Eye Candy

At this point in time we have enough evidence to show, even if it was never in question, that all of our senses play a role in eating and cooking. Before we’re even served a meal, we can smell how delicious (or off-putting) it will be. And if one is cooking or within hearing distance of the kitchen, the sizzle of oils, steaming pressure cookers, bubbling sauces, and kitchen timers all form a familiar and inviting harmony. With our eyes we savor the sight of a feast and we’re tempted to take more than enough. We relish the warmth of a dinner roll, the cool feel of a beverage, and finally experience the chemical reactions that reward us with taste. All of this isn’t gluttony (more on that article in a future post!); in moderation, it’s human nature. However, when translated to the worlds of paper or pixels, food loses much of its sensory effect over us while gaining a different kind of power.

Exhibit A

Television shows dynamically capture the sights and sounds of food, while cookbooks and blogs showcase static representations of it: two-dimensional formulas, descriptions, and photographs. How do we reconcile societies that are exponentially ‘farming out’ their cooking duties while increasingly churning out consumers of two-dimensional food-themed media? I’d argue that this is symptomatic of our media-driven world: we’re conditioned (see exhibit A) to become spectators and virtual participants. Some children play more sports video games than actual sports. People of any age socialize online. Although I couldn’t find conclusive statistics, I’d say that travel shows attract a lot of people who can’t or simply don’t actually travel. This virtual aspect of our lives isn’t innately a bad thing. Part of being a mere mortal is accepting that one cannot do everything, and people have been living vicariously since the dawn of art, music, and literature. When our health and that of others is at stake, however, it’s a very different story.

There is nothing wrong with reading about a blogger’s latest culinary exploits, watching a cooking or culinary travel show at the end of a long workday, or collecting cookbooks like baseball cards. There is something troubling about losing the will to act on what we watch or read when it comes to food because it correlates with handing over the pots, pans, and all control over nutritional value to an arguably dangerous food industry. And that correlates with expanding waistlines and malfunctioning vital organs everywhere.

Exhibit B

A lot of factors have combined to dissuade us from actively participating in our kitchens. As we discussed in last week’s post, some argue that they simply don’t have the time to cook. The ease and convenience of paying for a pre-made meal rather than paying for fresh ingredients and investing the time and energy required to produce something edible is another very real reason. Moreover, much like the world of Hollywood, the world of cooking has its own celebrities (see exhibit B). And while many people idolize these celebrities enough to emulate them, others are content to admire them from afar. The food itself is as glamorized as any celebrity: it’s

Exhibit C

prepared by pros with gourmet ingredients (or faked with some very inedible ones), set up with props and lighting to its greatest advantage, and photographed and edited with the finest equipment. Food preparation industries benefit from this surreal approach to cooking (see exhibit C), while celebrity cooks, foodies, and gourmets (where these are distinguished from the average home cook) seem to revel in the chance to tell their millions of viewers: you can look, but don’t touch!