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:

In the article “Can Food Be Art?”, Sara Davis explained and showed his own ideas about arts and food as arts. “For good reason: That tiny word, art, has launched a thousand volumes theorizing what can or should go by its name.”(Sara Davis, para 1) He thought arts can be showed in different ways. At the same time, he think art cannot be judged or defined. Just like what he said “It’s a good illustration that without a solid defense of what art is, any judgment about what art is not will be unsound.”(Sara Davis, para 1) In his following paragraph of his article, he said that people usually use their sensory experiences to figure out the surface in the world and feel more in the mind. Aesthetic judgment is different for everyone. It is a kind of freedom ideas toward food as arts.  Sara Davis explained “To enjoy (or even to dislike) is to feel yourself feeling enjoyment (or dislike); it’s one way you know you exist, and that “you” are a being who enjoys (or dislikes) a particular thing. It’s less abstract when you consider how many cultural or political identities are defined in part by what you will (or will not) eat.”(Sara Davis, para 4) The writer also use wine compare with foods. It indicated that food is more free to feel it and more different meaning. Just like “Memory, allusions, personal and cultural relationships, and aesthetic judgments are meaningful associations that anyone can experience, though of course we don’t all experience them the same way.”(Sara Davis, para 7) As he said, mind is the important and principal one for understanding art. Food is very simple thing, but it contains a lot meaning. Food is so normal in human’s daily life that easy to express emotion and ideas. Sara Davis also asked many question about arts and answer them by himself to show his ideas about food as arts.

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 Elizabeth Telfer in his article “Food as art”, he said “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.” (Elizabeth Telfer, page 22) This is really similar with what Sara Davis said. They both think food is simple but still important to be art. Because there is no limitation for art, food can be art in many ways. “Wine and other artisanal goods are designed for this sort of aesthetic contemplation, but food does not require fine craftsmanship to be meaningful. ” (Sara Davis, para 6) That is why food is simple and full of meaning as well.

Even though food can be art for many people, they have still different ideas about the level of this kind of art. Elizabeth Telfer in his article “Food as art” tries to tell us that food is an form of art just like “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.”(Elizabeth Telfer, page 26) Elizabeth thought that food could be a minor art even though food is an important art. Hence, he limits the range of art about food. This idea can be compared with Sara Davis’s idea. Sara said that “All the same, eating and cooking can be expressive or even transportative to whosoever wants it:The novice cook and the master chef; those who bake from scratch to save money and those who do the same to show off expertise; our grandmothers who made something-out-of-nothing suppers during times of scarcity and the younger relatives that try desperately to imitate them.”(Sara Davis, para 7)  Their different place is that Elizabeth gave food its level of art. It is hard to deny which one is right, both of them are reasonable.

In my opinion, I think food can be art and no one can give its art level. Every art has its own deep meaning and its value is equal to each other. Food can be anything in art range.

Reflection:

Elizabeth Telfer told me that food is also art. 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) The artifact helped me to know anything can be art.

These food pictures are really beautiful. Before I saw them, I never thought that food could be such an art. Even though they are not same as their original one, they are still good for art. Elizabeth Telfer gave me the ideas about food as art. I am really happy that I could read his article. Before I knew food as art, I just thought they were just food.

Future:

After understanding such things, I changed my attitude toward food. I will appreciate food before eating them in the future. I will spend more time on food and never ignore the art in food. If I insist this behavior, life will be more happy with being full of arts.

Bibliography:

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.