Yes, I know. It’s the best I’ve got to go on. Sorry.
It definitely had a Le Bouchon vibe, though.
3 Likes
The food is ordinary per se, but becomes art due to the context by which it’s served.
4 Likes
Creations like this make me want to apply lots of varnish. What soulless creature would cut up and consume something so cute? 
Well, that figures. It’s my own fault, I invoked him… 
5 Likes
That goes on the San Francisco Millennium Tower Legal Aftermath Bingo Card I’m preparing.
12 Likes
16 Likes
… for the purpose of investment
If we paint a picture about something traumatic, we have a picture of our trauma, but that picture doesn’t become “art” until an art collector buys it
If we sell it to him, we’re inviting him to invest in our trauma, and then we can all hope it becomes more and more valuable
1 Like
I think you make a good point but lack the linguistic facility to differentiate the salient point. Which is not your fault btw but that of the language you are using
German makes a distinction between art (Kunst) and “artistic crafts” (Kunsthandwerk). The line between the two is somewhat fluid but still pretty clear. Kunsthandwerk is an artistic creation that has a purpose other than a decorative one. It’s made by people who consider themselves craftspeople first (and not artists) and it is made to be sold (which art is sometimes as well, but not always).
There is still a distinction between normal crafts and Kunsthandwerk, though. You have to imbue your work with a certain aesthetic sensibility and a desire to do decorative work above and beyond the purely functional.
I would argue that cooking can be craft and it can be Kunsthandwerk but not Kunst.
So it depends on how you want to translate this statement into English whether you consider cooking an art or not.
Sidenote for the pedants: yes, it could be argued that the Arts and Crafts movement did make a similar distinction. Their understanding of craft certainly included a decorative element. But as far as I know they never tried to make a distinction between artistic crafts and normal crafts, probably because their main point was that all crafts should have an artistic element. I would go so far as to argue that the clumsy name of their movement shows that they were linguistically constrained in developing their ideas
9 Likes
Although the chef thinks he is an artist. (As @Brainspore has posted). I thought he was comparing himself to Basquiat but I am not sure.
The good news is you can re-create the experience at home.
1 Like
Shhh, don’t give them ideas or we’ll all end up being served NFTs for dessert
8 Likes
Bauhaus would be a perfect example of your argument.
4 Likes
100%. I admit that I started reading your comment and was preparing to feel insulted (“lack the linguistic facility”) but you’re right on the mark. I actually have a classical music education and I’m familiar with this differentiation – I was thinking of it the whole time I was writing the original post and grasping for new terminology.
Because the problem with the way the word “craft” is used in modern English is that people start thinking of the stylistic movement called “Arts and Crafts” or, perhaps even more unfortunately, the act of gluing egg cartons and acorns together with glitter to make kitschy place-settings.
To re-state my original conclusion, crafts can have artistry, but that does not make them art. The craftsmanship exists to serve a primary purpose other than pure expression. Eating. A structure to support living or working. The design of a hand tool or computer. Artful but not art.
6 Likes
Yeah, sorry about that. It was a cheap clickbait-like way of starting a comment
1 Like
“A friend of mine at the table said, ‘Those are two words you never want to hear together — meat and molecules.’”
3 Likes
Food is clearly design, since it both has a functional purpose and is intended to trigger an affective response.
2 Likes
This topic was automatically closed after 5 days. New replies are no longer allowed.
