Subtitles section Play video
MALE SPEAKER: Hello, everyone.
How are we today?
Give me a cheer.
Excellent.
I'm very pleased to welcome Charles Spence to Talks
at Google.
Charles Spence is a professor of experimental psychology
at Oxford University, and a gastrophysicist,
working at the interface between chefs,
food companies, and technology.
I've seen the slides.
They look incredible.
Please join me in welcoming Charles
with a round of applause.
CHARLES SPENCE: OK.
So it's a pleasure to be with you here this lunch time,
and tell you a little bit about the research we
do in Oxford, but also with food companies and chefs
around the world.
It's sort of this interface of psychology, neuroscience,
technology, and fine dining, it has
some of the insights that are emerging from the latest
kind of research at this kind of interface,
are starting to work their way out to home dining,
to a variety of real world situations,
to hopefully allow us all to eat a little more
healthfully in the future.
And it's all kind of premised on this idea of the perfect meal,
the title of the book.
Just feel the weight in your hands and you'll know,
there's quality there.
And the opening quote from the book, from MFK Fisher,
is one that kind of inspires a lot of our thinking.
"That once at least, in the life of every human,
whether he be brute or trembling daffodil,
comes a moment of complete gastronomic satisfaction.
It is, I am sure, as much a matter of spirit as of body.
Everything is right.
Nothing jars.
There's a kind of harmony with every sensation
and emotion melted into one chord of well-being."
If we all think back in our past over the last few years,
we've all had that kind of perfect meal experience.
My colleagues sort of think, well, we
can't study it, because it's kind of different for each
and every one of you.
Maybe for some of you, it's going for your gastro tourism
to some fancy Michelin starred restaurant
on the other side of the world.
For others, it might be nothing more complex
than a picnic on a summer's day in the English countryside.
Different for each and every one of us,
but I think that we can sort of study that perfect meal, what
makes it great, try and extract some generalizations
can be used in everyday life to kind of nudge our meal
experiences in the right direction
to be more stimulating, more engaging, more
memorable, and perhaps more healthy as well.
I'm certainly not the first to think about the perfect meal.
It is a topic that goes back at least a century.
You find some the first sort of mentions from 1894
from French chemist, Berthelot, talking about the perfect meal
and what it would be like sometime around about today.
And for all of the chemists, for the feminist writers,
and also for the sort of serious scientists,
it was this, the meal in a pill.
So he was imagining in 1894, thereabouts, what
it would be like in a century.
And the idea of sitting down to eat
and wasting an hour of your day with a multi-course meal
seems bizarre.
Surely in the future, we'll have a pill, we'll pop it.
And that will sustain us through the day
and we'll need nothing else.
Just take this quote from-- where has he gone?
"Looking Forward: A Dream of the United States
of the Americas in 1999," written in 1899 by Arthur Bird.
"In order to save time, people in 1999,
often dined on a pill, a small pellet which contained
highly nutritious food.
They had little inclination to stretch their legs
under a table for an hour at a time
while masticating on an eight course dinner.
The busy man of 1999 took a soup pill or a concentrated meat
pill for his noon day lunch.
He dispatched these while working at his desk."
So he could be more efficient as a result.
That's what they thought was going to happen in 1999,
but it has not come to pass obviously.
And why not?
Because I think food is so much more than just
about nutrition and sustenance.
There's a whole sort of psychology
behind our experience of food, the way we eat
and what we enjoy eating.
And that is the theme for the book, "The Perfect Meal."
Myself, I worked together with Betina Piqueras-Fiszman,
my co-author, working in a psychology department
at Oxford, trying to understand the factors that
make one meal experience better than another
or that it can ruin a great evening simply
by just getting one sensory cue or trigger wrong.
And this is what we can think of as gastrophysics,
the new sciences of the table, which means since 1984, when
Harold McGee came out with his "On Food and Cooking,"
that was a whole three decades we've had,
a little over, of sort of science in the back of house,
science in the kitchen, science of new techniques of food
preparation, a rotovaps and sous vide and all sorts of stuff,
changing the way that food is prepared,
at least in the hands of some chefs.
We've also had the kind of emergence
of all sorts of new ingredients as well
to deliver textures and spumes and foams
and all kinds of stuff we had never had before.
Three decades, that's taken us a long way,
and it's certainly changed the way
that we eat, at least sometimes, but it's
all science in the kitchen.
Where I think it's changing now, and that's
kind of the idea of gastrophysics,
is it's science moving to the front of house,
to the dining tables, in the restaurants,
because they're easy to study, or can be, through to the home
dining, anywhere where we eat.
It's a science of the diner.
And it's gastrophysics.
So it's gastronomy, we're interested in high end
food in the first instance.
But also physics from psychophysics,
which is the kind of psychology, the measurement
of the human-- what different inputs lead
to different kind of outputs.
Normally it's done with lights and sounds
in front of a computer screen, but we want the gastrophysics
of real food experiences.
Study what matters, what doesn't matter, and how to create
insights that are actionable in the matter where or who
you might be serving food to.
I keep coming back this sort of thing,
that food is so much more than just about food.
So, imagine yourself as the chef,
and you've learned all the techniques.
And until recently you'd kind of think, well,
if I know I source my ingredients locally.
I prepare them beautifully.
Perhaps I give a little attention
to how the food appears on the plate.
If I do all that, it'll be enough.
I can deliver great meal experiences.
But in fact, I think, you need to know
about the mind of the diner as well in order
to change people's behavior for the better
to deliver great meal experiences.
What I'm seeing now, kind of inspired
by the likes of Ferran Adria in Spain and Heston Blumenthal,
just up the road in Bray, is a whole generation of young chefs
who are popping up, starting up, opening gastropubs,
culinary artistry events in the UK
and elsewhere, who for the first time are thinking,
I need to know how to make great tasting food.
But on top of that, I want to know
what's going in the head of my diner or order
to really meet their expectations
or completely confound their expectations.
But I need to know what's in here.
So a couple of examples of why you need to know more than just
about how to prepare food well.
First one is this kind of ugly beast
of the deep, the Patagonian toothfish that has been
on restaurant menus for years.
It just was never very popular.
Would you order it yourself on a menu in a restaurant?
Probably not.
If you saw the picture, definitely not.
But simply a little bit of rebranding
calling this Chilean sea bass, exactly the same fish,
looks still as ugly.
