Culture Wars/Current Controversies

Rise of the Influencer Chefs

Books & the Arts
WEB VERSION
August 13, 2024
Over the last couple years, we have witnessed a revolution in food television. On Tiktok, on Instagram, on Youtube, we—the hungry and gastronomically inept—are assailed with an unending stream of home videos of professional chefs and amateur cooks slicing, dicing, pickling, frying, and roasting. The aesthetics are straightforward: bright colors, zoomed-in close-ups, hand-held videography, and amateur-hour sound. The cooking is, too—with one exception: Unlike food television of the past, these shows do not tell us how to make the great feasts before us. We are there just to watch these skilled practitioners of the culinary arts work their magic. “Not since the release of Fritz Lang’s Metropolis, almost a century ago,” observes Aaron Timms, “has the human body at work enjoyed such important cinematic exposure.” Writing in the August Books & the Arts, Timms investigates what has caused this transformation in gastronomic television—why is the focus now on admiring the art of cooking instead of on showing us, as the instructional programs of yore did, how to do the cooking? Why now is there a “classic assertion of craft and artisanship” without any explanation of “its inner workings”? “Want to try turning an artichoke at home?” Timms writes. The new food TV says, “Don’t—watch a professional do it instead.” Read “The Rise of the Influencer Chefs”→
ADVERTISEMENT
In the uncertain years after World War II, Marie Laurencin was heralded as one of the great painters of the French avant-garde. Her art hung in the galleries of Albert C. Barnes and the Museum of Modern Art, and she was represented by the dealer for Braque, Matisse, and Picasso. But in the years following her death, her renown began to subside. Her cubist portraits, often of women,and in hues of pink and baby blue, were often waved away by a new, more muscular generation of painters breaking from figuration and from the whimsical and what was deemed as the feminine. In the years that followed, Laurencin had critics as well as champions: Second-wave feminists argued that her work was too saccharine and hackneyed to be deemed radical or revolutionary. Now, a new retrospective, “Marie Laurencin: Sapphic Paris”—organized by the Barnes Foundation and in its second and final stop at Ohio’s Columbus Museum of Art—attempts to reframe Laurencin’s work as that of as a pioneering queer artist, rather than as reducing all women “to roughly the same set of attributes.” Hannah Samler, reviewing the show for Books & the Arts, asks if it is possible that Laurencin was providing “another clue pointing to her particular sexual desires.” Read “The Misunderstood Art of Marie Laurencin”→
ADVERTISEMENT
Althea Gibson Let the Racquet Do the Talking
A recent biography of the complicated tennis legend underlines the sport’s persistent challenges with race, class, and celebrity.
Alisa Solomon
What Is Policing For?
Sociologist Michael Sierra-Arévalo’s recent book explains how an obsession with violence has defined the police’s purpose and worldview.
Michael Friedrich
The Trans Panic in Sports Is Nearly a Century Old
Michael Waters’s eye-opening history of gender and athletics in the lead-up to the 1936 Olympics reveals just how old this reactionary movement in athletics is.
Ben Kesslen
The Transformation of Gowanus
Can a Superfund site be remade into an experiment for equitable housing and eco-friendly development?
Karrie Jacobs

Leave a Reply