Logo Epikur - Journal für Gastrosophie
Zentrum für Gastrosophie Impressum
Startseite > Archiv > Epikur Journal 01/2009 > gastrosophie 18th France

A taste of gastrosophie in 18th century France: an intellectual debate in a cookbook?

Viktoria Von Hoffmann.   

1. Introduction: A history of representations of taste

We can easily find many publications on the "History of Taste". When we look at them closely, though, we can see that they don't always really discuss taste. In fact, most provide merely an analysis of what people used to eat as deduced from recipe books. We can learn what people enjoyed eating in different countries and throughout history. Did they prefer meat or fish, wine or beer, butter or olive oil? What about the use of sugar? Which spices are mentioned in recipe books? But is the History of Taste only about eating practices? What is taste exactly? Isn't taste more than just the discovery of what kind of foodstuffs people from another time or place used to eat? What about the representations and the imagination associated with taste?

em

The emphasis of this research is on a more cultural History of Taste, which can easily be linked to gastrosophie, if gastrosophie is a philosophy of taste(1). Rather than studying food practices, the purpose is to analyse the way people used to think and talk about food and taste in the Modern Era, searching for what we could call "representations of taste".

The study is focused on the discourses regarding taste in the Modern Era, more precisely at the end of the 17th and during the 18th century, mainly in France. Various kinds of available sources are likely to help us explore the sense of taste, particularly philosophical, religious, medical and culinary texts. After reading through many texts from the Renaissance to the 19th century, it became clear that one of the key moments of this history occurred during what we call in French l'époque classique et des Lumières.

Books written by philosophers are one of the main types of source for this research. During the 17th and 18th century, everything changes in the philosophical environment with the advent of the Enlightenment, and of empiricism and sensualism. It's an intense moment for philosophical thinking, where people start to point out how central sensory experience is to knowledge. We can see this, for instance, in the important Essay Concerning Human Understanding by John Locke, published in 1690 and translated into French a few years later. This book is at the centre of a great debate in France in the 18th century, because it states that all knowledge reaches us through the senses, and this goes against the innate ideas theory, which has been promoted by scientists, philosophers and especially by the Church for centuries. The Encyclopaedists, as well as many philosophers of the Enlightenment, are really interested in the question of the senses and in taste; among others are Voltaire and Montesquieu, who publish texts on the subject(2). Finally, in this period, people tend to use increasingly the word "taste" as a metaphor to qualify forms of aesthetic judgement(3).

Religious and moral discourses can also be useful regarding taste. In this field, even though people continue of course mainly to refer in the final instance to God, one can however see that the Church's influence is becoming less strong and less effective (for instance in controlling the publishing of books and their censorship). For centuries, the senses and the pleasures they provide were condemned because they were thought to lead to sin. From now on, the philosophers underline their natural place in the order of the world, their importance for human preservation and, something that is new too, for the joy of living.

Finally, in food history itself, the period from end of the 17th century through the
18th century is generally considered as witnessing the beginning of the new culinary art, referred to as the Nouvelle Cuisine, particularly in the late 1730's. At this time, cooks claim to reject the ancient way of cooking, by promoting a simpler approach and natural seasoning, in contrast with the heavy meals of the past. And of course, the new culinary art is said to be better for health and for taste than the ancient one.

As we can see, this period represents a very important moment in the History of Taste during the Modern Era. It's a period during which discourses regarding taste are changing in medical, moral and philosophical texts, as well as in cookbooks themselves. New ideas are spreading and are completely changing the representations and knowledge regarding taste.

Furthermore, in exploring the literature of the 15th and 16th centuries, it seems that people didn't really talk that much about taste in the strict sense before the end of the
17th century. Of course we can find information in cookbooks, letters and travel stories for instance. Manners books also reveal all the rules about how to behave politely within society, especially at dinner. But nothing is really said about taste, which, compared to the four other senses, is often discredited as a more animal sense, only useful for survival. Taste is seen as being definitely not as noble as sight or hearing, both of which can lead to knowledge, to art and to God(4).

