Food As Art Research Essay

Gopnik, Blake. “The Big Debate: Can Food Be Serious Art?” The Washington Post [Washington, DC] 23 Sept. 2009: Web. 27 Apr. 2014. <http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/09/22/AR2009092203137.html>.

 

The big debate according to Blake Gopnik is if people can take food seriously as a form of art.  The answer for Gopnik is absolutely food is a serious art.  In his article, he addresses one by one the reservations of those who are skeptical of the issue.  Starting with the fact that there is nothing left after a meal is finished.  Obviously a painting would be considered art.  After the work is complete, the painting remains and can be viewed by the world.  It does not expire or end.  However, when a chef is done preparing a meal, it is consumed and there is nothing left to admire.  Gopnik often compares food to music, saying that a song does not play forever and music is considered art.  Music ends, just like food does.  He also addresses the point that food cannot have meaning beyond sensory pleasures.  Gopnik debunks this by saying that food “can represent history, culture, ethnicity, politics, the body.  In fact, it almost always does.” (Gopnik)  Another interesting argument that he makes is that functionality should not affect people’s opinions on the subject.  Simply because food fulfills a biological need does not mean it cannot be art.  Gopnik claims that portraits are considered art, yet they served a practical need.  Functionality is not a reason alone to dismiss food as an art form.  Next, he focuses on the claim that restaurants are businesses; therefore, they are all about making money.  Gopnik says that all art makes money.  A painter has costs such as paint and a canvas.  He must sell a painting in order to make a living.  Food is no different.  Each artist must support him or herself.  Thus, there is always a bottom line regardless of if it is a restaurant, a gallery, a symphony, etc.  These are a few of the examples that Gopnik focuses on in his article.  Clearly, he believes that food should always be considered art.

Although Blake Gopnik makes convincing arguments for why food should be considered art, I believe he only considered one side.  It is much easier to convince a skeptic that a beautiful gourmet meal is art than it would be to convince him or her that fast food is art.  The fast food video portrays this type of food as businesses trying to better their bottom line.  These chains are exactly the opposite of what Gopnik attempts to address in his article.  The fast food video uses the example of McDonalds and that their meals taste the exact same allover the world.  No matter where a person orders a Big Mac, it will always taste the same.  However, slow food is all about the preparation and the ingredients that go into it.  Clearly Gopnik was referring to slow food when he said that restaurants are not all about making money.  I would agree that restaurants and chefs take their work seriously and put thought into the food that they serve.  This thought and time that goes into making a meal is what makes it special.  Conversely, fast food is about how to make the cheapest meal and sell it for the highest price possible.  In order to make a more convincing argument, Gopnik should critique fast food and why it is or is not a form of art.

One thing that Gopnik and Tefler seem to have the same opinion on is that food can and does have meaning behind it.  Tefler says in her article that food “can symbolize a way of life and traditions.  However… it does not have the same kinds of meaning that the major art forms have.” (Tefler 25)  As I mentioned before, Gopnik addresses this in his article by saying that food “can represent history, culture, ethnicity, politics, the body.  In fact, it almost always does.” (Gopnik)  Both writers seem to agree that food cannot represent another object or emotion.  Since paintings, drawings, sculptures, music, and many other forms of art can mimic feelings or other objects, it is easy to qualify them as art.  However, Tefler says that food “creates its own world of tastes and smells.” (Tefler 25)  On the same note, Gopnik says, “Does any other art form threaten its audience quite as cooking does? People may turn away in disgust from a dance or a painting, but they’ll retch and weep at certain elBulli dishes. (Waiters warn you about the most challenging ones and let you opt out.) An elBulli meal is about a tense balance of enjoyment and disgust, satiation and excess. Along with a bit of fear.” (Gopnik)  Clearly slow food cannot be representative of emotion or other objects, but it can create a new world and challenge the consumer in new ways just as art should.

Food as Art

Although there are valid arguments against my position on the topic, I believe that food is art.  Firstly, I agree with Tefler and Urmson that “art is ‘an artifact primarily intended for aesthetic consideration.’” (12) In addition, as mentioned earlier in his piece, Tefler claims that aesthetic reactions can be judged if they are “based solely on how the object appears to the senses.” (9) In the simplest explanation, since food is a sensory experience due to sight, smell, taste, feel, and the sounds of the cooking process, it is indisputable that it is aesthetically pleasing.  Furthermore, Ellen Dissanayake’s theory of paleoanthropsychobiological applies to food as well.  Food is definitely a human experience that has been present throughout all of history; therefore it embodies the paleo requirement.  It varies from culture to culture, thus making it an anthropological experience.  There is a psychological attachment to food that arguable inspires the creation of new recipes and art.  Lastly, there is a biological need for food.

