Based on the same logic, it can be said that food is art by classification, but might not be art by evaluation (Tefler, 2002). She states that food is in fact a minor art because unlike the normal art it is very transient, it is not representative in itself, and cannot move the person exposed to it emotionally. In stating the food-art scenario, Telfer outlines,
“With the art of food, we have two problems. We need to strike a balance between the aesthetic claims of the food on a particular occasion and the social claims of the occasion.
We also need to find a middle way between two unsatisfactory attitudes to the aesthetic dimension of food: we must not be so heedless as to waste a satisfying kind of aesthetic experience, but not so precious as to expect more to it than it can give” (Telfer, 2002, p.60).
So based on Telfer’s arguments on food as a minor art, she states that the aesthetic claims of the food will depend on the occasion. The occasion could be a social one, a cultural one or a religious one. Based on the occasion, the food is perceived and sensed (by means of taste). The occasion is what therefore adds to the artistic and aesthetic value of the food (the time of tasting).
Food makes more sense as an art and an aesthetic object when it is associated with socio-cultural elements or experiences. As examples consider the sushi eating experience that the restaurant of Jiro Ono manages to create. The making of the sushi (before the customers) and partaking the food is the restaurant experience. It can be a minor art such as how Tefler presents it. Only in its association with the Japanese culture and craft of sushi making, does it become a truly complete art or aesthetic experience.