But later on, in the 19th century, taste is at the centre of huge debates; people start to be fascinated and passionate about food, coinciding with the development of gastronomy. It's the time of Brillat-Savarin, Grimod de la Reynière and the beginning of the gastronomic literature. One of the main aims of this research is to find out how society changed during the Modern Era, progressing from a time when people didn't really consider taste as a matter of interest, to this period in the 19th century, which is rich in celebrations of the pleasures of eating, and which made the spread of gastronomy possible up until the present day.

Of course, one can reasonably think that, at all times in history, people have probably enjoyed the pleasures of eating and the joy of the table. But this doesn't necessarily mean that they used to talk about it, especially in philosophical, moral or medical treatises! For a long time, people considered taste, food, kitchen, as irrelevant subjects of interest. This is definitely no longer the case when Brillat-Savarin (1755-1826) publishes his book Physiologie du gout, choosing to use the term "physiology", which had been previously limited to medical literature(5).

2. Gastrosophie in a cookbook?

After this quick introduction to the general research to which this article is related, this paper will now focus on one specific source, which reveals some of the values related to taste during the Enlightenment and which could also be interesting if we link it to the concept of Gastrosophie. The source that was chosen is the introduction of a cookbook of the
18th century.

The prefaces and introductions to this type of literature are particularly interesting, because they are the best place to find a mention of taste. What is this cookbook about? What's the content promised compared to the one we really find in it? Why did the author decide to publish his book? If the author does talk about taste, which words does he choose to do so? What exactly is taste? How do people talk about it? And maybe more significant, who is talking about taste? Are we listening only to cooks, or are we reading philosophers, doctors or other educated people from high society?

There is a history of French cookbooks, demonstrating the main evolutions related not only to food, but also to the culture in general. In the early cookbooks, there was no introduction. The books were written by professional cooks (often employed in rich and fancy houses) and they went directly to the essentials: the recipes. The first introductions, still written mainly by cooks, were meant to be practical and were related to the organisation of delicate meals: how the table should be set, how the different tasks of the dinner preparation should be distributed between all the kitchen staff, and also more technical information, such as how one should cut a piece of meat, explanations regarding the recipes presented in the book and so on. But at the end of the 17th and even more in the 18th century, these prefaces became much longer, more important, more erudite, and scholarly and, something that was also new, they were no longer written only by cooks, but by educated people from high society(6).

Les Dons de Comus, written in the 18th century, is one of those books(7). Published without an author's name, this text is attributed to François Marin, chief cook to the duchesse de Gèvres, before working as maître d'hôtel for the maréchal de Soubise. This text is particularly significant because the introduction looks nothing like the kind of text we would expect for a cookbook. In fact, it's a piece of about 50 pages, a real dissertation on taste and the history of cooking, in which the author considers taste as a matter of art and as a science. There are many classical references in the text, starting with the title itself, which refers to Comus, the classical Roman god of cooking and comedy. All the references and standards of literary style we find in this book suggest that the author is probably not a cook, but an educated member of high society. And this would have been especially clear to the contemporary reader. The preface is attributed by food historians to Pierre Brumoy and Guillaume-Hyacinthe Bougeant, two Jesuits. One can find many other examples of similar cases, other prefaces of cookbooks being written by a different author(8). This means that cookbooks are no longer being read only by cooks, but mainly by the whole of high society, who like to find in them some classical references or jokes that they can collectively understand. This was another way of underlining the distinction of this powerful, rich and educated minority, which considered itself a society of those who know and practise the rules of good taste and manners in their actual lives.

Moreover, by writing these introductions, the highly educated people of courtly society contributed to making cookbooks more important and meaningful, raising the level of cooking to culture and taking part in the debate over the statute of taste.

