» Artifact #2: Is Art Food? AAD250

Artifact #2: Is Art Food?

Objectives

Examine methods for evaluating qualities of art, such as product versus process, the differ- ence between craft and fine art, must art be archival, and what is an aesthetic reaction.
Explore the notion of food as an art-form.
Consider cultural differences in the production and consumption food.

Artifact #2

In Fabio Parasecoli’s article, “Is Food Art? Chefs, Creativity, and the Restaurant Business?” he argues and analyzes whether food should be considered art. Many food critics and chefs agree that food has increasingly gained visibility and recognition as a field or outlet where social, political, and cultural ideas and themes can exist. For these reasons, Parasecoli and others believe that food is art and at the very least there needs to be discussion on the topic. Parasecoli draws attention to two different aspects of possible connection to food being art. The first is about innovation and creativity. The other aspect that connects food and art is notion or representation of chefs as avant-garde by contemporary society. Parasecoli and other food aficionados addressed these connections between food and art by creating a panel to discuss the question, “Is Food Art?” in September of 2013.

This article and Parasecoli’s viewpoints of food being an art form have many similarities with those of this week’s readings most notably Elizabeth Telfer’s article “Food As Art”. One of Parasecoli’s main arguments about the relationship with food and art is that, “innovation and creativity are included among the traits that are most commonly attributed to a successful chef in the highest spheres of haute cuisine.” This is somewhat similar to Telfer, “There is another possible distinction between art and craft: art is original creation, whereas craft is simply carrying out an instruction…” Both Telfer and Parasecoli raise many issues and interesting points on food as an art form. Telfer sees art as an “original creation” and goes further to associate this view on art with that of food. Parasecoli believes that chefs must possess characteristics of “innovation and creativity” if they want to gain success and an elite level, haute cuisine. Based on Parasecoli and Telfer’s similar viewpoints, it is fair to say that for food to be considered art there needs to be a certain level of originality, creativity, and innovation.

Another similar idea or issue that both Parasecoli and Telfer touch in their essays is the thought of a third party: either a customer or food critic having an effect on food being art. Parasecoli goes to write; “young gifted chefs are often not too worried whether “narrow-minded customers” appreciate their work.” When it comes to food as an art form the major point to realize is that the customers are judging the food and the dishes presented to them. Not every customer will have the same experience every time with the food. Some may like certain dishes while others will not. Some customers may appreciate the food as artwork while other will not at all. Telfer also brings up this point in her essay. Telfer writes, “Admittedly there may be problems where a dish is not homogeneous enough: one dinner’s experience of the strength and blend of flavors may not match another’s.” Telfer like Parasecoli believes that every dinner dish is unique and different. Every food critic or customer will look at the food differently and thus look at the food as art differently or not at all.

Despite some of the noticeable similarities Parasecoli’s also raises many issues or ideas that are not similar to those of Telfer when it comes to food being considered art. Parasecoli believes that food should be considered art while Telfer believes that not all parts of food or the culinary process should be considered art. Telfer argues more about the certain processes during the food preparation that are not considered art. Parasecoli raises issues about the relationship between food and art and how it is embedded and represented in our society as avant-garde. Avant-garde as a term first appeared in 1910 and is defined as, “an intelligentsia that develops new or experimental concepts esp. in the arts.” Parasecoli expresses his thoughts and viewpoint on how the media and the public have created this representation of food as art through this avant-garde style. Telfer does not get into much detail or bring up the notion of the avant-garde and how this has shaped food as art. Telfer goes more into the areas of food and food preparation and what parts are considered art and what other parts are not considered art. This was one of the differences that were present between the two articles.

Parasecoli and Telfer both have similar viewpoints and raise issues regarding food as art. Both authors seem to raise the issue of how art and food need to have a certain level of originality and creativity. Additionally both authors raise the issue that food is looked at differently. The customer or food critic affects the food and how it is perceived as art. Along with the similarities of two articles there are many also differences. Parasecoli believes that food should be considered art and brings up the concept if the avant-garde and how it shapes the food and art relationship. Telfer however believes that not all parts of food or the culinary process should be considered art.

Reflection

When I gazed at this unit’s goals and objectives I was taken back by the “product versus process” goal. This was one segment of the unit I wanted to focus on and understand the most. What was considered art, the actual food the “product”or the preparation of the food the “process”? In Fabio Parasecoli’s article, “Is Food Art? Chefs, Creativity, and the Restaurant Business?” this is one of the main issues that he addresses in his writing. Additionally, Parasecoli makes references to why food should be considered an art form. This is one of the main reasons why I used this artifact in my portfolio. However, the claim that food is art is also misleading and as seen in the fast and slow food presintation there is a clear distinction between the two. Fast food is not considered art, while slow food is art.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Szq5Lj6-hOM

As well as Parasecoli, the author Telfer conveys how there are many different forms of food and food preparation that can be considered art. Telfer however draws the line and states that there are certain qualifications or guidelines that must be followed for food to be considered art. Telfer goes into much detail about how “the intent of the cook” was the key factor in determining if food can be considered art. IF the chef has some sort of emotional or cultural investment into the dish then it is fair to call it art. Telfer really helped me understand the objective of “product versus process” and for this reason I chose to write about it in the above artifact and include it in my portfolio.

Moving forward I really want to find out more ways food can be considered art. I think that I would want to focus more on Asian cuisine. Foods such as Thai or sushi. I think there are a lot of cultural influences that go into those types of food. I have been eating more sushi lately and am intrigued in the process that chefs do to create certain dishes. Also I would like to explore the sushi restaurant culture as an art form.