Still-Life Food Is So 21st Century

In his Haarlem studio, Dutch painter Willem Claeszoon Heda took care to shadow in creases on a damask tablecloth and added enough yellow to make light bounce off a pewter pitcher.

Join Our Community of Science Lovers!

This article was published in Scientific American’s former blog network and reflects the views of the author, not necessarily those of Scientific American


In his Haarlem studio, Dutch painter Willem Claeszoon Heda took care to shadow in creases on a damask tablecloth and added enough yellow to make light bounce off a pewter pitcher. In the lower right-hand corner of his famous “Still Life With Gilt Goblet” piece, the artist from The Netherlands couldn’t help himself. He snuck in a lemon with one-quarter of the skin peeled off.

The phrase “still life” may conjure up images of staid, dusty paintings - or, worse - memories of late nights cramming for the next day’s Art History 101 exam. However, there’s a common thread in the photos of art that follow. First, if you broaden the definition a bit, still life food remains very much the rage. Second, food art might make you crave a masterpiece meal.

"]

Still Life With Gilt Goblet. Willem Heda's famous masterpiece from 1635. Oil on Panel, 88cm x 113cm. Image courtesy of Rijksmuseum. [Click on the image to see the source.

Art, canned


On supporting science journalism

If you're enjoying this article, consider supporting our award-winning journalism by subscribing. By purchasing a subscription you are helping to ensure the future of impactful stories about the discoveries and ideas shaping our world today.


 

Each year, the unusual food charity called Canstruction® hosts competitions and events featuring objects made entirely of canned goods. Last year, the "Best Meal" prize went to… an orange peel.

 

That's NUTS

If we could examine the minute detail of each salted cashew piece before popping it in our mouths, then we might eat fewer of them.

 

Puff the magic gun

Because film and video still do a better job of conveying certain concepts, this last example is decidedly not still. The newly formed Museum of Food and Drink in New York City has plans to feature as one of its first exhibits a 3,200-pound machine that puffs food.

 

 

Kathleen Raven covers science and health topics as a freelance journalist based in Atlanta, Ga. She writes about personal health, biotechnology and agriculture/food. Kathleen began her career as a general assignment reporter before specializing in science writing. She is a part-time contributor to Reuters Health online and earned degrees from the University of Georgia: Ecology (M.S.) and Health & Medical Journalism (M.A.).

More by Kathleen Raven

Subscribe to Support Independent Journalism

Great science journalism requires human expertise, time, effort and creativity. And it costs money. That’s why I and the journalists here at Scientific American hope you’ll join our community.

When you subscribe, you are supporting staff and freelance journalists who are passionate about telling science stories that are true, important and compelling. Our editors and reporters are often experts in their fields, which means they understand the nuances of big discoveries and can untangle the breakthroughs from the hype. With a subscription, you are also supporting rigorous fact-checking to ensure the words we publish are precise and accurate. And you’re supporting original illustrations, graphics and photos that bring you closer to an advanced laboratory, an ice sheet in Antarctica or a space mission in orbit. You’re helping us craft other types of high-quality journalism as well: Our newsletters are carefully written, edited and curated by staffers you have or will come to know and love. Our Science Quickly podcast is based on original reporting, collaboration with editors and scientists and exacting production.

Subscriptions keep this engine running so we can continue to deliver thoughtful, rigorous and independent science journalism to you. In an era of viral misinformation, this work is crucial. If you value what we do, I hope you’ll consider joining us as a subscriber

Thank you,

Jeanna Bryner, Editor in Chief, Scientific American

Subscribe