Les Dons de Comus also reveals the emergence of the so-called Nouvelle Cuisine, which it also contributed towards disseminating. From the end of the 17th century, new culinary practices started to develop, claiming to excel over the ancient methods. The new way of cooking is said to simplify and lighten the meals of the heavy spices that constituted the older sauces, trying to find the real and natural taste of food, and by doing so, helping the digestion and contributing to better health. The Nouvelle Cuisine, simpler but also more scientific, is also a reason (or a justification) for members of high society to participate in the writing of cookbooks. And of course, the Nouvelle Cuisine claims to be better than the ancient one.

But not everyone agrees and this debate will lead to a real dispute through books between the Ancients and the Moderns, a conflict one can also see in other fields in France at the same time. Actually, Les Dons de Comus will lead to a real intellectual controversy, quickly followed by the publication of the Lettre d'un pâtissier anglois (1739), an anonymous pamphlet attributed to the comte Desalleurs, "who satirised the pretentiousness of the Advertisement and the preciousness of the Nouvelle Cuisine"(9), criticising the useless ambitions of novelty, mocking the philosophical and historical reflexions allegedly written by a cook(10).

When one is trying to find out about the representations of taste, such a text is really fascinating. It's an apology for cooking, considered here as a real art and a science, two major themes that shall be developed within the rest of this article(11).

Taste and cooking, or how a biological necessity became an art

Taste is the sense given by nature to help us distinguish food from the poisons in the environment. Its purpose is to satisfy a biological need: eating. All forms of life, humans as well as animals, need to eat to survive. That is one of the major reasons why, for a long time, taste, considered only as an animal sense, necessary but mechanical, was not really judged worthy of interest by scholars, scientists and philosophers.

But taste isn't limited to this material purpose in Les Dons de Comus, because by necessity, it became an art with the rise of culture and politeness. Animals, just like the first human beings, find their food in nature. They eat natural food, raw and crude; the author talks about "innocent food"(12) found in their environment, without any preparation. Some people think that because of this, protected by nature, animals don't get sick, unlike men in society who get diseases from too sophisticated cooking.

But the author of the preface doesn't agree. He thinks, on the contrary, that mankind progressively started to develop culture and industry, inventing cooking, which made it possible to transform crude ingredients from nature into something better. With time, people became more curious, experienced, and were always wanting to find other ways of preparing food. The techniques, quite simple in the beginning, became more and more elaborate, as people became more polite and civilised, with the rise of culture. Finally, people managed to "make an art from the most simple and natural action"(13). Cooking was a way of transforming natural ingredients, not to make them lose their natural goodness, but to make them better, for taste as much as for health, because it helped the digestion, a major criterion for judging the quality of food in the past.

The traditional opposition between nature and culture is here used to celebrate the so-called Nouvelle Cuisine. The history of cooking reveals that taste was born and developed at the same time as culture and manners. The culinary art made the food better, not only as regards taste, but also for health reasons. Culture is thus a way of perfecting nature. That is how taste developed, out of the rise of culture.

Taste, and more generally the way we eat, has always been an interaction between man and nature. In fact, taste is the only sense that makes it possible for a part of the external world to get into the human body, becoming a part of us while being ingested, which explains all the fears that often come along with food.

That is why it is so important to let responsible and qualified people take care of this matter: "This is the idea I have of a really good cook. He has to know precisely all the properties of everything he uses, so he could correct or improve the food that nature presents to us all crude; he should also have a healthy mind, very good taste, and a delicate palate, to make him able to combine skilfully the ingredients and the doses"(14). So, the cook appears here to be a master in perfecting nature through culture.

