Food Porn!

I have some reservations about the way we've started to use "porn" to describe anything people are really really enthusiastic about.  I even read a blog post the other day referring to the Westminster Kennel Club dog show as "puppy porn," which kind of creeps me out.  It seems to me that overusing the word makes porn itself more mainstream, less shocking, more shrug-inducing, which may also make the negative aspects of porn more palatable in the zeitgeist.  But in the case of food, it seems closer to appropriate, to me at least.  Food, like sex, is about appetite: it's often, anyway, about what we want in a deep libidinal irrational way.

With that in mind, I'm a huge fan of the blog "food porn daily," which every day posts a photo taken from one of hundreds of food blogs. The photos (of all different kinds of food) are luscious, and they inspire me to cook and bake and mix and eat better. They also usually provide a link to a recipe, but that almost seems besides the point. As the blog's authors say, "We provide links to recipes whenever possible, but we do not believe they are crucial to the experience. Let these photos inspire your cooking. Use your cooking fundamentals, reference the interwebs, and trust your instincts. Most importantly, have fun!"

There's something funny about that, though, isn't there? That a photo of food should be satisfying and inspirational? I wonder if this would be the case for me if I didn't have enough to eat on a regular basis. If I had to scramble for calories to get me through the day--if I were starving, or close to it, in other words--would these photos just make me angry or frustrated? As is, I do sometimes follow through on a recipe from the blog, but I often find them disappointing: the photo is usually much tastier than the reality.

Here's one of their posts that I've been saving, for creamy mascarpone polenta with sauteed leeks, endive, pancetta, and a poached egg: