I believe that food could be considered as art. In my definition of art, everything could be seen as art and art is a necessary activity for human. As Ellen Dissanayake argued, “art is a normal and necessary behavior of human beings that like talking, experience, playing, working, socializing, learning, loving and nurturing should be encouraged and developed in everyone” (Dissanayake, 26). Eating also is a ‘normal and necessary behavior’ of human beings so food is art.

Foods have many kinds of colors, tastes, shapes, materials and smells. Especially, color, shape and material accord with the elements of visual art. As Telfer mentioned, “it is obvious that foodstuffs can be made into visual objects which are works of art” (Telfer, 13). Traditionally, the definition of art is “a thing intended or used wholly or largely for aesthetic consideration” (Telfer, 14). No matter cooking or eating food, both of the chef and eater would take some aesthetic consideration because the food that is delicate in visual can increase people’s appetite. Just as Telfer described, “many meals are intended by their cooks to be considered largely in this way- to be savoured, appraised, thought about, discussed-and many eaters consider them in this way”. Of course, if people just eat food for the basic live they maybe would not care the appearance of food so they do not think food is art. The special aesthetic consideration make some food different with ordinary food, and this feature of chef could accord with artist, as Dissanayake mentioned in her ‘making special’ argument, “What artists do, in their specialized and often driven way, is an exaggeration of what ordinary people also do, naturally and with enjoyment – transform the ordinary into the extra-ordinary” (Dissanayake, 25).

Overall, I suggest that food is art because everything could be art and food have the characteristics of visual art and aesthetics.