The cook, a painter of taste

The chief cook is here presented as a talented artist, able to combine flavours as painters do with colours in their paintings. This painter of taste knows how to create a harmony of flavours, where no spice or ingredient overwhelms the others. This comparison between the cook and the artist is something new and it's a resolutely powerful and provocative one. Culinary arts claim a similar place as painting and all the other finer arts. Sight, considered as the most noble and superior sense for centuries, was celebrated in all discourses that mention the five senses, unlike taste which had always been the last one in the hierarchy of senses(15). But here, it is proposed that taste should be considered on the same level as sight, and cooking is claimed to be an art on the same level as painting(16). This new and powerful metaphor reveals that taste and cooking are progressively considered as important matters of interest, even for philosophers, thinkers, scientists and high society(17).

 

The new way of cooking: a form of chemistry

Not only is the cook an artist, he is also a scientist, as important as a doctor even. Cooking is to be considered as an advanced form of chemistry, transforming the simple ingredients of nature into something better for digestion and for health. The cook has the power of metamorphosis in his kitchen, able to transform the taste as well as the qualities of food. Even poisons can become edible. But of course, as a relic of the ancient tradition of dietetics, the choice of food depends on people's temperaments, which explains and justifies all the differences between personal tastes(18). "Ancient cooking was really complicated and much too detailed. Modern cooking is a sort of chemistry", mixing and fusing all the ingredients "so that nothing dominates and that everything is tasted". So one can see that the Nouvelle Cuisine is not only an art, but also a science(19).

One can also find mentions of food chemistry in scientific treatises related to the physiology of taste. Already in the 16th century, Paracelsus, who was among the first to reject the humoral theory, had begun to use chemistry and alchemy related to food and taste. At the end of the 17th century, scientists were perfecting chemistry, using it to understand the operations of the human body. Among others, Jan-Baptista Van Helmont explains digestion as a chemical process(20). He's followed notably by Thomas Willis, who also studied fermentation and distillation, related to the functioning of the stomach. He was also fascinated with the theory of spirituous principles, explaining that "the senses and mind operated by means of animal spirits, extremely subtle material fluids secreted by the brain and refined from coarser spirits derived from food by digestion. The nerves were hollow vessels through which the animal spirits reached every region of the body, acting as the vehicles of thought, will and sensory impressions. Certain foods, such as fermented liqueurs, spices and other highly flavoured foods, possessed large quantities of penetrating volatile principles or volatile salts, which were easily converted to a spirituous principle in the blood during digestion. The brain then extracted the most subtle part of spirituous principles from the blood and secreted it into the nerves as animal spirits"(21).

 

The modern cooks in favour of the Nouvelle Cuisine particularly promote the restaurans (sic), the jus and the bouillons, the latter being called "the soul of sauces"(22), because they believed them to be quintessence, "concentrated extracts of foods"(23), which could help digestion and mental functions in the same way, by removing "the 'earthy juices'" which encumbered the mind"(24).

Gastrosophie: health and pleasure of taste through moderation

In the end, the art and science of taste seem to lead to a form of gastrosophie, if gastrosophie is a philosophy of taste and wisdom of life. The key here is definitely moderation, the only way to access the sensual delight or pleasure of taste, which leads to a healthy and enjoyable life. The real and true good taste is therefore a sensual but moderate delight.

Moderation (mediocritas) is really a topos, a recurrent theme in discourses on taste. Medical and philosophical literature, treatises of civility, moral or religious works, all sources agreed for centuries that the pleasures of the table have to be reasonably enjoyed; otherwise they will lead to intemperance and to all excesses of the flesh. The sin of gluttony, immorality, and inappropriate behaviour, but also diseases, all are reasons to avoid and condemn the animal, useless and material pleasures of taste.

So, it is not a surprise to find mentions of the importance of moderation of the pleasures of taste in Les Dons de Comus. We have already found this before and it is nothing new. But what changes in the 18th century are the discourses, the words, the contexts and the developments that this theme brings about. What's new is finding such debates in recipe books, seeing taste at the centre of intellectual debates, concerning both thinkers and high society itself.