But suddenly sales increased by 1,300% in Australia,
North America, in the UK simply by change of name,
completely changes our food behavior,
what we choose to eat and what we don't.
Sure, great food, but on top of that,
you need to know what to call it.
Another kind of classic example of why the chef, I think,
needs to know about what's going on in the diner's mind.
Here we have a dish, and within the blink of an eye,
your brain has decided what it is.
Your brain is a prediction engine,
trying to figure out where the nutritious
food is in the environment.
So you see that and within 150 milliseconds,
your brain's decided, yeah, that's probably ice cream,
probably cold, probably sweet.
I'll probably like it.
Maybe I'll have a scoop later.
But I'd have to go to the gym.
And probably the flavor is a red fruit,
a raspberry or strawberry, something like that.
All went through your mind without you thinking, just
in the blink of an eye or less.
But the only problem is, that's not
the flavor of this ice cream.
So this is actually a frozen savory ice, popular in the UK
a century ago.
And this comes from the Fat Duck Kitchens.
So it could be a smoked salmon ice cream or a frozen crab
bisque ice cream.
So the chef makes this dish, maybe
is the world's top chef at the time.
He thinks it's seasoned perfectly.
It fits into sort of the theme of historic dining.
He brings it out and gives it to some of his preferred guests
who are regulars at the Fat Duck restaurant.
But when they put it in their mouth and they taste it,
they're going to go, ugh.
I didn't like it.
It's too salty.
But the problem was, the chef thought it was perfect.
He's the world's top chef.
But the diner said, no, it's too salty, pulls a funny face,
does not like at the time and does not
like it when they come back two or three weeks later.
It will remain salty in their experience.
The problem here is a matter of expectations.
Because the diner was thinking it
was going to be a sweet-tasting strawberry or raspberry ice
cream.
In fact, it was savory and salty.
Their expectations were disconfirmed.
They didn't like it.
Whereas if I just tell you before you
put a spoonful of this to your lips,
that this is food 386, a term that means nothing
to any of us, kind of vaguely scientific sounding.
But that title for the dish is enough
that when I give you, here, a spoonful of my new dish,
food 386, suddenly when you taste it,
you'll kind of withhold your expectations
and it will taste seasoned just right, the way the chef
experiences it.
So no matter what you do in the kitchen,
if you don't know the expectations of your diner,
you can't really predict how they're
going to respond or optimize the meal experience.
And if vision is so important, we
might think about the future of food.
Here we've got original sushi on the left, augmented reality
sushi on the right.
This, we were working with Katsu Kojima over in Japan.
There was about 70 vision scientists
thinking about a time, sometime in the future, when maybe we've
fished the seas to extinction of all our favorite sushi fish.
Could we, with our headset, like the one
you see there on the bottom right here.
Maybe you've been watching your movies.
Then you have your dinner and we can give you
the visual impression through the headset, of your best
tasting, now extinct fish on your sushi,
feed you the other one, and maybe
for what you eat, but eye is so important,
you have as good an experience as you
would have done if you could somehow still find
that now extinct fish.
Possibly.
Possibly not.
But again, it's this idea of using technology
and our knowledge of neuroscience
to deliver new, different food experiences.
Sometimes just more stimulating than anything we've had before.
At other times, trying to think about how
to nudge people towards healthier eating behaviors.
OK.
And food, as I say, it's so much more than about food.
It's about the naming and about expectations.
But it's also about mood and those we dine with.
It's kind of social, fundamentally
a social activity.
So I see chefs who think, as they
have done for decades, about palate cleansers.
We're in for a fancy meal.
We should have a palate cleanser to clear up palette
before the first of the chef's real dishes comes out.
And what will that be?
That will be maybe a lime sorbet,
something acidic to cut through something, apparently,
on your tongue.
But I think maybe the tongue is the least interesting bit
of our experience of flavor.
We experience flavors here in the brain.
So if I want to clean your palette, what I really
want to do is clean your mind, a mental palate cleanser
to get you into the right mood.
Because I know if you're in the right mood,
you'll enjoy the food that much more.
And this is the intuitive solution
of the Chef Denis Martin, who has a two Michelin star
restaurant in Vevey in Switzerland
between Charlie Chaplin's final resting house and Nestle
headquarters.
He's got two Michelin stars.
He kind of wants the third one.
Hasn't quite come yet.
Has a single sitting dining experience,
based in a knitting museum, which might
be part of the problem there.
But it's very inventive.
It's smoke and mirrors and all sorts
of great, molecular or modernist culinary practises.
When you go for that single sitting dinner service,
you all arrive, you're there at 7:00.
And you think well, we're all here now and you look around.
And there's nothing on the tables, no knives, no forks,
no glassware, nothing, just this sitting on the middle
of each and every table.
And people would wait and think, well, I'm
sure the first course is going to come out sometime soon.
But it won't.
Nothing will happen until some curious diner picks that thing
up off the table, wondering whether it's
the salt or the pepper shaker with a kind
of peculiar Swiss twist.
When they do that, when they pick that little device up,
look underneath, it's a silly, one euro toy.
It'll make a mooing sound.
The diner will laugh in surprise.
And then within a few moments, every table
in that two Michelin star restaurant
will have their moo cows in the air,
a chorus of mooing cows in a restaurant full of laughing
diners.
The mood has been elevated, enhanced,
and that is the moment when Denis
brings out the first dish, the mental palate cleanser.
Very simple, very easy.
I see other chefs in culinary institutes
trying to think about how to elevate the mood.
Do you put joke cards on the table?
Or do you play some sort of musical video clip
that makes everyone laugh like the laughing policeman
or that video you see it on YouTube of those four
quintuplets of babies.
One starts laughing and that's starts the next one
and that starts the next one.
And they just cannot stop.
You can't watch that video without yourself laughing,
I think.
And that could be a nice mental palate cleanser.
Because food is always so much more than just about the food.
It's all happening up here in your mind, rather than,
I think, on your tongue or in your mouth.
So we're looking how to work sometimes
with some of the top chefs to see how they have delivered
brilliant dining experiences and trying
to turn that into research or science and then kind of export
it out to whoever else.
But very often, we sort of work more these days
with younger chefs, those who have,
for the first time started to think
about the minds of their diners.
And think about some of the simple tricks
that they could utilize to enhance
the quality of their food.
And it's not about using these tricks to serve
bad food that will seem good.
