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).