Food as Art – Week 4
Comments(3) Elizabeth Telfer in his article “Food as art” tries to tell us that food is an form of art. At the same time, the art of food is a minor art. Many people do think it is not a good form of art and it is hard to accept this form of art “limits the contemplation that is possible – a work of food art will not be around very long to be contemplated. ..that transient works of art cannot acquire the stature that a long-lived work of art we have.”(24) Even though many people hold opposite ideas, Telfer still hold his idea and prove that food is art.
At first, Telfer started to prove that cookery is an art form ” It is true that cookery is often thought of as a craft…but we have seen, the usefulness of a thing does not prevent its being a work of art, so this criterion does not prevent cookery from being an art.”(16) Then, Telfer thought dishes have something to do with cookery and dishes are also art. He also said that “both an original recipe and an actual dish are works of art if they are regarded aesthetically.”(17) After that he used this relationship to prove food is a work of art.
Telfer tried to conclude someone’s idea that”there are no limitation, in us or in the nature of tastes themselves, which prevent food from giving rise to works of art in the evaluative sense of that phrase, though these will be simpler that in the arts of sight and sound.”(22) Then, he also prove that it is a minor art. Telfer said in his article”If food cannot be more than a minor art form, there is a danger of being precious about it-of treating it, that is, as though is had more aesthetic importance that it does.”(26)
Just like Ellen Dissanayake said everything could be art “So have ideas of beauty, sublimity, and transcendence, along with the verities of the human condition: love, death. memory, suffering, loss, desire, reprieve, and hope.”(Dissanayake 26)
When Telfer describes cookery as a form of art, I fully agree. I like that you pointed out that quote in her article. However, while she states that, “both an original recipe and an actual dish are works of art if they are regarded aesthetically” (17), I disagree. Art is something that is created, and whether it is aesthetically pleasing or not, a creation of a recipe or dish is a form of art because it took creativity to develop a certain flavor that can be either appreciated or unappreciated. Art is not something that always has to be appreciated, because different people can look, feel, or taste the same object and think of it differently. In Dissanayake’s article she portrays art as developing and transcending through time. It is also true that food and cookery has developed and transcending into a more complex nature. As humans, we now have an abundant amount of choices and ideas to consume or cook food. Food that is cooked can be claimed masterpieces or disasters; therefore, it is a true art.
Hi, Lauren!
I am glad that you made a comment in my post. I really agree with your point. It is very convincing. Just like what you said “Art is not something that always has to be appreciated, because different people can look, feel, or taste the same object and think of it differently.” We have common ideas on arts. In different ages, food can be different styles as art. People have thousands of ideas about cooking food and so do arts.
When Telfer describes cookery as a form of art, I fully agree. I like that you pointed out that quote in her article. However, while she states that, “both an original recipe and an actual dish are works of art if they are regarded aesthetically” (17), I disagree. Art is something that is created, and whether it is aesthetically pleasing or not, a creation of a recipe or dish is a form of art because it took creativity to develop a certain flavor that can be either appreciated or unappreciated. Art is not something that always has to be appreciated, because different people can look, feel, or taste the same object and think of it differently.