makes it clear that no thought really goes into preparing fast food, but they did mention that the food is made with intent to taste good. Also, most people today although they no the secrets about fast food and how unhealthy it is will still describe fast food as “tasty” – meaning that they get experience an aesthetic reaction (taste) from the food. Even with this is, should fast food be considered an art or not? Another thing is that fast food, majority of the time, is also aesthetically pleasing to the eye as well as taste good.
I’m really glad that you mentioned that there is a whole television network devoted to the culinary arts like food network. Which by the way is one of my favorite televisions networks to watch – I love triple D and chopped. Do you have any favorite food network shows? This network supports my belief that food is art and chefs are artists.
I do not think that the person specifically eating the food is only person who is gaining any artistic experience from it. A lot of fruit get turned into flowers and other cool arrangements. This art is not intended to be eaten but it can be. “There is no appreciation for art without interpretation” and interpretation does not equate to eating (Dissanayake 19). Interpretation can come from just looking at the food or maybe just smelling it. I do think that the only person that can critically evaluate the meal though is the person that ate it.
The cooking shows are a lot of fun to watch, it is exciting to see ingredients that probably do not go together get incorporated into the entire meal. Those shows are the perfect example of how food is art. It is like watching them making a painting without a brush, or having to use like a broom for a brush.
In my opinion, food is always art. Even if it is not seen by others as art, even the person who is eating the food. For example, a person who is extremely hungry sees food, would not consider the food art. A hungry person would only consider food to be something necessary to fulfil his/her hunger. This would be a normal reaction for someone because it would be hard to focus on finding art in food when the only thing you’re thinking about is eating. However, that does not mean that the food that is consumed by the hungry person is not art. That specific food is not seen as art only for that specific person. If that food would be taken away from a hungry person and given to a person at a restaurant, the food would be become a piece of art. Similarly, if someone who has no interest in art sees a modern piece of art, they might not consider or see it as art. Recently there was an employee at a museum who threw away a valuable piece of art because they didn’t realize it was, in fact, an art piece. Just because they didn’t see it as art didn’t make it any less of a piece of art. In conclusion, no matter who is eating food, food is art. What matters is how that piece of art is interpreted by individuals.