Artifact Three – Is Food Art?

Objective:

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

During this chapter , I explored the qualities of the culinary industry that mirror that of the art industry. I looked at what properties of food are artistic, which are similar to the business aspect of art, and what elements of food make it different from traditional forms of art.

Artifact:

In an article for the Huffington Post, Fabio Parasecoli discusses the similarities between the culinary industry and the art industry to support an argument that food is now an emerging artistic mode. The high-end restaurant business has adopted a patron and investor system that is modeled after the art business. Inside this relationship, chefs are also expected to keep themselves on the cutting edge of the business, impressing patrons and critics with “dishes and menus that stimulate and surprise them” (Parasecoli, 2013). Because of this effort to keep their dishes novel, the chefs of this generation have begun an avant-garde movement for food, much like the avant-garde artistic movement that was coined in 1910. Behind the success of this avant-garde-like movement, food has transformed into an art, placing more emphasis on the aesthetic pleasure of the experience of eating rather than the usefulness of food.

In her essay, “What is art for?” Ellen Dissayunake shows how artistic movements, where new artists challenged previous conventions, helped define and evolve physical and performance art (1991, p.3-6). The avant-garde movement that Parasecoli identifies in the culinary industry seems to be akin to the rejection of usefulness that came with the beginning of the modernist movement in the 18th century. Just as these artists rejected the notion of art as a tool for religion and societal needs and instead, began to pursue an idea of “art for art’s sake” (Dissayunake, 1991, p.4), so too has this movement of chefs moved past regarding food as a tool for nourishment, and instead they pursued food for food’s sake. And, according to Elizabeth Telfer, art must be considered “in abstraction from its usefulness” (2002, p.19). Because these chefs have rejected usefulness altogether, focusing more on creativity and style in their menus, then this type of analysis can be applied and the food can be considered a mode of art.

Still, Parasecoli’s classification of the current culinary industry suggests that food as art is a relatively new thing. These chefs, who are pushing their craft forward into a publically recognized art form, are developing an art business as much as they are exploring their craft. This is the part of the argument that Telfer does not touch on in her essay. Parasecoli makes sure to point out that chefs have an incentive to be experimental with their ingredients and menus, which can “keep them on the cutting edge and ensure coverage from the press, TV, and Internet” (2013). This sounds very similar to the art industry, and by how they compare in business, it is easier to compare food and other arts in terms of their quality. As Parasecoli points out, there is an entire field for food criticism. If the industry is so delicate and interpretive that it requires critics, then it must have the same qualities that define the art industry.

Although Parasecoli does not spend much focus on the specifics in innovation seen within the culinary industry, he does compare the general creative qualities of chefs to that of other artists. He notes that new chefs are often inconsiderate of ‘narrow-minded customers’ who do not understand the innovative style of their menus (2013). I cannot help but see the similarities between the chefs Parasecoli describes and experimental artists in other modes. In this case, if he creates like an artist, acts like an artist, and works like an artist, it seems the only conclusion is that these chefs are artists.

Where Parasecoli observes the business of the food industry and Telfer spends most of her article attempting to disprove arguments that food is not art, the piece that does the best job of truly illustrating the artistry that goes into making food is the short video presentation, “Slow Food.” In it, the narrator lists the attention to detail required for a mother and son artisanal team to make crepes that are unable to be replicated. When the narrator describes the mixture of ingredients that can only be found in this one area and how they blend together to form a dish that is authentically creative and personal, it sounds like how artists can be identified by their color scheme and brush strokes (“Slow Food”).

Each of these articles uses a different element of the art process to link the culinary industry to other art forms. Still, put together, the reader can see how similar the creation of food is to the creation of any other work of art. Food is going through the infancy of its existence as art, but chefs are continuing to push the envelope and find new ways to express themselves through food, and as this continues, food will continue to evolve as an art form.

Dissanayake, E. (1991). What is art for? In K. C. Caroll (Ed.). Keynote adresses 1991 (NAEA Convention), (pp.15-26). Reston, VA: National Art Education Association.

Huette, S. (Producer). (2009). Slow Food [Video file]. Retrieved from http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Szq5Lj6-hOM

Parasecoli, F. (2013, August 29). Is Food Art? Chefs, Creativity, and the Restaurant Business? Huffington Post. Retrieved from http://www.huffingtonpost.com/fabio-parasecoli/food-art_b_3830791.html

Telfer, E. (2002). Food as art. In Neill, A. & Ridley, A (Eds.), Arguing About Art: Contemporary Philosophical Debates (2 ed., pp. 9-27). New York: Routledge.

Reflection:

This chapter was particularly interesting for me because I have always felt like there was an artistic aspect to food, and upon doing research for these assignments, I feel like food is the next big art movement to reach the public consciousness. Food is a form of art, because like art, food creates an aesthetic experience. The Slow Food Presentation shows the amount of craft that goes into the creation of food, and when people experiment with food and the result works, we see a final product that is novel, creative, and critically acclaimed. When a work of art succeeds, we get a pleasurable and meaningful sensory experience out of it. Whether this comes from our taste buds or our witness of physical art, the result is the same.

I was particularly interested with the way that food could be looked at using a paleoanthropsychobiological approach (Dissayunake, 1991, 1). “Slow Food” gives particular attention to the anthropological and biological aspects of the creation of food. Food is unique to the places it comes from and the cultures that produce it. It has cultural meaning and aesthetic meaning. For example, a birthday cake represents years of human culture. Why do we attribute cake with celebration? Why do we decorate with candles and with icing? I think it is because it is a way of expressing ourselves artistically, and when we eat the cake, we have a celebratory aesthetic experience, just like in art.

As I continue to look into the role of food as art, I think my main concern will be the process of determining the artistic qualities of every dish I encounter. Real life application of the chapter seems to be the best way for me to continue understanding the art of food. What kinds of food do I think are art and which can I not look at “in abstraction from its usefulness” (Telfer, 2002, 19).