It's about using the best of your culinary skills
together with the best of gastrophysics
to deliver something better yet again.
And here we have the results from a restaurant study
done in Scotland last year.
We have 140 diners in a Scottish hotel in a fancy restaurant.
Half of those diners are served this dish of Scottish fish
for their main course, but they're given a heavy knife
and fork in their hands.
The other half of the diners are eating
the same food on the same day in the same restaurant
have been given the light canteen knife and fork instead.
They're all eating the same food.
We asked them, how much do you like the food?
How artistic does it seemed to be plated to you?
And in this context, how much would you
be willing to pay for that dish in a place like you are today?
And what we find, with the heavy knife and fork in hand,
is people think the food looks more artistic
and they're willing to pay significantly more
for exactly the same output from the kitchen.
A trend towards increased liking didn't quite
reach significance here.
So when I go to those kind of gastropubs
and these young chefs popping up in the Oxfordshire countryside,
near the Oxford department, I see
them so passionate about the food
that they're trying to create.
But sometimes, they think well, we can't afford heavy cutlery.
It's an expensive investment.
But you see results like this and say, no,
the way to the knife and fork should not
matter to a tasting experience, but it does.
And if you go, and you think carefully next time you
go to the Fat Duck Restaurant, and you finally
get the cutlery, on course three, four, or five,
you realize how heavy it is, and realize, intuitively perhaps,
the culinary team have worked that into the experience.
So heavier cup, heavier glass, heavy can,
seems to-- heavier book I think as well,
seems to make the thing even better.
I say, the other chefs, they care so much about the food.
And you go to an Indian restaurant in Oxford
with an up and coming chef and he's passionate about the food.
But he doesn't think about the music.
And you're there in the middle of July,
eating this Indian food, and the restaurant manager got his iPad
on, blaring out Christmas carols or something else that's
completely incongruent with the food, with the time of year,
and it does spoil, to some degree, the experience.
You cannot just concentrate on the food all the time.
Out brain is picking up this stuff
about the lighting, the smells, and music, the chair we're
sitting on, even the table we're sitting at
as well as the waiter, that cutlery,
and integrating it into a final judgment
about how much we like that food and how much we
enjoyed the experience.
I also want stress, while some of the underlying neuroscience
is kind of complicated, some of the insights, I think,
are very actionable and quite simple
for any chef, wherever in the world they might be working.
And here's another sort of simple one
that's come out of our work with the Alicia Foundation, Ferran
Adria's kind of test research kitchens,
just outside Barcelona.
And here we have a dessert that looks again,
suspiciously like a strawberry ice cream.
And in this case it is.
You're safe.
Your eyes did not mislead you.
But in this study, we served exactly the same chef
prepared strawberry dessert, either on a black plate
or a white plate.
About 30 or 40 people eating the desert
from each plate on the same day in the same sort
of a restaurant-like environment.
We asked them how sweet was the ice cream.
How much do you like it?
How fruity, and so on.
And what we find is that one of those plates tastes sweeter.
Same batch of ice cream, but one of those plates
tastes 10% sweeter.
Specifically, those who were eating
from the round, white plate, say this
tastes 10% sweeter, about 15% more flavorful
than exactly the same dish served on a black plate.
If that black plate was angular, it would taste even less.
So round and white seems to be very sweet.
Black and angular is not at all sweet.
And we've done this research with the Alicia Foundation
in Spain.
We've been to the Paul Bocuse Cookery
School, the heart of traditional French cuisine,
sustaining those French values.
They've been sort of interested in this.
Now we know the plate matters, even though we know it
shouldn't.
We want to know how it impacts performance and experience.
And with diners paying in their restaurant in the Paul Bocuse
Chateau just outside Lyon, the same sort of result
holds up again.
Things that shouldn't matter, but they really do.
Food is so much more than just the food.
OK.
Really, that first impression we get of food,
be it the color of the red dessert.
Is it frozen salmon, smoked salmon,
or is it really strawberry, plays a key part
in sitting our expectations.
Then when we come to taste the food,
those expectations anchor our experience.
And maybe very often, we really live
in a world of our expectations.
We occasionally test the world and see, is it like I
expected it to be?
And if it is, more or less, we carry
on living in our predicted worlds as it were.
So that first visual impression is important.
With that in mind, we see, and especially
with all those diners these days who are increasingly--
their experience of fine dining restaurants
is all about the pictures that they take and share
with their friends, that are almost distracting some diners
now from their meal.
The chef brings the dish out to the table, served
at just the right temperature and the diner
wants to orient it and then change the lighting,
stand up, take a picture, share with their friends, by which
time the food is cold.
But really, we cannot ignore the eye appeal of a dish now,
both the expectations it sets for the diner when they are
there, but also how it's perceived online, on TV,
via social networks or an Instagram of plating.
Does it really matter though?
Does it matter how the food looks to its taste?
That was a question that young chef Charles
Michelle, working in the lab in Oxford came up with.
He was in the Museum of Modern Art in New York
staring at this painting, Kandinsky 201.
It actually hangs the other way up,
if anyone's familiar with it.
But he saw a mushroom up there and mushrooms
ought to be kind of up right and not upside down,
do he inverted the painting.
But when he read the panel beside the painting.
Kandinsky-- it was meant to be trying
to convey emotion directly, the artist talking
through color and form.
And the chef is thinking, well, aren't I an artist too?
I can create visually stunning stuff.
Why can't I communicate through my food, emotion
directly through color and form?
And so this is Charles Michelle's interpretation
of Kandinsky's 201.
The Kandinsky on a plate.
Or in this case served on a canvas, a painting canvas,
about a 31 element salad.
You might even eat it with a paintbrush
if we're feeling a bit adventurous.
So you're eating the painting with a paintbrush.
The paintbrush may be scented with the some truffle oil
or something.
And as you eat the dish, this canvas
will stain with the colors of those purees
and you have your own modernist bit of art
to take home and hang on the wall, should you so desire.
Does it matter?
Yes, it does.
People enjoy the food more when it's plated artistically.
They're willing to pay more.
And they may eat more.
Well, in this case it's kind of a healthy thing to be eating.
What do the numbers look like?
Here you've got them.
From 160 diners served at Somerville College in Oxford,
where I teach, there's a parent's day.
We have all the parents coming in for lunch
to see their nearest and dearest.
Half of the diners served a regular tossed salad,
half of them on the left, served a Kandinsky inspired.
