Is Food Art?

In this article that author doesn't ask if food is art she wonders "why not?" Since virtually anything can be considered art why wouldn't food be given the same respect. Furthermore the author also inquires into what is art itself and she acknowledges that it will be different for different individuals. She also pokes fun into the seriousness and snobbery that some show when debating art. Someone suggests that food can't be art because the chef creates it in order to please the costomer even though this is not always true. She does acknowledge that often chefs put added emphasis on what critics have to say, but the same can be said for artists of different modes. Towards the end of the article she mentions that eating is one art that engages all of the sences as well as the mind and for this reason would elevate food to a more substantial art-form. She also mentions a chef who has literally brought some to tears of joy and shows that eating and food can be an emotional event. This brings new meaning to the term emotional eating and this also contrasts with the "Food As Art" position that food doesn't bring about any emotional connections and as a result implies that food is only a minor art because of it. This article shows for many good reasons food is an art-form unique and fulfilling in many regards and should not be dismissed as a minor variety of the arts.

Smillie, Susan. May 2007. Is Food Art?. The Observer Food Monthly. Retrieved October 2007 from http://blogs.guardian.co.uk/food/2007/05/theatre_of_food.html