I don’t think I’ve ever had aesthetic admiration towards a meal before, or if I have I didn’t recognize it as that at the time. Elizabeth Tefler, the author of this article brought up non food examples that I thought were interesting and made me think back to the times I had those experiences as well- seeing Niagara Falls for the first time or getting into a warm shower. I kept asking myself, did I have aesthetic admiration for either one of those things in the moment? Niagara Falls, being the more extravagant seems it would be the more aesthetically pleasing of the two things just because there are sights, sounds and even the feeling of the mist coming off the Falls if you get close enough. Now knowing how Tefler defines aesthetic admiration, “characterized as non-neutral, non-instrumental, having a certain intensity and often accompanied by judgments for which the judgers claim a kind of objectivity,” (pg 11). I would say that after seeing Niagara Falls you definitely have aesthetic admiration for the beautiful work of nature.

As far as considering food as art, I initially thought that this was a current cultural obsession; you can’t scroll through your Instagram feed without seeing what so and so had for brunch. But after reading Tefler’s article it seems like food has been art all along, or it has at least had the capability to fall under the category for a while. Here’s my question; can art be considered food for everyone? Recently a friend of mine suffered a bad concussion, which took away her sense of smell, losing your sense of smell affects your sense of taste. So, for people who have no sense of smell, would they only consider food as art if it were merely aesthetically pleasing to the eye? This is a strange case but think of those who have lost their sight too, would they only consider food as art if it merely tasted amazing?

 

Tefler, 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.