You've got 80 plates to make.
You can't do the full work, but something
in the right direction Kandinksy inspired dish,
and you see how much people are willing to pay,
a more than doubling of price for exactly
the same ingredients served to exactly the same people, simply
by getting the eye appeal, jut right.
Making it look visually as stunning as it could be.
And we're seeing this with fancy sellers like this.
We've seen it in home dining.
Simple garden salads, the same sorts of effect
seem to hold true, that getting the eye appeal right
is important for the chef.
But what can we do to help the chef?
Maybe the chefs, you know, intuitively they
get it all right.
So here's a dish we saw from Albert Landgraf.
He's a Brazilian chef, works out of Sao
Paulo, one of South top 50 restaurants.
Saw that on the internet one day and thought, wow, that's
a visually stunning dish.
It's kind of onions with tapioca, vinegar,
and sugar, and spume and stuff.
It's all those pink onions oriented away from the diner,
towards 12:00.
I asked the chef, why did you do that?
Can we borrow your plate for an experiment?
He says, yes.
I'll just play around with the plating.
That just seemed to feel right to me.
But is it right?
Are we happy to let the chefs just go on their intuitions
or can we use the power of the internet
to evaluate, crowdsource, the plating of our cuisine?
So take that plate of food, stick it on the internet,
allow people to rotate the plate, and say,
do you care how this dish would be served to you if you
were coming to the restaurant?
What orientation would you like?
And they'll pick some orientation for this dish.
Here, from about 200 people tested online.
Here, from 2000 people tested at London's Science Museum.
And for any of you interested in this,
currently for the whole year, there's a cravings exhibit
and you can take part in some of these experiments
on rotating famous chef's plates online or in the Science Museum
itself.
Here, about 2000 people.
And in fact, when we average their preferences,
they do care.
Each dot here is a person, potential diner.
And those dots are not equally spread around the circle.
The majority of diners like something
with the onions pointing away from them.
In fact, they like it at about 3.4 degrees
to the right of 12:00.
Close enough for the chef not to worry.
His intuition did bear out with 2000 people.
But it's an interesting idea of space
here, because the chef can think about a new dish,
take a picture of it one evening, we put online,
and by the next morning, ready for that evening service,
we'll quite often have 500 or 1,000 people
saying whether they care.
And if they do care, what is the orientation
or their preference.
And that preference may convert into higher willingness
to pay or more enjoyment.
Now what we can do is say, OK, that
was a dish as the chef prepared it.
What more can we do?
Well, we can hack the plate now.
We can take some of those dishes from famous chefs,
take out the elements, say, is three the right number?
And chefs are often told odds better than even numbers.
Would you like it if all the onions pointed to the right,
to the up, to the inside, all in different directions?
We can hack the plate.
Put it online and next morning, have hundreds or possibly
thousands of people saying, what is the ideal orientation.
And maybe there's something in the design space
of that plate that is better than what the chef has
intuitively come up with.
That's the idea of hacking the plate
and designing culinary experiences for virtually using
the power of the internet.
Well, I'll just give you this one example here
of why it's not always the case that what the chef intuits,
people like.
So if you go to many a modernist restaurant these days,
you'll find lots of this kind of asymmetric plating.
All the food is layered down one side of the plate.
The other part is just left like a blank canvas.
That doesn't seem to work from the visual aesthetics
literature.
We like balance and harmony.
This is very unbalanced, kind of unharmonious.
And when we show these plates on the internet,
when we serve them in cafeterias or restaurants,
people do not like them and they're
willing to pay less than for a harmonious, central, balanced
plating.
Does that mean that the chef shouldn't do it?
No, but at least they know they're
going against what the majority of people like,
so their objective for doing this,
maybe it's to be remembered five years hence.
As yeah, he was the chef that did that really weird stuff,
put it all on the side of the plate.
You could become iconic in that way.
But if what you're aiming for is kind
of the greatest enjoyment of at the time,
that certainly is not it.
OK.
So think, leave plating aside and think a bit
about technology, and how that could be integrated
into the dining experiences.
And here's one dish that's served at the Fat Duck in Bray.
Fat Duck currently in Melbourne, but we're back
in the UK about 10 days and this dish, I believe,
will still be on the menu.
It comes out of research we did with a chef in Oxford
in Science Oxford, about six years ago,
where we served people oysters.
Asked them how much they liked the oysters, how salty
they tasted.
And found that when we play the sounds of the sea,
people say the oysters taste better, but no more salty
with seaside sounds with sea gulls swarming over head than
if we play modern jazz.
If we play restaurant cutlery noises or farm yard chickens,
or all sort of sounds, but the kind of congruent
sounds of the sea, make that food taste better.
The Fat Duck research kitchen could then take that insight
and turn it into this dish that looks like the sea.
But also when the waiter comes to the table,
they'll have a conch shell in the other hand,
out of which dribbles some earbuds from a little mini
iPod.
You'll hear the sounds of the sea before you taste the food.
And if you see diners in the restaurant
with this dish, which has been the signature dish since 2008,
up until the present time, when they come in, they're talking,
they're chatting, it's exciting.
It's that once in a lifetime meal experience,
they put the earbuds in, and they're silent.
For five minutes, their attention
is focused on the food, and we know
it tastes better than it otherwise would.
Silence for a whole meal, I don't think so.
But for one course, it certainly works.
And from the first examples, I think of technology,
not at the back of house, but technology
at the front of house, being used, not to distract diners,
but somehow to enhance their experience of food.
That's a real passion for us, how to take the technology
and enhance the meal experience.
Here's something that not only we are passionate about,
but also a great number of those modernist chefs,
if you look in the newspapers, at new restaurant openings,
there's a lot of stuff like this.
We're in Sublimotion in Shanghai, Ultraviolet, sorry,
in Shanghai.
And here we have Paul Pairet, a French chef,
serving kind of a fish and chips inspired dish
to a single sitting of 12 diners.
We're in Shanghai, a French chef,
serving kind of an English dish, fish and chips, or thereabouts.
So what does he do?
He plays the sounds of the sea again, followed up by the sound
the Beatles, a quintessentially English band.
He projects a British flag on the table.
And of course, because we're trying
to simulate England with this dish,
we put the rain-spattered windows on the backdrop.
Each backdrop changing with each dish,
but it is technology kind of creating
this immersive, experiential, theatrical, magical even,
tasting experience that is so much more than the food.
