Cooking should be a recognized art form

Aerozord · 01-31-2012, 05:47 PM

Seriously, hear me out on this. "Art" in many ways is about expression and getting a response from others, usually through visual or audio cues. Now when you cook something you often do the same thing. You can even see genres of food preparation, be it food that looks gross but tastes excellent, or food based on nostalgia, or even on being as foul as possible. Lets not forget pretentious meals that people eat because its fine cuisine but is at best shallow.

In many ways a chef does with food what one might do with a movie, but with smell and taste instead of sight and sound.

Doc ock rokc · 01-31-2012, 06:01 PM

It already is!
Culinary ARTS

pochercoaster · 01-31-2012, 06:02 PM

How is it not recognized as an art already? Culinary ARTs schools disagree with you. The difference is the food is consumed in restaurants instead of displayed in museums.

Sure, your run of the mill chef might not be able to elevate food to the kind of memorable experience that art should impart, but that's why you go to the good restaurants.

Edit: ninja'd

Also:

Professor Smarmiarty · 01-31-2012, 06:02 PM

Its more like performance art than anything. It rather different from more convential arts because the food doesn't last, it's also limited to one person as a full experience.
So whatever you make is fleeting and limited and the culture/fame is limited to the chefs. As we do now

Azisien · 01-31-2012, 06:04 PM

No man you don't get it, man. It may be considered art at art schools but it's not considered ART art, you know, man?

Like this grilled cheese sandwich I'm eating? God damn Picasso.

Aerozord · 01-31-2012, 06:13 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Smarty McBarrelpants

Its more like performance art than anything. It rather different from more convential arts because the food doesn't last, it's also limited to one person as a full experience.
So whatever you make is fleeting and limited and the culture/fame is limited to the chefs. As we do now

not really a meal can be enjoyed by many people, and for a long time plays were just as finite in an experience until we developed techonology to record it.

So obviously all we need to do is use highly advanced nanotechnology to exactly duplicate food on a molecular level. Its not rocket science

Doc ock rokc · 01-31-2012, 06:25 PM

We might as well replace the "Rocket Science/Brain surgery/Rocket Surgery" analogy WITH nanotechnology. Because at best they are dealing with a simple chemical reaction and at worst they are dealing with things that would blow people's MINDS.

Loyal · 01-31-2012, 06:32 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Azisien

Like this grilled cheese sandwich I'm eating? God damn Picasso.

Horribly misshapen yet glorious to behold.

Amake · 01-31-2012, 07:39 PM

It may just be because I like the things I make to be lasting, but it makes me sad to think of cooking as a fine art. It might just be the fleeting beauty of it that makes me sad. But people cook thousands of millions of meals every day. If a few Grapes of Wrath or Breakfasts at Tiffany's* get eaten every now and then, what difference does it make to anyone who's not there? To anyone a hundred years later? Doesn't it break your heart to think about all these treasures that are lost forever?

CelesJessa · 01-31-2012, 07:42 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Smarty McBarrelpants

Its more like performance art than anything. It rather different from more convential arts because the food doesn't last, it's also limited to one person as a full experience.
So whatever you make is fleeting and limited and the culture/fame is limited to the chefs. As we do now

I was going to go off onto a tangent about sculptors whose work can disappear in a matter of hours (if not while he's creating it), namely Andy Goldsworthy came to mind, but then I got distracted looking at his work and remembering that most fine artists are crazy.

Do you really want food to be lumped in with a bunch of crazy people?

01-31-2012, 05:47 PM	#1
Aerozord So we are clear Join Date: Jan 2004 Location: Former murder capital of the world Posts: 13,824	Cooking should be a recognized art form Seriously, hear me out on this. "Art" in many ways is about expression and getting a response from others, usually through visual or audio cues. Now when you cook something you often do the same thing. You can even see genres of food preparation, be it food that looks gross but tastes excellent, or food based on nostalgia, or even on being as foul as possible. Lets not forget pretentious meals that people eat because its fine cuisine but is at best shallow. In many ways a chef does with food what one might do with a movie, but with smell and taste instead of sight and sound. __________________ "don't hate me for being a heterosexual white guy disparaging slacktivism, hate me for all those murders I've done."

01-31-2012, 06:01 PM	#2
Doc ock rokc ...Really? Join Date: Jun 2007 Location: in Theory. Everything works here Posts: 3,961	It already is! Culinary ARTS __________________ I have a Pesterchum its DangerousDoc I am ether fading out of Time, Space, or Reality...Or Simply my Typewriter is running out of ink

01-31-2012, 06:02 PM	#3
pochercoaster rollerpocher tycoon Join Date: Nov 2003 Location: Las Vegas Posts: 1,808	How is it not recognized as an art already? Culinary ARTs schools disagree with you. The difference is the food is consumed in restaurants instead of displayed in museums. Sure, your run of the mill chef might not be able to elevate food to the kind of memorable experience that art should impart, but that's why you go to the good restaurants. Edit: ninja'd Also: Last edited by pochercoaster; 01-31-2012 at 06:05 PM.

01-31-2012, 06:25 PM	#7
Doc ock rokc ...Really? Join Date: Jun 2007 Location: in Theory. Everything works here Posts: 3,961	We might as well replace the "Rocket Science/Brain surgery/Rocket Surgery" analogy WITH nanotechnology. Because at best they are dealing with a simple chemical reaction and at worst they are dealing with things that would blow people's MINDS. __________________ I have a Pesterchum its DangerousDoc I am ether fading out of Time, Space, or Reality...Or Simply my Typewriter is running out of ink

01-31-2012, 07:39 PM	#9
Amake Keeper of the new Join Date: Apr 2004 Location: A place without judgment Posts: 4,506	It may just be because I like the things I make to be lasting, but it makes me sad to think of cooking as a fine art. It might just be the fleeting beauty of it that makes me sad. But people cook thousands of millions of meals every day. If a few Grapes of Wrath or Breakfasts at Tiffany's* get eaten every now and then, what difference does it make to anyone who's not there? To anyone a hundred years later? Doesn't it break your heart to think about all these treasures that are lost forever? __________________ Hope insistent, trust implicit, love inherent, life immersed Last edited by Amake; 01-31-2012 at 07:41 PM. Reason: Oh yes, I went there. Barely thought about it even.*

01-31-2012, 06:02 PM	#4
Professor Smarmiarty Sent to the cornfield Join Date: Mar 2007 Location: K-space Posts: 9,758	Its more like performance art than anything. It rather different from more convential arts because the food doesn't last, it's also limited to one person as a full experience. So whatever you make is fleeting and limited and the culture/fame is limited to the chefs. As we do now

01-31-2012, 06:04 PM	#5
Azisien wat Join Date: Jan 2005 Posts: 7,177	No man you don't get it, man. It may be considered art at art schools but it's not considered ART art, you know, man? Like this grilled cheese sandwich I'm eating? God damn Picasso.