Art, Culture and Class: The Inescapable Art of Food
January 29, 2014
Food preparation, like painting or writing, involves human creativity and thus, is an art form. In its very definition, food is for human nourishment, human sustenance, or simply human enjoyment. Therefore, the art of food falls under Dissanayake’s Renaissance theory. In the description of this human-centered art theory she states “…there is no abstract concept of ‘art’, everyone may be an artist…arts are invariably and inseparably part of ritual ceremonies that articulate, express, and reinforce a group’s deepest beliefs and concerns” (21). Food is a very human concern and need. It is also one that is a constant in the daily life of every individual.
However, depending on income level and access to resources, different classes of individuals have different abilities to play with the aesthetics of food as an art form. For example, lower income individuals who have limited food, or have no control over the types of food available to them are less able to incorporate aesthetics into their cooking styles. Conversely, wealthier individuals have more freedom and creativity with food because they have more access to it and have the freedom to include less nourishing foods into their cooking styles for the sake of aesthetics. However, Tefler (2002) argues against a direct link between aesthetics and art stating, “Not all objects that can give rise to aesthetic reactions are works of art. A work of art is by definition a man-made thing, even if the human involvement need consist of no more than putting a natural object in a gallery and giving it a title” (12). While individuals with less access to food may not have the resources to create aesthetically pleasing food, it remains closely knit into culture, an artistic aspect of human existence. Different cultures have diverse ways of cultivating, preparing, displaying, and even eating food. Therefore, all people interact with food in a way that is artistic, because individuals cannot deny their own culture in their food preferences and cooking styles.
4 Responses to “Art, Culture and Class: The Inescapable Art of Food”
January 31st, 2014 at 6:38 pm
I enjoyed the light that you brought into the topic discussing different income levels and access to resources that all families encounter. You also mention the connection between income level and culture. While I do agree that food can be considered art, Tefler discusses the distinction between art and craft, “There is another possible distinction between art and craft: art is original creation, whereas craft is carrying out an instruction, following a convention or employing a technique.” (Tefler 15) While people of different cultures have varies ways on how to prepare food, would that not be classified more as a craft and not as art? Another aspect in the reading is a quote from Oscar Wilde, “All art is quite useless.” (Tefler 18) Food is essential to all human beings in order to survive, in Wilde’s definition, food, as art would not be classified as art. How would you argue the definition by Wilde discussing why food is useful but is still considered art? You make the connection between the idea that all people interact in a way that is artistic, because one can not deny one’s culture. I thought that idea is very interesting, but what happens if someone does deny their own culture, because I have seen it happen before, would their food preference and cooking styles still be considered art?
January 31st, 2014 at 10:26 pm
Hi, CJB
I always enjoy reading your post as you always bring up the new idea I have not thought about. This time, I like your idea of connected food art with the different class of people. In general, people with higher income level will gain the more access to some expensive food, such as white truffle and wagyu beef. On the other hand, people did not have such access for those expensive foods, but their creativities on food might be beyond the richer classes.
The best example I can provide is the New Year’s Eve dinner in China. It is the most important and sumptuous dinner in the whole year. The richer classes might just go to the best restaurants, and order the most expensive dishes for the whole families, while people with low income classes will cook and invite families to eat at their home. I consider it is the best part of the New Year Eve because even though all dishes use only simple and inexpensive material, but they also have great look and taste and the meaning of each dish is also important in our culture. In most case, we will have rice cake, fish, a lot of kinds of meat and seafood. We will have one bowls of rice cakes for stepping on the higher place in your career or studying; the fish would not be eaten completely for there will be something left at the year end. Some clever cooks even make some egg dumpling, which is like gold ingots, indicating you will become richer and richer and so on. Thus, I did not agree with the statement of “While individuals with less access to food may not have the resources to create aesthetically pleasing food”. As the Tefler cited words of Prall, the philosopher agree with food as art, (21): “Like all sense presentations, smells and tastes can be pleasant to perception, can be dwelt on in contemplation, have specific and interesting character, recognizable and rememberable and objective, they offer an object, that is, for sustained discriminatory attention”. As long as people can make delicious food with great look, which all can be considered as arts. There is nothing related to access to the food material.
February 2nd, 2014 at 5:33 pm
I liked your personal story about Chinese New Year. The beautiful explanation provided support against my claim that it is more challenging to create aesthetically pleasing food with a low income. You illustrated a dinner, which serves as a great example in which that is not the case. I was more generally referring to “fluff” ingredients that aren’t necessarily nutritious like exotic flowers as a garnish on a dish. However, this is a traditional and conventional approach to art rather than a more inclusive approach. Whereas you mention the other senses involved in aesthetics.
Dissanayake also remarks on how cultural background plays into art. As you mention, part of the beauty of food is that it reflects the beauty of the culture. Dissanayake states that we, “…do not see the world in any singularly privileged or objectively truthful way, but rather interpret it according to their individual and cultural sensibilities” (19). A cultural understanding, therefore, adds another level of meaning and depth to a dish.
February 1st, 2014 at 1:45 pm
You bring up an interesting point regarding the role of wealth in art. I believe there is some truth in you belief that wealth creates the need for aesthetics, while being poor limits that need. The main idea is that as you become wealthier, your options increase. When your options increase, then your taste for aesthetics will rise, and there will be more of a need to be wowed. However, I will disagree with you on one point. Though impoverished people have fewer options, they still have a need for aesthetics in food. Telfer said, “…if we react favourably to a play because it will earn a lot of money for us, because it teaches a fine moral lesson, or because it is a successful venture for a playwright we know, our reaction is not aesthetic. Our reaction is aesthetic, in many simple cases, if it is based solely on how the object appears to the senses.” (Telfer, 9) This quote can be connected with food by implying that it is not aesthetic if the primary purpose of eating and contemplating is to not be hungry, or to fulfill a nutritional requirement. I believe this may be the case for some people, but even lower class people will contemplate which type of food to eat based on how it looks. They still know what appealing food looks like, and know what it doesn’t look like. Their palette may not be as refined as a wealthy individual, but they still can make a legitimate observation.
I’ll use my life as an example. I don’t come from a family of great wealth, and may not be as refined aesthetically as many other people. Let’s use steak as an example. I haven’t eaten a ton of amazing steak during my life, but I believe I could tell the difference between a good steak and a bad steak just by looking at it. However, an interesting part of the whole aesthetic experience could be the restaurant itself. If you go to a cheap steakhouse, you will immediately have lower expectations, but if you go to an expensive steakhouse you will expect greatness. If there a certain amount of bias involved in aesthetics within food as art? Absolutely, and I think it would be interesting to look into this subject more. Anyway, I know I went a little bit off-track, but my main point is that while lower class individuals have fewer resources to explore food as aesthetics, they still care and are cognizant of the aesthetics involved in food.
Source:
Telfer, E. (2002). Food as Art. In Neill, A. & Riley, A. (eds.) Arguing About Art: Contemporary Philosophical Debates (2nd ed., Chap. 2). New York, NY: Routledge.