That's at high end, maybe $1200 a person,
if you're lucky enough to get a shot.
But maybe it could be something as simple as this.
You go to the restaurant.
You read about the sound of the sea dish.
And you think, well, why couldn't your tablet,
why can't that be plate wear?
It's like there's technology and there's food.
We keep them separate because one might get
into the keyboard of the other.
But now there are waterproof tablets.
You can stick them in the dishwasher, I guess.
Steak and chips I don't suppose would work
from that kind of hard surface.
But other finger foods.
Maybe the sound of the sea.
If we actually ate what looked like the kind of sea
underneath, how you could tell stories about a dish,
about the origins of the ingredients.
And again, use the technology to enhance the experience.
Are people doing it?
There are few chefs out there who are now
serving at least one course from a tablet, in Spain, in the UK,
and in Switzerland.
I think we're going to see more or it as they push to see,
what are you trying to do here?
Why is it worthwhile?
How much better can you make the experience,
dining through a tablet, bringing technology
to the table in a way that takes us away
from this, from the distracted diners who are fiddling
with their mobile device, not concentrating on the food,
not sharing the moment of dining with those
who are physically present.
This kind technology that at the moment,
we see some chefs around the world, who banned--
said you cannot take pictures of the food in my restaurant.
Put those mobiles away.
Just eat the food.
Enjoy the moment.
Leave the technology aside.
That's an extreme reaction.
We think there is a way to bring technology
in to augment, to enhance, and to make memorable experiences.
Here's the way it happens.
We go from the sound of the sea, which
is the chef at the three Michelin star
restaurant bringing the technology for you
for once in a lifetime experience.
What we want to do is take the technology that's
in everybody's pockets and incorporate it
into the experience.
We're still in a world of sound and sort of digital seasoning.
And here we are 2013, with our culinary artist,
Caroline Hobkinson at the House of Wolf
restaurant in Islington, North London,
with our sensory tasting menu.
But the key course here is the sonic cake pop.
And on the menu, you can sort of see here, take out your phone,
if you want to make your dessert sweeter, dial 08456802419.
If you want to make your dessert more bitter,
take your mobile out, dial a different number.
What's going on there?
Well, here we have a diner in the restaurant,
listening to some music perhaps.
Perhaps not.
Play that one again.
AUDIENCE: [INAUDIBLE].
CHARLES SPENCE: Sorry?
AUDIENCE: [INAUDIBLE].
CHARLES SPENCE: What did he say?
AUDIENCE: [INAUDIBLE].
CHARLES SPENCE: [INAUDIBLE].
So, what this man is hearing on his headphone,
is like a [BUZZING].
It's not really a very nice sound at all.
It's kind of a distorted traffic noise from an underpass,
very low in pitch.
Or if they dial a different telephone number,
what their hearing is this.
And the question is, which of those two sounds is bitter.
[BUZZING] Or this tinkling sound.
The majority of people, when we asked them in the restaurant,
when we ask them online, when we asked them in the lab,
say the second sound feels-- [TINKLING] There we go.
--sweeter somehow.
It's not literally sweeter because tastes do not
have a sound.
And yet, people will say this is sweet,
whereas [BUZZING], that is bitter.
If you've got a coffee or a dark chocolate,
and you have that in your mouth, when you hear that,
it brings out the bitter notes by about 5% or 10%.
So this is a whole new world using technology
that's in your pocket to deliver digital seasoning, 10% more
sweetness without any calories.
Who wouldn't be potentially interested?
We trial it in the modernist restaurants
because the chefs are innovative, creative,
will try things out.
They are their own boss.
But the hope is what starts there, the proof of principle
can then be extended to the mass market
to make all our lives better.
Two examples of how that's kind of extending out.
On the one hand, we have a Haagen-Dazs Concerto app.
You go to the store, you buy your ice cream.
You scan the QR code on the lid, and then you
see some musicians playing on top of your ice cream tub
through your mobile device.
Different musicians playing different music
for different flavors of ice cream.
When they wrap up after about two minutes,
then your ice cream is supposedly
soft enough to scoop.
Those aren't the best substantiations
but there are a number things like this from Krug
has also its sensory app that will give you
music to play to match the taste of each of its champagnes.
This is I think the future of technology and food.
Prove a principal in the modernist restaurant,
and then to the mass market and the supermarket.
Or in airlines with British Airways, last year
for its long haul flights, delivering this kind
of digital seasoning menu.
You choose something to eat from the trolley when it comes down.
And then you can plug into the headset
and hear music that has been designed to enhance
the experience of the food.
Maybe it's sweet music like you just heard.
Or maybe you've ordered the lasagna
and you want some Italian music to bring out
the ethnicity of the dish.
Various ways of doing it, but it's technology
being used to enhance food.
So when I saw this coming out last month,
you kind of think, this is kind of what's going to happen
and the way of the future.
Munchery and Google Play Music team up
to turn a simple meal into a dining experience.
You go online.
I guess you order your food.
It arrives.
And then what are you going to listen to on the hi-fi in home?
Why not offer people a range of music designed
to enhance the experience, based on what
you know about their music preferences that
built on the neuroscience?
Do you want to make things sweeter,
is a little bit more savory, a little sourer, more bitter?
Whatever it is, there will be a musical parameter
that can be matched to your musical tastes
and delivered along with the food
to enhance the home dining experience,
just like you had in one of those fancy modernist
restaurants.
And I'll leave with a final example, which will sort
of bring everything together.
We've got the sounds that change the experience.
And when we do these experiments in restaurants or culinary
artistry.
And I'd really like to test in somewhere like this.
May be a bit like your dining facility here.
You might think is it a restaurant?
Are they experimenting on me or am I just having
a great tasting experience.
And there's kind of an interesting world
where you don't know.
Is this a science lab or a dining room?
It's kind of both.
They can change the temperature, the lighting, the music,
they can vibrate the table.
They can do all sorts of stuff.
They may measure your responses.
But you might have a great experience
of eating at the same time.
We want to test in these great restaurants,
but if you're paying $1,200 a shot,
my department is not going to pay for 100 subjects
to go and have dinner at one of these.
So we can't literally test very often in this very high end
experience restaurants.
So what we have to do instead is create experiential events
that capture the idea.
And this is the idea of the Singleton Sensorium.
It was in London, November, 2013, I think now.
