The Menu

1. Instant gratification, social media, and art
With the flagrant stereotypes of the upperclass and elitist nature of the secondary cast, food as a metaphor for capitalist goods is surface level. However, it’s something we must dive into before considering alternate interpretations for the metaphor. We are used to instant gratification and our cyclical culture of consumption purposefully leaves us feeling unfulfilled to keep the system going. However, the food metaphor becomes more nuanced when you think of it as “art” under capitalism. The general framework remains the same: we’re so used to instant gratification that we forget to taste the food, and just “eat” like Slowik told the diners not to at the beginning of the film.
Food as a metaphor for art gives it nuance on an important point: art in the age of social media is “eaten up” so quickly by its audience that nothing is left of it by the time the starving masses move onto the next big thing. An artwork is only looked at for 2 seconds on twitter before you scroll again, every movie is reduced to a passing fad without serious analysis, and music has been reduced to slop of 5 second tiktoks. Food is taken for granted and eaten without appreciation, the same way art is.
For example, the guy who got his ring finger cut off had visited Hawthorn 11 times and still couldn’t remember a single dish that he had enjoyed there. Visiting the island should be a once in a lifetime experience, but the couple doesn’t even bother looking around the island before getting to the restraunt. They are already bored because their wealth grants them instant gratification, and they’ve become so used to the art’s presence that they don’t even bother appreciating it.

2. Capitalism shapes art
There’s no denying that Slowik is pretentious, but that’s because he’s a victim under capitalism the same way that all the working class or “chefs” are. Slowik can no longer create the art that he enjoys, and it has no substance anymore becuase it is catered to a clientele that will never have enough. He needs to keep going to the bigger and bigger thing until it ends in his literal self immolation under the guise of nostalgia through the “s’mores” act. This is further reinforced by how Slowik compares all service work to prostitution, a job that’s historically been regarded as a low job that forces you to sell your soul. It’s worth noting that the work of prostitutes literally forces them to take away all autonomy, like how the main character had to agree with everything her client demanded.
The way Slowik can’t ever be satisfied like his clients and this is expanded on through Tantalus. Tantalus, the name of Slowik’s resturaunt that Bloom wrote her article on that lead to his big break, references the greek king. He was condemned to the afterlife after feeding the gods his own children by being trapped under a fruit tree in a shallow pool, from which he could never eat or drink, but never being able to die. Slowik can’t ever satisfy the clientele that visit his resturaunts, because as he said, he’s been “fooled into trying to satisfy those who’ll never be satisfied”. However, this metaphor also works both ways, as Slowik himself is comparable to Tantalus. He has sold his art to the consumers(the way that Tantalus murdered his children to feed the gods), and so he can never truly enjoy or create art again in a prison of his own making. It’s only after Margot/Erin demands that he feeds her something she’ll enjoy that he’s found meaning in making art again. However, he’s so committed to the bit that he can’t back out now.
There’s nothing left to Slowik’s art than an “intellectual exercise” and that’s really depressing

3. The genius of using food
It’s possible that the director just really fucking liked food and therefore chose it to make it the main focus of the film, but the exclusive nature of food highlights the ephermerality of art, especially under capitalism personified by the secondary cast.

4. Conclusion
The assertion that food is a metaphor for art is by no means a revolutionary one, as Slowik repeatedly calls himself an artist and his food art during the film. However, it’s important to realise that this metaphor isn’t just contained to himself and his relationship to cooking, but that it’s applicable to the state of all art under capitalism. Our culture of instant gratification emphasises “eating” over appreciation, leading to the death of the artist and viewer alike.