Is food art? I would argue emphatically that it can be. To minimize a finely crafted dish down to its nutrients is as shortsighted as to say that Monet’s paint merely served it’s purpose to cover the canvas and no longer make it white or that Beethoven’s Moonlight Sonata merely broke an awkward silence. Yes, food is functional. So are paint and sound. If you can accept that paint and sound, in the hands of a skilled craftsman, can be transformed into something that takes your breath away, I would argue that so can food. Telfer’s claim that food as art only requires really good technique and not creativity, I feel, only displays either her lack of truly great culinary experiences or her lack of ability to appreciate them. I can freely admit that my appreciation for music or sculptures might not hold a candle to someone who is more knowledgeable and well versed in such subjects. However, for me to minimize those artists’ feats down to mere technical skill is, I feel, a bit more than mildly insulting. A true culinary artist creates new and insightful flavor combinations much the same way a painter might do with a brush or composer might do with their instrument. Yes the flavors are the same and the technique needs to be there, but it’s the way one arranges them that makes it either notes and food or something special, something never experienced before. I agree wholeheartedly with Prof. Huette that there are no lesser senses and that all of the senses can trigger intense emotional responses. I would like to add I feel he left out one of the tastes the Japanese refer to as Umami. I think the closest English synonym is savory, but doesn’t truly capture what this word means. In any case, I wont argue over syntax, but this brings the grand total of  flavors in a chef’s arsenal to six. That’s pretty close to the seven primary tones in music. In any case I would challenge Telfer to address Chef Masaharu Morimoto or Chef Mario Batali and tell them that they lack creativity and are sheer craftsmen. I can say from personal experience, I was once lucky enough to eat at the latter’s restaurant and it was nothing short of mind-blowing.

Denis Dutton’s reverse engineering of why and what he find beautiful is absolutely fascinating. Admittedly, I am a sucker for a logical progression where I can’t foresee the ending from the start, and for anyone who knows their history, but his analysis and conclusions are spot on. The idea that art originated long before language is mildly shocking. However, the manner in which it was presented was not only logical, but probable. Dutton begins his case by listing all of the things we find beautiful; sculptures and paintings, movies and theater, music, nature, sports excellence. Dutton sums this up by stating, “We find beauty in something done well.” Ironically enough, I find beauty in the accuracy and simplicity of that statement. It was very insightful to learn that most landscapes have very similar features no matter the cultural background of the artist; short grass plains, a medium amount of dispersed trees (especially if they fork low to the ground), an availability of water, a presence of animal life and possibly a path leading off into the distance. From a hunter/gatherer standpoint this is the ideal setting for a nice couple weeks of survival. He ties this all together by claiming, “beauty is natures way of acting at a distance.”

Detractors of Dutton might claim that beauty in nature might be cultural universal, but art that we create is much more diverse. To combat this, Dutton brings up the earliest works of art, long before cave drawings and atomically accurate sculptures, there was the hand ax. Two and a half million years ago, man made his first permanent tool. An incredibly useful teardrop shaped sharp stone with hundreds of uses from hunting to shelter construction to self defense. But the problem is, there are far more hand axes found than could have ever been used by our prehistoric ancestors, and many showed no signs of wear and some were too big to be functional. Dutton postulates, I think correctly, that these were used as a mate acquisition tool. A finely crafted hand ax made out of a semi-precious stone showed; craftsmanship, higher cognition, access to fine stones and excess time to spend on non survival oriented tasks, inferring proficiency at survival. Therefore, the hand axes were our very first sculptures and art. In the end, Dutton leaves us with the parting thought that perhaps our affinity for that diamond ring has little to do with our cultural indoctrination and a lot more to do with very deep inherited traits.

I leave you with these two questions:

What things do we have occur in our society that may go against natural survival, but arise because they are pleasing to the mating choices of our females?

What are some things or traits that we find attractive currently that do not have any direct correlation to positive evolutionary traits, but might have much deeper and removed connections?

So my top 5 values were:

Family, Friendship, Health, Integrity, and Loyalty

So far today I have gone to work, gone on a bike ride, and started my homework. So the question is; Do my actions reflect the values I have chosen? I think they do. I go to work everyday to provide a better life for my family. I came home for lunch because my wife had the day off and I treasure the time we get to spend together (even if it is just 20 minutes). I’m training for another Ironman Triathlon to continue to lead a healthy lifestyle so that I can be active with my kids (personal accomplishment and personal development were #6 and #8 on my list). As far as friendship goes, after I complete this assignment, I’m taking one of my friends out for a beer before he goes to Peru. Integrity and Loyalty thankfully aren’t tested on a daily basis, but they are values instilled in me by my father and it’s not usually pretty when they are. Upon further introspection, they all tie into each other. I learned the importance of integrity and loyalty from my parents, my friends and wife would not be my friends and wife without these vital qualities. Health however, is sort of the odd man out, though, without your health it is very difficult to enjoy life. When I think about the values my parents raised me with, pretty much all of them stuck. The religion didn’t, but the values stayed.