[BIRDS CHIRPING]
You come to a building in Soho, a [INAUDIBLE] maker's studio.
You're given a glass of whisky.
You're taken into the green room.
We have grass on the floor, deck chairs, croquet hoops.
We have the sounds of the English summer.
You tell me how grassy that whisky tastes, smells
on the nose, how sweet on the palate,
and how woody the texture of the aftertaste
once you've swallowed.
OK, had your whisky, made your rating.
We then take you downstairs to this room.
[TINKLING SOUND]
Same whisky in hand, score card in the other.
500 people over three nights.
Suddenly, there's that tinkling sound.
It's coming from the ceiling, because these
are the sounds of sweetness.
The room itself is red, because red is the color of sweetness.
Everything in this room is round, because round is sweet.
Angular is bitter.
Round window frames, round floor plan, round, poof,
round everything.
Trying to connote sweetness.
And finally take your whisky, your score card,
to the woody room.
We've got the sound of wood, everything we can think of,
the sound of a wood fire, creaking wood doors.
[CRACKLING, CREAKING DOOR, BASS FIDDLE]
Double bass wooden instruments, a walk through the woods.
We've got wood on the floor, stressed wood
on the floor, a dead tree behind me this picture was taken.
Rate your whisky again.
You know it's the same whisky in all three environments.
And yet, when you look at your score card
after 15 minutes going through these three environments,
you find that the whisky tasted a lot woodier
in the woody room.
Tasted about 10% sweeter in the sweet room
and the grassiness was brought out in the green room.
And some people went through this
and said, well, I knew what you were trying to do.
Of course, you wanted me to say it
was more grassy in the green room, so I did the opposite.
They were still affected by the environment.
They couldn't just give a straight rating every time.
And if you roll up the 300 or 3,000 people
we've tested in these kind of multi-sensory, experiential
events, you can demonstrate that exactly the same food or drink
tastes dramatically different as a function
of the lighting, the music, and all
the other environmental cues.
So I'll wrap up there.
But just leave you with a couple of areas
that we're working on now.
I think the modernist restaurant is a great place
to work because the chef is their own boss,
they're creative, they're innovative.
They can put stuff on the menu if they
believe in neuroscience story.
Some of it will work.
Some of it will work brilliantly.
Others may fail.
But of course that Michelin starred restaurant experience
is very exclusive.
Most of us can't afford to go there, especially not
us academics working in Oxford.
Maybe it's a once in a lifetime thing.
So the question is how to take the insights from there
to the real world to affect all of our dining experiences.
And we're currently trying to translate
some of those insights about plate color, cutlery weight,
lighting, music, and so on, into the world of hospital food.
You have all these patients in hospitals whose hospital stays
are prolonged because they're underfed, under nutritionalized
because the food looks so horrible, tastes so horrible.
And there's a business case to have enhanced sensory designer
food to improve nutrition and reduce bed nights.
We're thinking about foods of the future.
So we're working with Ben Reade, who was formerly
head of the Nordic Food Lab and Jozef
Youssef, a chef in London, thinking
about how to make these little critters more appealing.
The food of the future, highly nutritious,
highly proteinaceous, very good for you.
You think, uck, disgusting.
But you know, there are other things
that you think were disgusting, like ripe French cheeses,
and yet somehow, you've come to love them.
So how to make you love these guys?
Through kind of the graying silver palate,
all those people are over 70 years
of age, the age at which you start
to lose your ability to taste and to smell,
two senses for which there are no prostheses to bring it back.
What can you do to improve their dining experiences
through finally kind of the nudging?
What we do for the obese populations in terms
of plate color, plate size, and other kind of tricks or rules
of mind that might be used to make people satisfied
with a little bit less?
All very big challenges, all very important,
but I think the best insights here
may well come from that interface between design
technology, the high end chef, and the measurement
scientists such as myself.
So I shall leave it there, but hopefully
convinced you why this is an exciting area
and why I think technology and food will in the future
be merged seamlessly in our day-to-day experience.
And it's a very exciting time to be here with all the technology
that's coming out it;s [INAUDIBLE].
You know, you go back to the 1930s
and you find FT Marinetto, one of the Italian futurists,
they were thinking about multi-sensory dining.
They were spraying atomizers over the food.
They were serving you frog's legs
while listening to the sound of croaking frogs.
They were having you rub textured materials
while you dined.
They were miscoloring food.
They were dining in the dark.
They were doing all that in 1930.
They had the ideas, the inspiration, the desire,
but what they did not have is the technology to bring it off
in the [INAUDIBLE].
But we do have the technology now.
We have the interest.
We have the chefs and we have the scientists
working together.
And I'm very excited about what the perfect meal might
be a few years hence.
Thank you.
[APPLAUSE]
MALE SPEAKER: We have time for a couple of questions.
Questions.
Right.
We're going to use the throw box,
so you can throw it and catch it, and then
speak into the black circle.
AUDIENCE: OK.
You can hear me?
MALE SPEAKER: Yes.
AUDIENCE: During these experiments,
do you get the different responses
based on where the person is from, like culture?
CHARLES SPENCE: So sometimes, yes.
Sometimes, I believe that that sweet and bitter sound
will be sweet and bitter across the world.
It will be sweet and bitter to a chimpanzee and to a rat.
Why so?
Because at birth, we're all born sticking our tongues
out and down.
If you put a bitter taste on a newborn chimp,
rat, human's tongue, bleck, because bitterness is poisonous
probably.
We learn to eject it.
Put a sweet taste on a newborn's tongue,
the tongue will go [SLURPING] licking, ingesting calories,
growth, that's what we need.
So we're all born sticking our tongues out and down
to bitter tastes, out and up to sweet tastes.
And maybe we just captured something of that difference
in there or there.
It's there in all of us.
Our brains pick up the statistics of the environment.
This is a useful statistic to know about.
Nevertheless our brain can't tell
the difference between an incorporated in sound.
That should be, I think, predictionally universal.
Maybe I'll be proved wrong.
When it comes to what instrument is sweetness,
we find in Western populations, it maybe
a tinkling piano or wind chime.
Would it be the same instrument that Chinese or South Americans
would match to sweetness?
We don't know for sure yet.
But we are currently starting to go around the world in person.
So we've been testing them Himba tribe of Kaokoland
in Namibia, with no written language,
no schooling, no supermarkets.
What do they think about the shape of taste and sound?
