This week the reading was, Introduction: Body Alteration, Artistic Production, and the Social World of Tattooing, by C., Sanders.

I often find myself “people watching” when I go out. As I do this, I often notice myself making assumptions about people based on their appearance and their actions. Today I sat on campus and watched a few people. The first one was a girl reading a book on a bench on the corner of campus. Based solely on her looks and dress, it seemed like maybe she had an artistic style. The fact that she was reading a book alone seemed like she had an enjoyment for literature (another form of art) and was a person content of being alone or having alone time. After she had sat for a while I saw her walk over to the bike rack and head off on her vintage style bike. It was one that is a popular style around campus, so I thought she might be someone who is not only artistic, but also likes what is trendy at the time.

Another girl I saw had on a dress and was walking with a few friends all wearing black dresses. They had heels and fine jewelry on (so I assumed they were not headed off to class or to the library). I immediately thought that they might be sorority girls. Their outfits made me think that they were obviously going somewhere (so I assumed they would be social). The girl talking on the phone also gave me the impression that they were socially active. Assuming they were in a sorority, I would guess the girls came from a somewhat higher economic background (as I know sororities can be expensive). I often find myself associating groups of girls with sororities and the Greek life. Not to say that they are all the same, but this most likely meant that they were going to a mixer or some type of event.

The last person I saw was a guy lacing up his shoelaces and getting ready for a run. He had his athletic clothes on, his dog on a leash, and was getting ready to take off. He seemed like an active and fit person who must enjoy physical activity as well as the nice weather. He had his dog with him, which made me think that he may appreciate companionship and animals. He also had what seemed to be a mostly Nike attire. From the looks of it, I would guess that he is someone who takes his working out more seriously than others. While Nike is a popular brand many people like (which may be why he was wearing it), he was in the athletic gear. He also had on Asics running shoes. I am a runner, so I knew that was a popular style for a running shoe. That also gave me the indication that he was someone who must work out often.

All of these observations showed me how much you think you can tell about someone based on appearance alone. I tend to take into consideration my values, my knowledge (what is “in style”), and how I was raised when I am viewing others. This may be a good or bad thing, as I know that I cast judgment at times when I often should not. Looking at someone doesn’t tell you who he or she are as a person or what their story is, it is only a snap-shot of who they may be in our own opinion. I know that I definitely use my own experience and thoughts when assuming what other people may be like.

I found and read the article, Food as art: It looks almost too good to eat by Jane Brocket.

This article describes the progression of a movement of “food from art and food as art”. There is an idea that artists and designers are now moving into using their creative skills in original recipes and dishes. Brocket describes a blogger, Megan Fizell who uses her authentic dishes to not only being accurate and savoury, but also oto create a fabulous geometric, colourful, and “wowing” creation. Brocket explains how, “..sponge, icing, chocolate and food colouring are the kitchens creator’s media, just as clay, stone and paint are for the sculptor or painter. In fact, there is little in the artist’s studio that cannot be substituted in the kitchen”. An equally creative , contemporary, fashionably stark aesthetic is the series of Fictitious Dishes, by Dinah Fried. Fried is a graphic designer and photographer who takes famous literary meals and turn then into artfully arranged pictures for her website. Many of the pictures and designs are shot from angles, which make them look like artful paintings. Brocket explains food as art by, “Taking art and literature as inspiration means no rules, and the freedom to express your culinary creativity as you please, according to your vision and the contents of your cupboard”.

I found some similarities between what Brocket described and what Telfer described as food being seen as art. In Brocket’s article, her main points to be made are those that describe food as art in a visually pleasing sense. I agree with many of her points made, but I also think there should be more emphasis on other factors such as the aesthetically pleasing senses of taste and smell that Telfer touches on in the article we read this week. He gives the definition of a “work of art” by saying, “If something is a work of art, then its maker or exhibitor intended it to be looked at or listened to with intensity, for its own sake”. I think that Telfer and Brocket would agree on that definition. Brocket and her other references that she cited throughout her article, create their food in ways that resemble art and become appealing and appreciated by consumers.

Brocket focuses on the appealing nature of food and how it can look great through the colour, texture, and “wow” factor. Telfer explains this in an interesting sense. He explains, “..if I like the way cottage cheese contrasts in flavor and tecture with rye bread, my reaction is aesthetic, whereas if I am pleased with the combination because it is low-calorie and high-fibre, it is not”. He explains how we think aesthetic reactions have to do with intensity, but aesthetic reactions don’t always involve actively paying attention to or concentrating on something. Some aesthetic reactions involve being impressed by something unexpected or short-lived. Brocket creates these examples as many of the artists and creators make images with their food creations in order to catch our attention.

