Mapping Out Food and Philosophy

The following special section on food and philosophy arose out of an ongoing conversation that, like many of our encounters within the discipline of food studies, began with a shared admiration for the diversity of methodologies and interests that form its esprit de corps. While the use of theory has been a constant in food scholarship, the contributions of philosophers, and the unique perspective that the discipline of philosophy provides, have not been as central to its growth as other disciplines when one considers the presence of philosophical work in food studies’ major publications, the makeup of scholars at its major conferences, and the disciplinary background of those who hold positions in food studies programs.But such evidence runs counter to our experiences in the field that, however anecdotally, characterize the vibrant discourse that unfolds with our colleagues when philosophy enters the food studies conversation. This special section is therefore not simply a moment to gather and present a snapshot of philosophy’s place in food studies; more importantly, this section inaugurates an ongoing commitment by Gastronomica to the unique and compelling perspectives that philosophy brings to the study of food. H. Rosi Song, one of Gastronomica’s Editorial Collective members, first suggested that we create a special section dedicated to food and philosophy—a request inspired in large part by the colloquia organized through the Culinary Mind research center, whose efforts show how compelling theoretical work on food can be, and above all, highlight the contributions of many young and rising scholars who are charting new and exciting pathways through the discipline. We were also inspired by the success of Megan Dean’s essay in Gastronomica 22.3, around which were gathered three responses to create a small conversation on the relevant topics of dietary restrictions, hospitality, and epistemic injustice.These experiences nicely illustrate how the philosophy of food is a variegated field whose ample margins permit a freedom of movement for young and seasoned thinkers alike—some working firmly within academic philosophy while others in adjacent disciplines pulling upon the particular resources afforded by philosophical topics and methodologies. Readers and scholars with an interest in food studies may encounter philosophical ideas in different moments of their research and may use them in multiple ways, e.g., to provide a foundation to their approach, to substantiate a specific claim, to evaluate the ethical or theoretical plausibility of a specific principle. To engage as many readers as possible, as well as to highlight the richness of the field, we aimed to maximize the number of voices, topics, methods, and styles for the issue.Despite the prevalence of the long-form essay as the de facto currency of recent academic philosophy, the love of wisdom has not always been expressed in papers of 6,000 to 10,000 words. Profound examples include poems (think of Parmenides or Lucretius), letters (from Epicurus to Descartes), epigrams (from Confucius to Heraclitus), dialogues (from Plato to Hume), and aphorisms (from Pascal to Nietzsche). We did not hesitate in the least to organize this issue around short pieces, seeing this format as an opportunity and even a challenge for would-be contributors.Short papers are nonstandard but not entirely uncommon. Several journals notoriously publish only short articles, including Analysis and Thought. Our Call for Papers asked authors to limit their submissions to just over 1,000 words in any style or method of philosophical thinking. The prompt asked:What does it mean to you, in your daily practice, to address food-related issues (broadly understood to include food products, systems, food experience, media), from a philosophical perspective?The submission process held many surprises: the essays ranged across an incredibly diverse landscape of topics and interests, but above all the sheer number of submissions (over fifty in total) exceeded our expectations and estimation of the task at hand. We remained dedicated to the process of blind peer review utilized for all scholarly submissions at Gastronomica, which relies upon the expertise of Collective members and external reviewers. Given the volume of submissions, we are especially grateful to our colleagues on the Collective and our many peers in the field who offered their time and insightful commentaries, often for multiple submissions. When the dust settled, we identified fifteen submissions that best captured the spirit of the original Call for Papers. Most authors went a little over the limit during the revision process, but even with some recalibration all remained true to their original vision. We thoroughly enjoyed the process (while we have no clue whether the authors did), and we absolutely cherish the outcome.We organized the submissions in three macro-categories. Readers should not be misguided by these: they are nothing more than convenient devices to visualize the fifteen short papers. We did not have these categories in mind before receiving the submissions, nor during the review process; and there obviously are plenty of connections between pieces that belong to different categories.The first batch of papers deal with a broader reflection on the state of the art in the field. In what ways can, do, and should philosophers engage with food issues? The four contributions in this section rehearse classic questions in philosophy as well as in food studies: how eating can make sense of the seeming absurdity of life (“What’s for Dinner? A Culinary Version of The Myth of Sisyphus” by Robin Wehe); the metaphysical and epistemic challenges faced by philosophers of food, given the relational and situated nature of the field; the role of eating in (“Meeting Food Halfway” by Paolo Bosca); the boundaries of the very field of study of the philosophy of food (“Seven Curious Cases of (In)edibility” by Jan Ferwerda); and the striking contrast between the depth and the simplicity of hunger, as a fundamental condition underlying any speculative reflection on eating (“Reading Hunger in the Voice of a Child: Thinking the Philosophy of Everyday Life through Food” by João Paulo de Oliveira Rigaud).The second category contains papers that most distinctively address value-laden questions. The section includes reflections on mindful eating practices in social and cultural frameworks (“Ethical Omnivorism: A Diet of Conscientious Consumption” by Samantha Noll and “Culinary Consciousness: Reflections from Indian Philosophy on Food in Modern Times” by Pravajya Pandey); an essay on “Embodiment and Eating: Food Perception and Eating Practices” by Maria Cristina Clorinda Vendra; a very contemporary moral reflection on the fast-spreading consumption of anti-obesity medications (“Food Ease in the ‘Ozempic Era’” by Michael L. J. Greer); the proposal of an “Alternative Food Hedonism: New Culinary Pleasures in the Age of Sustainability?” by Jonatan Leer; and a piece on “A Better Theory for Food Wasters: How Philosophy Can Be Used in Rethinking Food Waste” by Nicola Piras.Finally, the third category contains papers that address aesthetic matters. This section includes a reflection on the active role of the diner in constructing a tasting experience (“Eating as a Model for Enactive Aesthetics” by Harry Drummond); an essay on “Gastronomy as Sensory Engineering” by Sascha Benjamin Fink and Brandon Ashby; an aesthetic and moral reflection on the phenomenon of “Pervasive Sugarization: Unraveling the Triumph of Aestheticization through Taste” by Maddalena Borsato; a piece inspired by Felix Gonzalez-Torres’s artistic legacy (“Sex, Death, and Pineapple Candies: Felix Gonzalez-Torres’s Alternative Ethics” by Britten Chroman); and the issue comes to a close with the proposal of “On a Collaborative Culinary Frame: Rethinking Why Dining as an Art Needs Us All” by Isabella Vincent and Liju Jacob Kuriakose.These short essays crystalize the current work of thinkers in food studies but also serve to catalyze critical engagements with these topics and the many issues not captured on these pages. This collection thereby initiates Gastronomica’s ongoing call for philosophical content on food and related issues. We aim to highlight the contributions of philosophers and theorists to food studies by featuring full-length scholarly essays, shorter reflective works, and opportunities for dialogue through short response papers. Our hope is that the insights of philosophy will provide a consistent presence for the broad and diverse audience that comprises Gastronomica’s readership.