And we're also using kind the online testing
that is now allowing us to run studies in seven or eight
countries simultaneously.
Currently, we're looking both at the color of food.
Is red sweet everywhere in the world or not?
And we're also looking at plateware.
So if you go to China, they may serve noodles
in what looks like my dog's bowl, kind of bashed up metal.
Looks terrible to me, but they think it looks fine.
Whereas, some of the Western plate ware
might look just a bit odd.
So we are presenting images of food, plateware, glassware,
arrangements, odd and even numbers on the plate in the UK
and in many other countries to try and pick up
those similarities and differences.
And it's going to be a bit of both I think.
There will be some universals.
Probably maybe sweet will be round, more or less the world
over, I think too.
But also kind of the culture-specific ones,
that's something that then maybe the chef
would want to know about.
Because if they see, as they increasingly try and get
kind of personalized meals for their diners,
if you know you've got a big booking
of a sort of Chinese delegation coming to your restaurant
tonight, maybe they don't like odd numbers
in the plate in the way that a Western diner does.
Maybe they like even numbers instead.
And if you have that information in hand,
you kind of personalize the experience a bit.
It's a rich area.
Takes a long time to do.
But we are interested in making little steps.
AUDIENCE: OK, thank you.
AUDIENCE: I have the mic, so I'm going to ask the question.
Fascinating topic, amazing speech.
Thank you for coming.
Along the last comment you made, my question
is along those lines.
I think a lot of the examples you showed
were focused on creating a kind of a similar experience
for the whole restaurant or the whole table.
Can you push that to like maybe send a survey before coming
to the restaurant, to say, how are you feeling today?
CHARLES SPENCE: Yes.
AUDIENCE: Was it a good day?
Was it a bad day?
CHARLES SPENCE: Yep.
AUDIENCE: Or tracking your customers over time,
to say, hey, that guy actually prefers this.
And then let's cater to that individual.
Like push it to it's limits.
CHARLES SPENCE: So there's kind of two questions in there.
On the one hand, it's about is this one
of these experiences as a whole environmental experience?
And that's true.
Unless we're working with them we
can't really build stuff exactly,
but are working with the lab in Bristol
to try and make augmented, sort of digital glassware
that will only play sweet music when you pick the glass up
and tilt it to your lips.
And it's personalized to you.
It happens you only hear the sound when you taste.
And it's kind of directed or hyper-directionalized.
Because we are trying to personalize where we can.
But it is sometimes a challenge.
And then the other part of the question, about sort
of the personalisation.
We work closely with Chef Jozef Youssef up in Maida Vale.
I'm always trying to convince him about the next dining
concept to get his creative juices working.
And what I want to do is like personalized for you,
which involves you book a table and then you get a plastic bag.
It's says, please spit in the bag and send it off.
And you've got about two months between booking and actually
arrival.
And that bag is off to our colleagues
in Monell Chemical Senses and they can analyze your spittle
and then personalize a meal for you.
They can say, you'll be a super taster or not.
You'll be anosmic, will be unable to smell
this cork taint, like myself.
Coriander will taste soapy to you,
so don't put that in the dish.
And you can get eight or 10 perhaps
predictions that could be used by a chef
to personalize the thing.
That'll be part of it.
But then also it would be I think the whole personalization
is a real interesting one.
So what you could also do, you see
the success of Coca Cola putting your name on the bottle.
That's personalized.
It's kind of meaningless personalization, but it works.
You see Starbucks writing your name on the cup.
Why?
Because it makes the coffee taste better.
Kind of personalization from the genetic level
to these other kind of more [INAUDIBLE] ones.
You can just wrap all that together
and it's a personalized experience.
Which could be nice, but I think I've
seen there was press coverage last week in The Times,
I think The Guardian about the reopening of the Fat Duck
restaurant.
And there it was announced that, like some US restaurants, when
you book a table two months in advance of your reservation,
they'll start Googling you.
What do we know about this person?
What do they like?
When were they born?
Maybe they'll deliver a dish from your childhood.
and some of the response to that, I heard that about 100
diners, as soon as that article came out,
kind of canceled the reservation.
I like personalized, but I don't want
you to be probing into my darkest secrets.
So you can make it and you can do an obvious way.
But maybe one of the nicest examples of personalization,
I think, is from the Fat Duck, where
for the first few courses, as in many other restaurants,
they give you finger food.
And part of the purpose of that finger food
is to see how you interact, to figure out whether you're
a left or right hander.
And then without telling you anything,
if they figure out you're a lefty,
your food and the cutlery will be arranged slightly
differently, just for you.
No one says a word.
But somehow, hopefully it just feels just right.
The evening flows.
It's personalized for you without you ever realizing,
but hopefully it delivers a better experience.
Whether you make people wear it or not, probably not.
There is a lot you can do.
The chef says no.
He doesn't like the idea of spit in a bag.
We need a better name but--
MALE SPEAKER: Question in the front.
AUDIENCE: Yeah.
I had a question about the experiment
you did with the white plate and the black plate
and the sense of sweetness.
Do you think that it was the white that was associated
specifically with sweetness or if the question had been,
is this a saltier food, would they also
have experienced a heightened sense of salt as well?
CHARLES SPENCE: OK.
So I think it is sweetness.
So we've repeated the experiment in Paul Bocuse, where
each week the chefs make a different dessert
as a part of their training.
And then that dessert is served on a white or a black plate.
So I think, from a few, we're talking about five or six
experiments now, as some other groups have, it's true,
you're mostly asked about sweetness.
but I think somewhere in that mix,
we have asked about other taste sensations.
But it seems to be about sweet.
Whether enhanced sweetness is a good thing,
whether that means you like the food more,
really depends on how it came from the kitchen.
So we've done one version of this in a Scottish hotel, where
the dessert, a sticky toffee pudding, was, I think,
too sweet.
And then when you added sweetness from the white plate,
you thought, yeah, it's really sweet, but I don't like it.
It's gone a bit too far.
It's hard to know.
We don't really the reason why.
We just know it happens.
It could be that that dessert-- we know if we actually
change the color of a food, it will change the taste.
You never see colors by themselves.
You always see them set against a contrasting background.
So maybe the color of the plate serves
to change the apparent color of the food.
And that's part of how things work.
Or maybe it's just from your lifetime.
You never think about it, but in fact, your brain
is kind of making records of wherever you've
eaten, what you've eaten off.
