When it comes to myths about art, perhaps the oldest (and heftiest) is the one that pairs up the artist with madness. From Antiquity to the 19th century, the myth of madness around art has taken on different dimensions, and surely it will be easy to remember more than one case of the archetypal mad artist [1]. However, the studies that have addressed this subject are usually pathographic, implying that they have focused their attention mainly on the tormented life of the creative subject, with their respective anecdotes and eccentricities, leaving aside the visuality of the works they have produced.

Due to its main function, cooking can –ironically– be pushed under the table when considered from a non-culinary point of view. It’s understood that cooking is limited to the transformation of food by means of different techniques, a matter between cook and stove. The act of eating represents, aside from a vital process, a set of symbolic values and traditions that has aroused the curiosity of scholars and theorists for centuries. It’s not just about what we eat, but how we eat it.