What goals do I have yet to pursue? Within a year I will graduate from college. In the next couple years my wife and I will undertake the endeavor of parenthood.  In 2018 I’m going to race Ironman Cour d’Alene. I am going to move up either with Anheuser-Busch or wherever else my career takes me. I would like to work with a craft brewery and sell something I’m truly passionate about. I will continually strive to be a better husband and father.

What stands in the way? Working 70 hours a week makes it difficult to find time for homework. Setting up a budget and adjusting to a different lifestyle will be a hurdle for successful parenting. The only difficulty with Ironman Cour d’Alene will be scheduling my time, but with school out of the way that should make things easier. In order to advance my career I have to have a college degree. A lot of things need to fall into place for me to move to a craft brewery. As for being a great husband and father, only I stand in my way for that.

Since I can’t seem to post a clear picture of my list I will just type the bottom fifteen;

Personal Accomplishment, Enjoyment, Personal Development, Leadership, Location, Wisdom, Security, Community, Wealth, Expertness, Service, Prestige, Power, Independence, Creativity

Here is my response to

http://www.outdoorlife.com/blogs/hunting/tips-and-tactics-how-hunt-ducks

Being an outdoorsman, I find joy in taking the time to learn about the ways of Mother Nature. Duck hunting is such an intricate way of learning about how the ways of a species interacts with Mother Nature and all of her glory. Andrew McKean captures the beauty of how the smallest detail can make or break this beautiful sport. Understanding how these beautiful birds move, live and react is more than just a simple task. One must spend a great deal of money to gain the proper tools to execute a successful day of duck hunting. While there are hundreds of different species of ducks just in North America, one could argue that there are just as many strategies too. McKean brings the readers into the the elaborate setting of dozens of duck decoys, calm clear water and distant call of an approaching target. Within the Tips and Tactics: How to Hunt Ducks, there are explanations of what kind of shot to use, flight patterns, lists of species and food/bait recommendations. This is all described while drawing you closer to his world: the glorious outdoors. Andrew McKean is truly a master of his craft and displays photographs throughout his blog that help better paint the picture of how to hunt ducks. Exploring new territories and species of ducks is truly exciting. “So why shoot them? In short, it is a hunter’s paradox of the truest kind: The waterfowler hunts ducks because he loves them.”—K. W. This is how the outdoors and hunting should be viewed. There is so much more to discover outside these walls and even city limits. Understanding the habits of ducks and how they are in the wild is exactly how one can learn to enjoy the hunting of ducks.

“Even if the four basic modes and the two major synthetic modes through which we form our values are accepted as correct and complete, should we not be concerned that this framework puts too much emphasis on how we arrive at our values? Surely what matter most are the values themselves not the way we arrive at them.” (p. 13)

The author initially goes on to claim that this is a valid argument, however I would disagree. Before I go on I would like to state that I understand that my argument is predicated on my own personal bias in which I value two of the four basic modes more than the other two. Basing a value judgment on on sense experience and/or deductive logic is, in my mind, far superior to one based off emotion or intuition. Suppose I were driving in a car with two friends and we were trying to get to Spencer’s Butte from downtown. One friend states that we should turn right because they feel that it is the correct way to go. The other friend informs me that Spencer’s Butte is South of town, it’s late in the day, and the sun is in our eyes, therefore left is the only right conclusion.

Now I realize that in this simplistic example I made the person supporting my position right and the other incorrect. Consider a more moral issue: consider an argument over murder/assault/theft being legalized. One of an emotional or intuitive mindset might argue that they feel that murder is wrong, or that god says it’s wrong. This doesn’t much sway me either way because perhaps I simply feel the same way or believe in the same god. However, if someone were to present me with the argument that if I steal from you and you beat me half to death and I come back and kill you, well that doesn’t sound like a world I’d like to live in. So how about instead we come to an agreed upon set of social standards, by which to act that we can all agree will increase everyone’s happiness as a whole. Therefore the way in which we come to the conclusion, at least in my mind, can be far more important than the value itself.