Objectives
- 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.
- Explore the notion of food as an artform.
- Consider cultural differences in the production and consumption food.
Original Post
click here to see original page
In Crystal Neely’s article “The Significance of Food in Culture: Is Taste an Art Form”, she encompasses many of the questions and objections surrounding the argument that food should not be labeled as a legitimate form of art. Neely does an incredible job structuring this argument and by responding to those arguments with her theory that food is in fact an art form, while at the same time supporting her reasoning with other professionals and philosophical viewpoints. Neely believes that “food is an important part of everyday life and the emotional role that it plays in informing our reactions to what we eat makes it essential to consider food art just as we would art that is evaluated with any of the other senses” (Neely 1). She responds to objections such as what actually is the piece of art when food is being considered, or the objection that food is considered functional and art should not be functional at all. Additionally, the article discusses the idea of aestheticism and how it relates to food, and therefore as a result of the concept of art.
Food has been an integral part of every person’s life since the existence of man. It is a bare necessity to live and a necessary component for our bodies. As Dissanayake said in her article “What is Art for?”, “art must be viewed as an internal universal trait of the human species, as normal and natural as language, sex, sociability, aggression, or any other characteristics of human nature” (Dissanayake 1). Over the generations, food has taken on an increasing amount of importance in our culture. I believe that culture in the late 20th century and the current 21st century has redefined food to be a culturally sophisticated component to our every day lives. However, as author Crystal Nelly points out, food seems to go about unappreciated too often. If we reflect on what the importance and impact food has on our lives, we would realize that it “reflects our lifestyle, culture, preferences and beliefs” (Neely 1). Additionally, there are hundreds of thousands of people across our nation that have aesthetic reactions that turn into emotional responses when they come across certain foods. For example, a specific dish or type of food has the ability to bring back warm and loving memories of family, friends, or loved ones for people who encounter them. I believe that it is nearly impossible to argue that food does not have this type of ability, and that food does have the power to allow people to experience an aesthetic experience. In Elizabeth Teller’s article, she states that many philosophers agree that although food and drink can give off aesthetic reactions, they still do not constitute a form of art. These philosophers believe that a “work of art is ‘an artifact primarily intended for aesthetic consideration’” (Telfer 12). This statement would make the argument that food is a not a work of art completely invalid. This also goes against the widely viewed opinion that music is most definitely a work of art. Music is by no means an ‘artifact’, but it does primarily intend to give off aesthetic experiences. As culturally integrated as music is, so is food; and, as artistic as music is, so is food. With how important food is to our lives and how important it has become to our cultural overtime, the aesthetic experiences that it gives off to people exposes itself as a work of art. Like Neely stated in her article, “art is an object created with intent to give rise to an aesthetic experience and which in some case successfully achieves this objective” (Neely 2).
Both Elizabeth Teller and Crystal Neely go deep into the question of whether or not the recipe or the dish itself is the work of art that we are trying to support and argue. A dish is duplicated over and over again, whereas the recipe is the hardcopy manual for those dishes. An objection rises stating that “there is no way for an exact experience to be duplicated thus no way for the art to be reevaluated” (Neely 4). However, Neely argues with the concept of music once again. Musical composition is a form of art not from the written notes on the page itself, but the actual performance based on those notes on the page. However, each musical performance is not identical to one another. This is the same for a specific dish made over and over again for one single recipe. I believe that each time you analyze or experience a painting, a piece of a music, or even a sculpture, your experience will never be identical to the last time you experienced it.
In conclusion, there are fundamentally two components to art. The first of which is aesthetic experiences and human emotion. Without this, no one would respond to works of art the way they do, and would result in the human species not identifying art for what it is. Food gives off emotional responses, brings people together in society, and allows us to respond aesthetically to its taste and smell. The second component is detail orientation. Without detail, art would not have the aesthetic pleasure that it does without it. Food falls underneath both of these categories that make it a legitimate form of art. With its ability to connect with our minds, memories, and emotions, there is no reason to not label food as a form of art. It’s one of the most needed and desired things in the world.
Reflection:
From this artifact, I realized even if I told art is necessary in life. People should know what represent art in life instead of everywhere. Especially the research for the food – people must needed thing to live. Now, I know the relationship between art and food is connecting closely and represent each other. The aesthetic reaction which is the reaction of art helps me to distinguish the food between “slow” with emotional and “fast” without appreciate. For the process of cooking, it is work of art by enjoy and feel the process as art form. Otherwise, it is belong to craft. Meanwhile, the smell and taste for food is the reaction of art. The cultural difference and maker’s thinking are easy to change or create the food as one of art products. Those reactions are come from art. Art shows in food according to the aesthetic reaction and it is necessary of food represent art. Anyway, I believe that food reflect art in my life.
Before this Artifact, I never think that food as art. Just realized how amazing of food because food represent multiple culture and can satisfy all kinds of desire for human being. In the course materials, Elizabeth argued that food as art but he mentioned there are different methods for evaluating of art by aesthetic reaction. Meanwhile, the presentation compared between slow food and fast food. I can strong to feel the emotional process of cooking is art form because people use the heart to feel the reaction from aesthetic. Otherwise, fast food more likes to ignore the reaction of art and focus on “making”. Furthermore, by the Dissanayake told that “Art for life’s sake” (Dissanayake, P. 9), food shows art for life’s sake as one of important parts in life.
In the further, food is shows art means for me. Both of foods and art are the important parts in life. I think I will enjoy the process of cooking and think what the art value for me in every dish. The world not lack of art, just people need the eyes to find it.
