Food is something that our world considers necessary for human existence, whereas art is often seen as a luxury. And yet those who work in either the sectors of food or the arts (whether it be artists and farmers, patrons and chefs, or arts enthusiasts and foodies) seem to be working along parallel lines to address issues that we face in our modern world. The arts, including painting, sculpture, installation, dance and music, are in part about creating a sensory experience—something for the audience to see, feel or hear. And perhaps more than any other discipline, food has the ability to appeal to all of our senses—a combination of colors, textures, crunches, smells and tastes goes into the making of a meal, and the selection and transformation of those elements is creative. When a creative, sensory form also has the capacity to express philosophies, inspire multiple interpretations, conjure narratives and/or allude to complex meanings, it is art. Food can be crafted with artistry; convey meaning; be a vehicle or inspiration for some of humanity’s better qualities. Therefore, food is art.
In last weeks reading, “What is Art For?”, Ellen Dissanayake says “Art is not universal…”(Dissanayake 19). This, to me, is the perfect quote to reiterate that food I indeed an art form. By are not being bound by specific guidelines, it can be identified as many different things to many different people; its meaning is not universal and food being an art form is subjective. In my mind, art is a form of expression, and what people make for food is a form of art, whether it is making a wedding cake, having a thanksgiving feast, or just making top-ramen for dinner. By not being universal, food has unlimited potential for expression and uniqueness. Each food item produced is bound to be different from another.
Elizabeth Tefler in this weeks reading, “Food as Art” states, “a work of art by definition [is] 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” (Tefler 12) I completely agree and I think food is legitimate form of art because it is a manner of expression, it can be critiqued critically in more than one way, and also can be extremely unique.
This is Art! Yummmmm!
I agree with you that food is art, the reason that I believe that, is because many people can look at it and they either see it as art or they don’t. It has a very similar effect on people that other forms of art do. Even though some people may not see it as art, that doesn’t mean that it isn’t art, it just means that they can’t see past the fact that it is food. The same goes for paintings, many people can see the picture that is painted before them, but they do not understand the meaning or the reason that they picture was painted and displayed. However, the artist or chef that creates the food dish is creating the dish because it is beautiful and they want someone to experience it. You can experience a painting by simply looking at it, however, to truly experience food, one must not only look at it, but they must also smell it and taste it. This way food can apply to all of our senses as you were saying, and that is an experience within itself.
Hi Anna!
Thank you for you comment . I’m glad you feel the same way. Food definitely should be considered art, but I want to state that although I posted a delicious picture of an in-n-out meal and stated it as art, many may think it is only art for the taste buds. Aesthetically, not so much. Normally, people go to restaurants because they are hungry for food, not to appeal to our aesthetic sense. That is some find it hard to say that food in general is art itself. I want to know if you think the likes of in-n-out, or McDonalds can be considered art?
Again I think food is legitimate form of art because it is a manner of expression, it can be critiqued critically in more than one way, and also can be extremely unique. It also can appeal to all of our senses which is awesome to me!