In the intro to the article, “Food as Art”, the author tells us that philosophers believe that food is in no shape an art; “…it cannot be an art form or produce works of art” (Tefler 1). The author focuses her argument to clarify their argument and defends her belief that food can be viewed as an art. Let alone people have a passion for the culinary arts focus so much of their time to perfect an ordinary food item or their food creation. Wouldn’t that fall into what Dennayaske defined as an art? “…an artifact that was man-made or has human involvement ” (Dennayaske 2). The author of this article, Tefler, defines art in the same way in page 2 in her article. My argument or question to her readers would be, other than food, what would you argue that isn’t art? It can be an object or process of something happening, what don’t we consider as an art?
I believe that food is definitely an aspect of art that has many artistic features, whether it be display or taste. In the radio show by Kurt Anderson along with writer Chandler Burr, “Is Smell a Sense of Noble as a Vision or Hearing”, he interviews a physicist that tells how our minds interpret smells and how we register it. I think it’s fair to say that without the scientific reasoning, once we smell something we instantly process of:
- Does it smell good?
- What does it remind us of?
- If we can distinct it, what is it?
Burr believes that we should build museums of noses, because of how important they are, which is true. I believe that the artistic feature of food has a strong reliance on the nose. It should smell good, remind us of some comfort food, and to taste the meal through smelling it. My view of food as an art, is a modernism approach. Food is a slow growing feature in art, but the appearance is shifting to modern aspects. Wouldn’t you agree? Food is very cultured along with ingredients, but the presentation is shifting towards a modern look.
Hi, Alfredo. I really agree with that art is an aspect of art because it has many artistic features. The three questions that you proposed to describe the smell process, I think that are very similar with art. If we consider food as artwork and cooking is the process of creating art, the smell of food could remind us something which is like the artworks could evoke viewer’s emotion. Artists express their emotions or opinions through artworks, similarly, the cookers deliver their emotion through the food. In addition to the smell, the food have many types of shapes and colors so it is accord with the elements of visual arts. As Telfer introduces, “it is obvious that foodstuffs can be made into visual objects which are works of art” (13). The food also include the aesthetic consideration, “many meals are intended by their cooks to be considered largely in this way- to be savored, appraised, thought about, discussed-and many eaters consider them in this way” (Telfer 14).
I absolutely agree with your notion that smell is a very unique characteristic that can apply in determining the value of food as ‘art’. As tefler stated himself, “There can be aesthetic reactions to tastes and smells” (Tefler 11). I too believe that food is art, although I still believe that there is a lot of culture in the style of food created, even today. Of course for the regular food items it has a modern look to it, but I think it makes a food item that much more appealing when you knows its cultural significance and its history, at least that’s how it is for me. I think that the more cultural an item is the more aesthetic it can be to the viewer at hand. The modern look in itself is a great look as well, but the cultural and unique significance to specific food at hand can make it very distinguished and appreciation.