I think an interesting dilemma when considering food as art has to do with a difference between art and craft. Brocket has many artists who create their images through the presentation of their art. Telfer describes the difference between art and craft as, “A cook who creates a recipe is a creative artist. If a chef gives directions to an assistant or someone who prepares it, then they are technicians rather than artists”. When considering this idea and Brocket’s examples. I wonder if those creators are more of the technicians than the actual artist who made the recipe. While some examples Brocket gave did create their own recipes, others just made them appealing to the viewer and consumer.

This topic of food as art has me troubled in some areas. It is difficult to decide which “titles” are necessary in terms of who can qualify as an artist when using food as a tool to express art. I think there are many situations in which art can be shown through food (whether it be presentation or an aesthetic reaction we have to another sense brought on by food). I think Brocket describes food in an art sense with great openness. She illustrates how art should have no boundaries for creativity and we should have the opportunity to express our culinary creativity in whichever way we please.

Brocket, J. (2012, August 3). Food as art: It looks almost too good to eat [on-line newspaper]. Retrieved from http://www.theguardian.com/lifeandstyle/2012/aug/03/food-as-art-design-literature

The reading we had this week was, “Food as Art” by, E. Telfer.

Telfer says, “We naturally associate the word “aesthetic” with the arts, but we can also speak of an aesthetic reaction to natural things such as a beautiful landscape, or to man-made, non-art objects such as pieces of machinery”. I believe this to be true with food as you see this in many restaurants. If you went out for dinner and your plate was sloppy and thrown together without any form of presentation would that make you want to eat it? Some places may not take the time, and in those cases I would never consider those creations as “works of art”. The recipe may have been an artful skill, but the presentation would not be (in my opinion). If you walked into a restaurant that was filled with an unpleasing smell would you want to eat there? The taste of the food and drink as well as the look can give an aesthetic reaction.

There are considerable complexities when deciding if something constitutes as art. Telfer expands Urmson’s definition of “work of art” by saying, “If something is a work of art, then its maker or exhibitor intended it to be looked at or listened to with intensity, for its own sake”. So something may constitute as a work of art if it is meant to be looked at with intensity. One difficulty I have with this is that sometimes things may not be made for the purpose of art or intensity but then become viewed as such. One example was a church building that was not created as a work of art, but now is treated as one (Telfer, 12)

The struggle I have is determining where to “draw the line”. How should we determine which food deserves the title of “art”? One example is that I do not see fast food as art. I think as the food presentation explains, that “slow food” takes more time and dedication for its product. When thinking about which theory of art best describes how I feel, I find myself considering art in the Postmodernism: Art as Interpretation sort of way. Dissanayake explains this as, “…Interpreting it according to their individual and cultural sensibilities…hence taste and beauty and art for art’s sake are constructions that express class interests”. I can also see food as art in a species-centered type of way as we view aesthetic feelings as a behavior. Everyone feels differently about things, and it is how you feel and view certain things that can make them art in your own eyes. In this view it is the things that are viewed as “special” that we could consider a work of art (whether it be an activity, a landscape, or food).

This weeks reading was, “What is art for?” by E. Dissanayake.

Reading through this article I found myself agreeing with points from different eras in terms of art, but then accepting the progression and species-centered view of art. Art is a word that can be used somewhat loosely as it is seen in many different aspects of life (sports, poetry, physical art, imagery, medieval times-religion). As art has become more esoteric and outrageous, the role of the critic has been shown to be more helpful in the reception of works of art. This is seen in modernism as Dissanayake states, “…it seems inevitable that an “institutional” theory of art arose to explain what art is.” (pg. 18) Directors, editors, art critics, gallery owners (the list goes on), all determine the status of art and place more restrictions on what a true “work of art” is. It seems to restrict the limits of art and take away from the freedom of art and expression (as seen in the past). Dissanayake continues to explain, “Implicit in this account is a recognition that what is said (or written) about a work is not only necessary to its being art, but it is indeed perhaps more important than the work itself. There is no appreciation of art without interpretation.” (pg. 19). It seems sad that in order for art to be accepted, it must be reviewed and then critiqued in some way to determine whether it should be appreciated.

Post modernists show how artists (just like other individuals) do not see the world in some sort of “privileged” or better/truer way than others. They just interpret it in their own individual ways. Dissanayake says, “Art is not universal, but conceptually constructed by individuals…” (pg. 19). One issue with the post modernism is that, “If everything is equally valuable, is anything worth doing?” (Dissanayake, p. 21).

