The question whether food can consider be art is large debated all around the world, and from this week’s reading “Food as Art” and the article wrote by William Deresiewicz, I know more about the different perspectives of the argument.

William Deresiewicz in the article “A Matter of Taste?” raised a new question that how food replaced art as high culture. He briefly talked about how Americans discovering their senses, such as “learning to value pleasure, making fine judgments…”and finally what happened next is food has replaced art.” He used several examples in different time periods in history illustrating that people could acquire more power by knowing or having more knowledge about food. He also pointed out the different things young men were chasing was changed. Nowadays, there was growing a large number of people to “look to the expressive possibilities of careers in food”, because they think food is representing “creativity, commerce, politics, health, almost religion.” Then, Deresiewicz talked about the importance of food in people’s life recently and he made a statement that food is not art. Finally he expressed his concern that “Here in America, we are in danger of confusing our palates with our souls.”

When people talk about food, our first reaction would be the appearances and taste of it, and it connect to the aesthetic reaction which is part of art. As Elizabeth Telfer stated in the article “Food as Art”, she said, “It is generally agreed that there can be aesthetic reactions to taste and smells. (There can also, of course, be visual aesthetic experiences connected with foodstuffs, as when one admires a rosy apple, but these raise no questions peculiar to food and drink.)” (P.11) I agree with her idea because I think everything in the world could be art, especially food, even the nature such as apple would be an artwork. Because the beautiful color of it and smell of the apple can all considered as the element of art. However, Deresiewicz brought the idea that “An apple is not a story, even if we can tell a story about it. A curry is not an idea, even if its creation is the result of one.” He argued the limitations which food can bring to human. He said, “But food, for all that, is not art. Both begin by addressing the senses, but that is where food stops. It is not narrative or representational, does not organize and express emotion.” But art can bring us the emotional changes.

Moreover, when Telfer illustrated that “Our definition of a work of art, in the classifying sense, was: a thing intended or used wholly of largely for aesthetic consideration.” (P.19) Also “Food properly so called is likewise often arranged or decorated in creative and attractive ways which constitute a visual work of art…the taste of food and drink as well as the look of it can give rise to aesthetic reaction.” (P.14) Then from her point of view we can say food is can be considered as work of art. By contrasting her idea, Deresiewicz indicated “Meals can evoke emotions, but only very roughly and generally, and only within a very limited range — comfort, delight, perhaps nostalgia, but not anger, say, or sorrow, or a thousand other things.” He does not believe that food can make people more emotional changes than art does. And he doubted that food could only create cheerfulness. I disagree this statement. For example, there are certain types of food would made me cry, because they contain special memories which maybe even some artworks would not achieve to that point. When food is very personal, it does make people emotional changes.

In my point of view, food is can be considered art, because it can make people emotional changes just like art does to human beings, and it connect to the aesthetic reaction.

Deresiewicz, William. A Matter of Taste? The New York Times. [On-Line Newspaper.] 27 Oct. 2012. Web. 26 Oct. 2014.From http://www.nytimes.com/2012/10/28/opinion/sunday/how-food-replaced-art-as-high-culture.html?_r=0

Tefler, E. (2002). Food as Art. In Neill, A. & Riley, A. (eds.) Arguing About Art: Contemporary Philosophical Debates (2nd ed., Chap. 2). New York, NY: Routledge.

Is food art? This topic is very interesting and I always believe food is art, even though they are so many different types of food in the world and some of them may taste bad or look strange.

From the presentations I know the differences between fast food and slow food. As the video shows, the chemicals such as food coloring and natural flavor made the food tastes good but definitely unhealthy. Also the foods are not really “directly” made, because they were reheated. All of these reasons made fast food fast and tasty. When compares to the slow food, people spent more time on making delicious and designing beautiful dishes and it should be considered as a work of art, in another word, the process of making food is creation. As Telfer indicated in the reading, “food properly so called is likewise often arranged or decorated in creative and attractive ways which constitute a visual work of art.” And also “The taste of food and drink as well as the look of it can give rise to aesthetic reactions.”(P.14)

It is possible to draw a line between fast food and slow food, however, it is still hard to distinguish the idea of all food is art and some food is art. In my opinion, anyone can appreciate food from his or her own personal taste. For example, the foods you think delicious may be are the worst dishes others ever had.

“Modernism” can represent my point of view. As one of the theories of art came up by the author of “What is art for?” Modernism relates to the idea of “disinterested attitude” which towards the work of art. In the article “What is art for?” the author Dissanayake, E states that “Disinterest implied that viewers could appreciate any art, even the artwork of eras or cultures far removed from their own, whether or not they understood the meaning the works had for the people who made and used them. In this sense, art was universal.” (18)

1.The term paleoanthropsychobiological is coined by Dissanayake, E, the author of “What is Art For?” and it is made to describe the author’s own view of art for life’ sake. Paleoanthropsychobiological contains three main ideas of the concept of art and they are: human history, human societies, and the combination of  emotional need and effects.

2. In her points of view, making special means “particularly things that one cares deeply about or activities whose outcome has strong personal significance. ” (22) And more important, “special is different from the mundane, the everyday, the ordinary.” (22)

3. The three different theories of art throughout western European history are Modernism, Postmoderinism, and the species-centered view of art.

The Modernism theory developed in 18^th century, and the idea of art is about “a concern with elucidating principles such as taste and beauty that govern all the arts and indeed make them not simply paintings or statues but examples of art.” (P.17)

The Postmodernism theory developed “after the political calamities and barbarisms of the twentieth century, the Enlightenment and Victorian faith in human intelligence and goodness.” (P.20)

The species-centered view of art theory developed by Dissanayake, and it  “combines modernism’s proclamation that art if of supreme value and a source for heightened personal experience with postmodernism’s insistence that is belongs to everyone and is potentially all around us.”(22) More important, this theory states the significant connection between what human found important and the way they enhance the importance.