There is a real knowledge about taste, only mastered by a minority of people who know, who talk with the chef about the refinements of good cooking. And these "connoisseurs" are masters in controlling themselves. They never eat too much; they just eat well, always in moderation, to preserve their health as much as their taste, because balance is the only way to get the real sensual delight of taste. And finally, with moderation, the pleasures of taste are stronger and last longer(25).

The sophistication of cooking does not lead to diseases, as some people think, says the author of the introduction of Les Dons de Comus. All diseases come from excesses, when people eat too much, when reason is too weak to control the body. "That's how one unfairly imputes to the innocent art of cooking the effects of intemperance"(26), excesses and abundance being one of the characteristics of the dishes of the past that the cuisine moderne claims to reject. In reality diseases do come from digestive problems. And we've seen, thanks to the Nouvelle Cuisine, that the cook is now able to counteract such problems by transforming foodstuffs and helping digestion, contributing, like the doctor, to preserving health. In that way, people would take pleasure at the table and have a more enjoyable life.

Moreover, moderation is as important for taste itself as it is for health. No pleasures of the table should exist without balance. The delicate art of seasoning is a good example of this; it needs the talent of a real chef to use spices delicately, for these are, "more precious than gold when they're used properly, but real poisons when they're lavished"(27). What seems to be an attack against the ancient way of cooking, which used a lot of spices in any kind of meal, also reveals how important the amount, the proportions, can be, in acceding to what is considered to be the natural and real taste of food, a balance or harmony of flavours.

3. Conclusion. The art and science of Taste: Gastrosophie?

In summary, in reading a cookbook from the 18th century, we definitely don't necessarily get a catalogue of food practices. In a study focused on ancient representations, there is not only a culinary history of taste, but also one involving science, art, religion, morality, medicine, philosophy and so on. Isn't that what gastrosophie is about; questioning the philosophy of taste, the meaning of food culture, through the discourses of the past? Isn't the Nouvelle Cuisine speaking for gastrosophie?

In this cookbook of the 18th century, the author of the preface of Les Dons de Comus, a member of the educated society, manages to make a real plea for cooking to be considered as an art as well as a science. Describing its history and practices, the author shows that cooking and taste are no longer irrelevant subjects of interest, but disciplines that require specific knowledge and skilful practice. He also celebrates the superiority of the Nouvelle Cuisine over the ancient one, using scientific and medical arguments to prove its higher quality. The good cook has to be a real scholar, a scientist, able to know and recognise all properties of the food he prepares. With his art, real chemistry, he transforms the crude ingredients of nature, making them more digestible and tastier. The Nouvelle Cuisine claims to simplify the culinary rules, revealing the natural and true taste of food. In this way, by stimulating taste pleasantly but reasonably, the cook, like the doctors themselves, could contribute to maintaining people in good health. It's important to mention that one doesn't only find these ideas in recipe books, but in philosophical and medical literature as well. Scientists, too, talk about the chemistry of taste, while philosophers discuss the values of this sense among the other arts.

Eventually, the Nouvelle Cuisine seems to lead to Gastrosophie, a philosophy of taste, concerned as much by health as by the true pleasures of taste, made possible only by moderation. And this is a key word regarding a moral way of living, an aesthetic sense of existence, combined with health and sensual delight. Finally, it's the whole life of the gastrosopher, and not only his plate, that could become an art.

 