Modernist and postmodernist views have many contradictions and one way to resolve those is through a broader view. A species centered view combines the modernism view (value and personal experience) with the postmodernism view (that it belongs to everyone and is potentially “all around us”. This is done by thinking of it in terms of a human behavior (pg.22). Dissanayake explains how “art” is usually referred to as an object (paintings, pictures, sculptures, dances, etc.), but works of art are the result of an artist’s behavior. When art is regarded as making something special, we can see it in many different forms (things we cook, an outfit we wear, rituals in everyday life). Dissanayake says, when we look at art this way, we are making the things we care about special. (pg.24). Denis Dutton also explained in the video how this idea is portrayed through things of beauty whether it be human beings, landscapes, works of art, or skilled human action. I agree with this view of art. It does not mean standards get lost along the way because there will always be critics. I just believe that this view leaves the least amount of restrictions on the term “art”. There are so many beautiful things surrounding us and I think they all deserve the right to be claimed as art in the opinion of the viewer/artist and how we feel as individuals.

Listed above are what I find to be my top priorities.

I do many activities throughout the day that may reflect my values while I hardly even notice it. Today for example, I went to class (where we worked on a group assignment), had a conversation on the phone with a friend, caught up on some reading from class/did homework, went to the store, and then went to work. My group assignments and social work aspect represent my values of community, leadership, personal development, and service. My various activities such as talking on the phone with a friend, correspond to my values of friendship, loyalty, and also wisdom. My classwork and homework shows my values of personal accomplishment, personal development, independence, and creativity.

Some belief patterns that I learned from my family I have carried over and applied in my own life. My parents have always emphasized the importance of family and also good relationships in general. I have made this a high priority in my life to not only keep relationships stable, but also find appropriate social situations to get involved in throughout my life. A value I also attribute to relationships is loyalty. I find it important to stay committed and trustworthy to people who share my beliefs and values. My parents have also modeled for me the importance of wisdom. Within this value is the topic of religion. I have grown up in a very spiritually connected family and personal growth as well as growth in my faith and beliefs are of very high importance to me. While I have taken many belief patterns from my role models, there are some belief patterns that are no longer valid, but still have a hold on my thinking. These difficulties are ones, which trouble me when it comes to finding a career pattern/ lifestyle that is both enjoyable, but also financial beneficial. Although my parents have never emphasized wealth over happiness, they have displayed a successful lifestyle, which I admire very much. The way that I have been raised and the people I have been privileged enough to surround myself with, have given me extreme motivation for my future. I not only want success for myself, but I also want a fulfilling life in many aspects (enjoyment in my career, involvement relationships, and a stability through income to provide). I hope to complete my graduate program and pursue a job in my field of study. Fortunately, after my Master’s degree, I will have a wide range of job opportunities and fields in which I can practice. The difficulties I may face with my goals in the future are the location of my graduate program, the cost and duration of my program, and the location of where I will want to work after. Through these different stages and choices in my life, I will need to rely on my values and beliefs to reach my goals.

For this week, Our first reading was, “A Question of Values” by H. Lewis.

This article caught my attention in many ways, as well as it made me think about what values truly are. Within the reading, Lewis describes how we may choose our values. It is explained that one way our values may come about is through our inherited instincts rather than values we freely choose. It is stated, “But do values, in the sense of freely chosen values, truly exist? Are human beings instead driven by the inherited instincts, instincts that we like to dress up within the term values, so that we can pretend there is a measure of choice in the process, when it is really all programmed into our genes?” I disagree with this idea. While values can be very complicated and the meaning/term may be used more loosely, they are still a part of our individuality. I believe that the values of an individual can be shaped and chosen through time and are not a quality that is inherited. Some characteristics may be inherited, which then may alter one’s values. Although this may be true, values are not necessarily something inherited in a directly specific form such as eye color or a gene for height. The inherited characteristics that may influence our values could be, personality traits, social activity, and also the way we mature and develop as individuals. I know there have been many situations in my life from high school to college that have caused me to reflect on my values. These various situations caused me to think about different perspectives, decisions, and what I may consider to be right or wrong. The people we surround ourselves with, as well as the environments we live and work in can all shape, alter, influence, or even change our values.

Throughout the article, I found difficulty with the basic modes in which we form our values. Maybe I have never given it much thought before, but it is difficult to decide how we may arrive at our values. Lewis explains that, “…human beings cannot separate the way they arrive at values from the values themselves.” He continues to elaborate by explaining how our experiences, emotions, logic, authority, and “science” are all mental modes or techniques that help us form our values. By using certain ones over the others, they become more dominant for an individual. An example from Star Wars was explained in the article. The idea of one mode for values was illustrated by the choice of emotion when Luke is told to “trust his instincts”. Lewis then goes on to explain that these characters are fictional and it is not realistic that many people could use one primary mode in order to form values. I agree with this logic. I think that a person must rely on a combination of modes but may choose to emphasize certain ones given the circumstances. This is what makes human values so complicated and complex. This is why a framework for sorting through values and finding a way to focus our values is so essential. I have come to agree with the fact that values are extremely difficult to explain in terms of how they are chosen, and how we use certain values within particular areas of our lives. This is why I think our values depend on a framework that relies on our experience as well as the specific situations we find ourselves in.