I am in the fortunate position to write about this topic because I, primarily feel bad for all aspiring cooks out there that received their calling, gathered all their knowledge either from their traditions, their family or their education, meditated, concentrated the most of the confidence and begun mixing ingredients together to prepare the best meal.
The meal I’m talking about is meant to be received by another person because this article is not about the need to please your hunger. The other, in turn, will have to scrutinise the attempt of the aspiring cook and finally they’ll reach to a point that both parties will advocate if this event has been a success. A lot of factors will define the success of that meal, that if so, the cook will continue to practice the art and the receiver will continue to appreciate the result, while in the same moment, promote that cook’s art to all of his friends and acquaintances.
What makes the receiver to be so qualified to promote someone’s cooking skills when nobody really knows if he/she had ever understood the process of that ‘making’? Why do we blindly accept the fact that taste is the ultimate tool to appreciate life? and… What is really the origin of claiming ‘taste’ the ultimate tool? I wouldn’t like to answer the questions above, because just as via ‘taste’ is the easiest method to define success, so it is ambiguous to understand why this is true.
Starting off with the question for you to think about, I am going to elaborate on the “Power of Accustomed”.
Who is more qualified to prepare your favorite dish, is it your grandmother or the most qualified chef in the world with at least 20 years of experience in creating the exact same one? ( I would appreciate a realistic answer and not a witty one)
I am a very conservative person regarding the way I arrive to any conclusion but I am restless and liberal in the way I process the information I receive. I literally hate ‘common sense’, I would like to see/taste/feel everything on my own and not because somebody else tells me so. On the other hand, I am accepting suggestions and advice when I feel that I am not qualified enough to reach my own conclusion. When I was a kid I wasn’t even remotely qualified to know which food I liked and I was eating the food I was being served. Having ‘taste’ as the only tool I was gradually listing various dishes in my head according to my liking factor, and the best dishes were indisputably my favorites. Consequently, the best cook was my grandmother because her recipe made the food so delicious. I grew accustomed to that taste and no other would make this food taste better! In analysis… my grandmother suggested me to taste this food, since I wasn’t qualified enough, I loved it, in turn, and from that moment on, I shaped my concrete opinion on the fate of that dish.
Where does that link with architecture?
‘Taste’ is one of the strongest points of the architect’s potential client, since he/she is not qualified in anything else in order to criticise a creation or design. At the same time, ‘taste’ is also the hardest to ‘tame’. An architectural creation is an ensemble of elements that the architect will have to combine but the theme of that ensemble is derived by the client’s preconceived idea; just like ordering food in the restaurant. If the client wants a ‘steak tartare’ then the architect has to provide that dish in the exact circumstances the client had it for the first time and liked it. There is definitely room for experimentation because you can never replicate the historic instance of your client – there has been a huge compromise by your client to accept and eat your food in your restaurant in the first place.
Having said that, there is no point of trying to convince anybody to change his/her idea but there is, however, room for suggesting an alternative that would be equally ‘likable’ and prepare the second party to make a compromise.