Quellen, Anmerkungen

  1. Regarding "gastrosophie", see Lemke H., Ethik des Essens. Eine Einführung in die Gastrosophie, Berlin, Akademie Verlag, 2007.  
  2. Voltaire, art. « Goût », in Dictionnaire philosophique, t. 4, s.l., De l'imprimerie de la société littéraire-typographique, 1785.- Montesquieu, Essai sur le gout, Paris, Armand Colin, 1993 (1st ed. Paris, 1754). Passages of Montesquieu's work are also published in the article « Goût » from the Encyclopédie, completed by Voltaire and D'Alembert: Diderot D. and d'Alembert J., Encyclopédie ou Dictionnaire raisonné des arts, des sciences et des métiers, vol. 2, t. 7, Paris, 1757, p. 758-770 (New York edition, Readex Microprint, 1969).  
  3. « Ce sens, ce don de discerner nos alimens, a produit dans toutes les langues connues, la métaphore qui exprime par le mot goût, le sentiment des beautés & des défauts dans tous les arts ». Voltaire, Art. « Goût (Gramm. Littérat. & Philos.) », in Diderot D. and d'Alembert J., Encyclopédie ou Dictionnaire raisonné..., p. 761.  
  4. Since Aristotle (De Anima), taste had been considered a form of touch, both being necessary but animal senses, not as noble as sight and hearing.  
  5. Brillat-Savarin J.-A., Physiologie du goût, ou Méditations de gastronomie transcendante, Paris, A. Sautelet, 1826.  
  6. Bonnet J.-Cl., « Les manuels de cuisine », in Dix-huitième siècle, n° 15 (numéro spécial « Aliments et cuisine »), 1983, p. 53-63.- Mennell S., All Manners of Food. Eating and Taste in England and France from the Middle Ages to the Present, 2nd ed., Urbana-Chicago, University of Illinois Press, 1996, p. 81 (1st ed. 1985). See chap. 4 "From Renaissance to Revolution: Court and Country Food", p. 62-83. The following lines also owe a lot to Emma Spary's forthcoming book: Spary E., Eating the Enlightenment: Food and the Sciences in France, 1675-1760, to be published soon. Chapter 5, "The Philosophical Palate" (p. 263-303), deals with interesting ideas regarding taste, e.g. the relationship between the polite society and cookbooks, but also many developments regarding the physiology of taste. I would like to thank the author here for letting me have a taste of her work before it was printed.  
  7. (Marin F.), Les Dons de Comus ou les Délices de la table. Ouvrage non seulement utile aux officiers de Bouche pour ce qui concerne leur art, mais principalement à l'usage des personnes qui sont curieuses de sçavoir donner à manger, et d'être servies délicatement, tant en gras qu'en maigre, suivant les Saisons & dans le goût le plus nouveau, Paris, chez Prault fils, 1739. This first edition is mainly a book on the art of serving meals, with a list of dishes. This edition is followed three years later with a supplement, called Suite des Dons de Comus ou l'art de la cuisine réduit en pratique, Paris, chez la veuve Pissot ; Didot ; Brunet fils, 1742, 3 vol. It presents many more recipes and also contains a new preface, attributed to the journalist Anne-Gabriel Meusnier de Querlon. In 1750, a second edition of the Suite des Dons de Comus is published, combining both introductions in one preface written by Meusnier de Querlon: Les Dons de Comus, ou l'art de la cuisine réduit en pratique. Nouvelle edition, revue, corrigée et augmentée par l'auteur, Paris, chez la Veuve Pissot, 1750, 3 vol. All the introductions are edited by Mennell S., Lettre d'un pâtissier anglois, et autres contributions à une polémique gastronomique du XVIIIe siècle, trans. Biard J. D., (Exeter), University of Exeter, 1981. This article is based on a later edition: (Marin F.), Les Dons de Comus, ou l'art de la cuisine, réduit en pratique, nouvelle édition, revue, corrigée et augmentée par l'Auteur, t. 1, Paris, Pissot, 1758.  
  8. For instance, Etienne-Laureault de Foncemagne, member of the Académie française, is said to be the author of a "Dissertation préliminaire sur la cuisine moderne", used as a preface to the cookbook of (Menon F.), La science du maître d'hôtel cuisinier, Paris, 1749.  
  9. Mennell S., All Manners of Food..., p. 81.  
