The Science of Food

by kn_watson

This work has not been commented by curators.

Title

The Science of Food

Headline

What makes food pleasurable?

Concept author(s)

Kayla Watson

Concept author year(s) of birth

1996

Concept author(s) contribution

I created this work

Concept author(s) Country

United States of America

Friendly Competition

Pleasure (2016)

Competition category

Visual communication practice

Competition subcategory

static

Competition field

academic

Competition subfield

educator/researcher

Subfield description

North Carolina State University / Scott Townsend / Graphic Design

Check out the Pleasure 2016 outlines of Memefest Friendly competition.

Description of idea

Describe your idea and concept of your work in relation to the festival outlines:

My idea is based off the article of "The Science of Mmm". The article talks about how much the pleasure of food is based on hedonic hotspots found in the brain. Because of this, I wanted to create something the everyday person could look at and gather some information about where these "pleasure spots" were actually located. Through some research, I found out which foods Americans love and hate the most. I associated the more pleasant foods (fruits, cookies, coffee beans, and chocolate) with the "pleasure spots". I contrasted this by making the rest of the brain foods that many people do not like (celery, brussels sprouts, mushrooms,cilantro, and beets), allowing to the viewer gather information through imagery.

What kind of communication approach do you use?

Visual Explanation.

What are in your opinion concrete benefits to the society because of your communication?

The viewer is able to understand a little more about the way their brains perceive food, and understand why eating is so pleasurable.

What did you personally learn from creating your submitted work?

Up front I learned about why and how food is pleasurable. Through creating the piece itself, I was able to find different ways to communicate my idea. For instance, I debated getting rid of the diagram of the brain (left brain), and keeping the "food brain" alone. But by taking the diagram away, the "food brain" lost context, or a reference point, and it was harder for the viewer to understand. By having them side by side, the viewer was able to see how the brain works in two forms.

Why is your work, GOOD communication WORK?

I believe my work is good communication work because it allows the viewer understand this science of pleasure in relation to food. Not everyone who looks at it may not have a strong background, or even a background in science. By using food, something people interact on a daily basis, the viewer can begin to understand how the brain works in a way that was broken down.

Where and how do you intent do implement your work?

This work would work best with the article itself. It allows people who are about to read the article to get a general idea of what the article is about and go back and make references to the diagram if needed.

Did your intervention had an effect on other Media. If yes, describe the effect? (Has other media reported on it- how? Were you able to change other media with your work- how?)

N/A

Curators Comments

Comments