Might Food and Drink Sometimes Constitute an Art Form?
No, Because…
-
Food is useful, and nothing useful deserves to count as art.
-
Tasting requires a physical connection to our food, and this requirement is too crude to be present in an artwork.
-
Combinations of flavors are not complex enough to make up a work of art.
-
We cannot finely discriminate between various smells and tastes.
-
We are limited in our powers of recuperation. For example, we cannot taste subtle flavors after tasting stronger flavors, as when something is spicy.
-
Unlike our memory for music, our memory for tastes is much too weak. Because of this, we are unable to truly appreciate food as we would appreciate a symphony.
-
Unlike our memory for music, our memory for tastes is much too weak. Because of this, we are unable to truly analyze our food after the fact.
-
Tastes do not come in regular patterns, and such patterns are necessary to create a form, like sonata form in music.
-
Taste does not allow for a combination of features, unlike in music, where combinations of features can make a chord.
-
Taste does not allow for balance and climax.
Yes, But It Is Only a Minor Art Because…
-
Food is necessarily transient. It does not last forever.
-
Food cannot mean anything. It does not represent anything other than itself in the way a painting does.
Is this the same thing as meaning something? I am not sure.
-
Food cannot move us to the point of changing the way we live our lives.
Questions
-
Let’s say for just a minute that food can be a work of art. Does this change how we should engage with food? For example, we often go to museums to view visual art, or we go to concert halls to hear musical art. Should there be special places set aside for partaking in food art? Would these be like restaurants, or something else?
-
If food can be a work of art, which thing is the art? Is it the food itself, or is it the recipe for the food? Notice that the same question comes up in performative arts, like dance and music. Is the composer who wrote a piece of music the artist, or is it the performer who plays the music? Does the fact that we can ask this question mean that if food is a work of art, it is a performative work?
-
Supposedly, food is the art that characteristically belongs to the sense of taste. Paintings and sculptures are art forms that characteristically belong to sight. Music is the art form that characteristically belongs to hearing. Do you think there might be an art form characteristically belonging to each of the senses? What might it be for smell? What might it be for touch?
-
Historically, food has been the purview of women. Do you think this might play a role in how we view food? Are there other activities commonly associated with women that might also be art forms? Fashion? Fabric activities?
Notice that if food is art, it is not going to be the store-bought ravioli and pasta sauce I make for my family on a Thursday night. However, much of the day-to-day cooking is done by women. Historically, many high-end chefs have been men. What might this tell us?