 

It is true that some food is more easily identified as art than others.  A chef that designs a menu and puts together beautiful dishes is clearly an artist, but a random person slicing an apple and consuming it does not count.  There must be an aesthetic purpose behind the food creation.  Much like the slow food video, where the woman spends large amounts of time in a hot kitchen making sure to get the recipe and every detail right, food is art when labor and thought have gone into it in order to please the senses instead of simply consuming it for nutritional value.

 

Perhaps not all food is art.  As I mentioned before, anyone can prepare food, but there is a difference between simply microwaving a meal and creating a dish from scratch.  There is a labor of love that is lacking in the first instance.  Food is a craft in some circumstances because somebody can follow a recipe to create a meal, but that person is free to present it in anyway he or she wants.  That presentation is an opportunity to make the meal art.

 

What is Art For? Essay Assignment

1.  Paleoanthropsychobiological is a term originally coined by Ellen Dissanayake.  It describes the interpretation of art.  She states that “art must be viewed as an inherent universal (or biological) trait of the human species,” meaning that art “encompasses all of human history,” (paleo), it “includes all human societies,” (anthro), it “accounts for the fact that art is a psychological or emotional need and has psychological and emotional effects.” (15)

2.  Dissanayake argues that a part of human nature is to make objects, ceremonies, people, art, and many other aspects of life special.  She defines special as “something different than the mundane, the everyday, the ordinary” (22).  In regards to art, she states that “art was not for its own sake at all, but for the sake of the performance of ritual ceremonies” (22).  In order for an artist to consider his or her work art, it must be special.

3.  Modernism began in the 18th century when art began to focus more on aesthetics.  People began to believe that “there is a special frame of mind for appreciating works of art.” (17)  People also began to look at art from other eras and appreciate it for its beauty without understanding the meaning behind it.  Modernism was not only a new style of art, but also a new way of looking at it and interpreting it.

Postmodernism began around the 20th century.  Postmodernism assumes that all art can be understood and appreciated by everyone.  Instead of limiting the art experience to the privileged and highly educated, Dissanayake and postmodernism both claim that art is a human experience and it can mean different things to different people.

Greek/Medieval Times: In Greek times, art was not meant for aesthetic admiration.  The same word for art was used for fishing.  It seems as though it was more of a skill or craft.  Similarly, in Medieval times, art was for religion instead of aesthetics.  Art was not inspiring or meaningful.  It was an accurate depiction of  “the subject matter, using craftsmanlike standards of beauty, harmony, and excellence.” (16)

What is Art?

When looking at the progression of art throughout the ages and the variation of art among different cultures, it is easy to note the aesthetic differences.  The meanings and symbolism behind each style of art is a clear reflection of how each group of people viewed life.  As Ellen Dissanayake states in her piece, “In the mid-twentieth century, more elaborate and abstract formalist standards were developed in America… in order to justify abstract expressionalism” (Dissanayake 18).  Although the style had changed since earlier times, the new abstract movement captured the advancement of society towards a more truthful art scene.  For example, Dissanayke states again, “Never in question was the ‘high’ art assumption that works of art—no matter how strange they looked, or unskilled they seemed to be—were conduits of transcendent meaning, of truths of the unconscious, expressions or revelations of human concerns…” (Dissanyake 18).  This is a stark contrast to the previous religious era, in which art was meant to honor religious figures.  In the mid-twentieth century especially, art became about the modern human experience in society.

 

In addition to the different inspirations behind the various styles of paintings, another advancement in the art world is the recognition that each piece of art means something different to each individual person.  Although religious paintings clearly represent a specific story and were made for a specific purpose—to honor a specific religious figure—the progression of art and movement towards abstract art has inspired different interpretations.  Dissanayake mentions in her section about postmodernism that this movement is about the encouragement of art and individual interpretation.  Art represents the human experience.  Each human should be able to relate his or her experience back to art in a way that makes a piece more meaningful.