  10. To find more information regarding this controversy, see Mennell S., Lettre d'un pâtissier anglois, et autres contributions à une polémique gastronomique du XVIIIe siècle...- Mennell S., All Manners of food..., p. 77-83.- Spary E., Eating the Enlightenment..., p. 267-268.  
  11. Les Dons de Comus has been chosen here as an example of new ideas spreading since the 1730's in France within the development of Nouvelle Cuisine. One can of course find all these themes in other books of the same period.  
  12. « L'avantage que les animaux ont sur l'homme, est qu'ils trouvent chacun dans leur espèce la nourriture qui leur est propre, toute préparée, pour ainsi dire, par les mains de la Providence. La nature seule a fait tous les frais de leur cuisine & de leurs repas. (...) la terre, même sans culture, nous offre par-tout des mêts innocens qui ne coutent rien à notre industrie (...). » (Marin F.), Les Dons de Comus..., t. 1, Paris, 1758, p. viij-ix.  
  13. « (...) se faire un art de l'action la plus simple, & la plus naturelle. Voilà l'histoire de la cuisine, & à peu près celle de tous les arts ». (Marin F.), Les Dons de Comus..., t. 1, Paris, 1758, p. x-xi.  
  14. « Mais voici l'idée que je me suis faite d'un bon Cuisinier. Il faut qu'il connoisse exactement les propriétés de tout ce qu'il emploie, pour pouvoir corriger ou perfectionner les alimens que la nature nous présente tout bruts : qu'il ait avec cela la tête saine, le goût sûr, & le palais délicat, pour combiner habilement & les ingrédiens & les doses. » (Marin F.), Les Dons de Comus..., t. 1, Paris, 1758, p. xxiij.  
  15. Regarding the superiority of the sense of sight see Havelange C., De l'œil et du monde. Une histoire du regard au seuil de la modernité, Paris, Fayard, 1998.  
  16. « Enfin, à leur donner cette union que les Peintres donnent aux couleurs, & à les rendre si homogènes que de leurs diverses saveurs il ne résulte qu'un goût fin & piquant, & si j'ose le dire, une harmonie de tous les goûts réunis ensemble. Voilà tout le fin du métier, & le grand œuvre en fait de cuisine. On ne s'est peut-être jamais avisé de chercher du rapport entre deux objets aussi éloignés que paroissent l'être l'art de la Peinture & de la Cuisine. Mais sauf la hardiesse de la comparaison, & à l'irrévérance près, je n'ai point trouvé d'image plus propre à rendre mes idées sensibles. L'union & la rupture des couleurs qui font la beauté du coloris, représentent assez bien, ce me semble, ce mélange de sucs & d'ingrédiens dont le Cuisinier compose ses ragoûts. Il faut que ces ingrédiens & ces sucs soient noyés & fondus de la même manière que le Peintre fond ses couleurs, & que la même harmonie, qui dans un tableau frappe les yeux des connoisseurs, se fasse sentir aux palais fins dans le goût d'une sauce. »(Marin F.), Les Dons de Comus..., t. 1, Paris, 1758, p. xxij-xxiij.  
  17. Stephen Mennell suggests that the claim of cooking to join the arts was made possible thanks to the development of printed books, but also to the rise of "self-consciousness" since the Renaissance: "The written word eventually helped to promote a striving for 'originality' and 'personalisation' in cookery as it did in the arts generally." If in the 17th century, recipes were dedicated to noble patrons, in the 18th century, by contrast, recipes started to be attributed to particular cooks themselves. So "(...) the trend towards individuality in taste and culinary creation only became very obvious in the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries". Mennell S., All Manners of Food..., p. 68-69.  
  18. Even though people continue to refer as a habit to temperaments, the theory of humours, used for centuries since Galen, is no longer considered valuable in the 18th century.  
  19. « L'ancienne Cuisine étoit fort compliquée & d'un détail infini : La cuisine moderne est une espece de Chymie. La science du Cuisinier consiste à décomposer, à faire digérer, & à quintessencier les viandes ; à tirer des sucs nourrissans, & pourtant legers, à les mêler & les confondre ensemble, de façon que rien de domine &, que tout se fasse sentir. » (Marin F.), Les Dons de Comus..., t. 1, Paris, 1758, p. xxj-xxij.  
  20. Debus A. G., « La médecine chimique », in Grmek M.D. (dir.), Histoire de la pensée médicale en Occident,