In the article “What is Art For?” the author Dissanayake, E briefly talks about the development and some significant changes of Western concept of art throughout history, and from her own view of art for life’s sake, she called it “palaeoanthropsychobiological- first, that the idea of art encompasses all of human history; second, that it include all human societies; third, that it accounts for the fact that art is a psychological or emotional need and has psychological or emotional effects.” (P.15) And she also came to develop the idea of art is helping human species survive from very early period, just as the role of art in the ritual ceremonies. Art is important, and “adopting the species- centered view of art (P.26)” can make human species better understanding art.

In the TED video, the speaker Denis Dutton introduces the Darwinian theory of beauty and he states that beauty is complicated as the variety of beautiful: “Human beings, natural landforms, works of art, and skilled human actions.” Dutton gives some examples such as Beethoven is adored in Japan and American music and movies go everywhere around the world to represent the beauty is about universal crossed and culture, aesthetics, pleasure and value. And then he points out the natural selection and sexual selection which is about the biological aspect. In his talking, the example I am interested the most is about the landscape pattern that people from world tend to be love it. With the open spaces of low grass and water, a pathway towards the distant, and wild animals and birdlife just freely involved.

People always think that the artistic beauty is exhaustively influenced by culture; however, I think culture does impacts the way artist critical thinking of art and selecting tools to make art, but not where the motivation comes from. Just like people from different places with different cultural backgrounds tend to love one typical landscape, the real passion of creating or responding art is coming from the biological selection of human species that arose in very early period and will pass it to generations and generations. My question is, if art is universal and everyone can appreciate art even without understanding what the real meaning behind it, how one can have the emotional changes just by looking or watching the art?

Reflection:

My top five values are: Family, Health, Wealth, Enjoyment, and Friendship. I had a busy day and I think all of the activities I have done today reflected my values. Today after woke up, I looked up some updates from friends and family members who are in China or in other states. After having brunch with my boyfriend, we went to the post office to pick up my package which sent from Japan. And in the afternoon, I went to studio to finish my homework while being the monitor and helping one of the intro student. In the evening I had a great dinner with some of my close friends. And when I went back home, I talked to my parents and discussed with them about their upcoming travel during Christmas. The last thing I did today was taking one tablet of Claritin since I have been suffering allergies for almost one month.

After leaving home and country for about five years, I think I really understand how important my family means to me, so I always talk to them and update with them. I put family on my top one because I see family as my motivation and I love them without any reason. Health is on the second place, just like I took medicine today I could almost do nothing when I had bad physical condition. Studying in the studio and finishing my homework is the way how I enjoy myself, because when I did what I had passion on it I do feel worth it. So enjoyment is really important to me, and I believe if I contribute my time to it I will gain money from it as well. The number five value is Friendship. I love hanging out with my friends and I could not live without friends, because I feel happy when I spend time with real good friend instead of “fake” friend.

Since I was little my parents always tell me to be integrity, positive,and doing what I really love. I think I do inherited these values from them, and the way they love me and no matter what situations I face they will always back me up let me know that family is the top thing I should always consider the most. The goals I have for myself in short term is to be graduating next year and get accepted of my BFA degree in the area of metalsmithing and jewelry. I know I have to push myself very hard to get my goals done, and time is the biggest challenging for me to be succeed.

By finished reading this week’s article, I started thinking of how I became who I am today. Is my gene making me? The society? The people who around me? Or the past experiences shaped me? I look back and realize is the way I lived and the place s where I have been to and the people who I met taught me how to see things today, and the values I chose has changed during times.

The one point from the article “A Question of Values: Six Ways We Make the Personal Choices That Shape Our Lives ” I found most interested me is “The proposition that individual human beings are programmed into their values, either by the influence of genes on personality or by social pressures, can neither be proven nor refuted.” (6) I agree with this point, but I truly believe that the influences of social pressures are more important and superior compares to genes in the terms of shaping one’s values, because different people has different evaluations system that might be formed by the society or one’s past experiences. So the way people see the world is different.

For example, culture background is part of the society pressure. Because people who come from different countries have variety standards to define “beauty”, some girls want to be pale while some want to be tan. This is not about genes but the way you desire how you look like and how the others look at you. Moreover, the environment surrounds people are another essential part and it will shape our interests on a large scale. Some guys are super fans of Lakers, while some are fans of Indiana Pacers. Your genes might be decided that you are addicted to basketball, but it doesn’t lead you to choose which team. Your family, your friends and even the city you were born could be the reason. So the society shaped our evaluation of things and our beliefs. Just like the article says, “personal evaluations and beliefs that propel us to action, to a particular kind of behavior and life.”(6)

In this blog “French artist JR and his exhibitions” posted by Clarissa Sebag- Montefiore, people who are lived in China finally had the chance to see JR’s works and involve in his project.

After arrested in China when he first worked in Shanghai, JR brought his project back this summer in 2014. JR, a French street artist who is famous by his giant black and white photography throughout the world and who had been awarded the 2011 TED prize.

I love his works because when he traveled to many places to photography different people’s faces and pasted it onto the walls and roofs and almost everywhere in the city, he let the public to wonder the stories behind it instead of telling them directly. For example, like the author said, “Last time he was in Shanghai, JR’s portraiture focused largely on the city’s elderly residents,” the irony is that he pasted the photos just on the old housing complex which is almost to be destructed. So there are always hidden message through his works and I believe that these photographs might be changing the viewer’s point of view in some ways.

By consisted on spreading the idea of “use art to turn the world inside out”, JR inspired me somehow and the way using city as an art gallery and letting public to think and exchange thoughts is what I interested in most.