    t. 2 (« De la Renaissance aux Lumières »), Paris, Seuil, 1997, p. 37-59.- Albala K., Food in Early Modern Europe, Westport, Greenwood Press, 2003. Chapter 6 "Diet and nutrition", p. 223-230.  

  21. Spary E., Eating the Enlightenment..., p. 268-269.  
  22. « Le premier Bouillon, ou si l'on veut, le bouillon général, (...) est à proprement parler, l'ame de la cuisine ». (Marin F.), Les Dons de Comus..., t. 1, Paris, 1758, p. (1). These words are used in the opening of the first chapter of Les Dons de Comus, devoted to the "bouillon". See (Marin F.), Les Dons de Comus..., t. 1, Paris, 1758, p. (1).   
  23. Spary E., Eating the Enlightenment..., p., 269.  
  24. Idem, p. 269. The link between the body and the mind has been a central philosophical question for centuries. In the 18th century, some philosophers claimed that diet could influence the mind. In les Dons de Comus, we find the idea that the value of taste depends on the quality of the organs: « Comme le goût corporel & le goût spirituel dépendent également de la conformation des organes destinés à opérer leurs diverses sensations, la finesse de ces deux sortes de goûts prouve assurément la finesse des organes qui leur sont propres. » (Marin F.) Les Dons de Comus..., p. xxvij. This question is actually much more complicated and is very well explained by Emma Spary in her forthcoming book, which also mentions other thinkers of the same period. Regarding the question of restaurans, one should also see the remarkable book by Rebecca Spang: Spang R.L., The Invention of the Restaurant. Paris and modern gastronomic culture, Cambridge-London, Harvard University Press, 2000.  
  25. « La sensualité délicate & la finesse du goût, au lieu d'exclure la sobriété, la supposent nécessairement, & cette volupté peu durable qui échappe au milieu de la jouissance, n'est jamais plus piquante & plus pure que dans l'usage modéré des plaisirs de la table. (...) Que ceux sur qui la raison n'a aucun pouvoir, qui donnent tout au tempérament, & qui ne peuvent concilier avec les plaisirs de la table, cette utile modération qui en fait le prix, & qui peut-être n'est elle-même qu'un rafinement (sic) de volupté, craignent avec raison l'art de la cuisine : c'est un art funeste pour eux. (...) Mais pour ces sages voluptueux, qui en satisfaisant la nature, sçavent écouter la raison, & se ménager dans les plaisirs même le moyens de les rendre durables, en évitant la satiété, ils peuvent goûter sans crainte les délices de la table.»(Marin F.), Les Dons de Comus..., t. 1, Paris, 1758, p. xxv-xxvi.  
  26. « On dit d'un autre côté que le Médecin n'est occupé qu'à contreminer le Faiseur de sauces. A supposer le fait établi, seroit-il impossible de les reconcilier ? Est-ce en effet l'aprêt des alimens, ou l'abus & l'excès qu'on en fait qui nous les rendent pernicieux ? (...) C'est ainsi qu'on impute injustement à l'art innocent de la Cuisine, les effets de l'intempérance. » (Marin F.), Les Dons de Comus..., t. 1, Paris, 1758, p. xvij-xix.  
  27. « L'assaisonnement est l'écueil des médiocres ouvriers, & la partie de notre travail qui demande le plus d'attention. Le sel, le poivre, & les autres épices, ingrédiens plus précieux que l'or, quand on les emploie à propos, mais vrais poisons, quand on les prodigue, doivent être ménagés comme l'or même, & dispensés par une main légere que l'intelligence conduise. »(Marin F.), Les Dons de Comus..., t. 1, Paris, 1758, p. xxiv.