Maybe there's black slates normally presaged the cheese
board or something else.
So maybe savory food is more normally associated
with those angular, black plateware.
And you've just learned the statistics of the environment
and play them back here.
I'm not sure.
AUDIENCE: I guess I'm asking, if there something about white
that is generally [INAUDIBLE]?
Like could it be that purple could
be chilly and yellow could be [INAUDIBLE]?
CHARLES SPENCE: Yep.
So what we do sort of with Chef Youssef and his synesthesia
dinner.
Just closed last month or two months ago.
We served the first course-- He served
the first course of the menu was four verified spoons of taste.
Sweet, bitter, salty, sour.
One green, one red, one white, and one browney-black.
And the task for the diner was, the waitress would just
randomly put these four spoons on the table.
And she says, well, the chef recommend
you start with the salty, then have the bitter, then sour,
and end on a sweet note.
And disappears.
And you're left wondering, well, how
do I know which one's which?
Well, you do know, and you're challenged
to arrange the spoons in the right order,
sour, bitter, salt, then sweet.
Then you can look around the table
and see how many other people agreed that those tastes do
have specific colors.
And from that we find, that a pinky-red is most definitely
kind of sweet in the food itself.
White tends to be salty, white and blue.
Yellow and green are sour.
And browney-black and purple tends
to be bitter in many situations.
Probably more work to be done.
Certainly I know we're often asked about what could you
do to reduce salt in food?
Because that's a big health concern, not just sugar.
It certainly is the most challenging one for us
in terms of sound.
I always play the salty sound, sweet, bitter, salty, sour
sounds. and I always play the salty sound lasts.
Because it's hardest one to capture sonically.
Not quite sure why.
And in terms of color, if I change the color of a food,
it's also-- I can make it sweeter
or I can make it more sour.
But I find it very difficult to make it more salty.
Perhaps because in the environment,
salty foods come in all sorts of colors.
So there isn't something very clear there.
And perhaps also, our response to saltiness,
we're not born liking or disliking
salt. It comes online after some months.
Whereas, we're born liking sweet and bitter.
And perhaps those other tastes have a head start.
AUDIENCE: Yeah.
I'm curious to know how much you extend this from restaurant
environment to the home, and whether you actually
would apply some of this when you prepare a meal at home?
CHARLES SPENCE: Yeah.
So certainly there are some things that are easy to do,
some things that are harder.
And you haven't met my wife.
So there's a challenge there between the neuroscientist,
the gastrophysicist says, and what Mrs. Spence says.
And she wins in the home environment.
So I have lots of angular black plates, very good
for certain foods.
But I have to keep them in the lab, because she won't let me.
The cutlery's heavy.
I've got that one through.
And when it comes to the music that we play when we're eating,
that's certainly a part.
And we quite often have these kind
of dinner parties with the chef in the lab and all the students
together.
I'm cooking and doing some experimenting.
You can buy the cheap one euro light bulbs now,
remote control, change the color as we eat the food.
You've got the tone generator to find the music that
matches the taste of the beer.
And we do lots of experimentation, things
like the Kandinsky on a plate.
That was served kind of in a home environment to see a bit
about how things work before going
to the live, big experiment.
So that's the best place to do it, in the lab dinners at home.
And then the battle with um, yeah.
AUDIENCE: Hi.
You know, there's a saying that says, the way to a man's heart
is through his stomach.
And I saw a TV program with Heston Blumenthal,
cooking Valentines Day meals for couples.
And afterwards, they reported feeling more in love.
So is there a connection between science and food?
CHARLES SPENCE: Yes, so I advised some of the courses
on the Heston the TV lunch.
My trip, it was a hot chili, which
I've used for years, decades now,
that kind of releases a flustering and arousal
and pupil dilation.
And the person sitting opposite you
might confuse that for signs of love.
It works very well, I think.
I think there's a great book by Bunny Crumpacker, a great name,
"The Sex Life Of Food."
And she-- kind of from 2006, and she sort
of brings these two things together.
And that maybe in a way, you think,
well, our brains are designed for the three
Fs, sort of feeding, foraging, and something else.
So two of those three are, because of what the brain does,
so there's food and love or sex should be intimately linked.
And I know there are some companies starting up
who are trying to bring these things closer,
so for a certain sort of audience,
when you go to a hotel, maybe you're thinking about romance.
And they might deliver a multi-sensory edible.
But, how shall I put it?
Enhancing the romantic moment as well.
That border, say, is an interesting one.
Probably you've seen, if you do the brain scanner,
you'll see many of the sort of same areas
in the brain lighting up with great food and other things.
MALE SPEAKER: Final question.
AUDIENCE: Hi, Charles.
I love the evidence that you put forward
to show how there's a real connection between being
thoughtful and creative about multi-sensory approaches
and how people enjoy the experience in a restaurant.
I'm curious what you think about what opportunities there
are for creating really great multi-sensory environments
in either a business context or in other contexts.
So for us, when we meeting each other,
we want to have a great experience
so we can be more productive.
Similarly with clients.
So any tips or do we just need to take them to the Fat Duck?
CHARLES SPENCE: I think the multi-sensory approach
could be applied anywhere.
And we have done work about a decade ago with ICI Paints
and Qwest's looking at fragrance and paint color
for productive working environments.
Maybe that was more for spotting typos
than it was for any real, genuine kind
of innovative, creative thought.
But we have worked there for a number of years.
It certainly does work-- there's evidence
that the use of fragrance can-- so,
if you're stuck in a certain mindset,
then if you change any aspect of the sensory environment,
it can almost refresh or restart your mental processes
so you're more likely to have the good thoughts.
If you're in one environment, you're
stressed, that stress gets associated
with the smell of that environment.
Go somewhere else, different color, different scent,
it helps.
I see also a lot on touch.
So some of the companies that we have worked with-- I mean,
touch is like, it's not necessary.
It's kind of a luxury rather than a necessity one feels.
And yet from the emerging body of neuroscience,
our skin is our biggest sense.
And it's full of these receptors that love to be stroked
or to be groomed.
And if you do give people a lunch time massage,
say, that leads to significant improvement in performance
afterwards, to lowering tension and it can lead
to many other sort of benefits.
So I think certainly through touch, through smell,
certainly color, illumination levels, can change,
can make us more alert, more relaxed,
can just serve to completely change the scene.
And I also really worry about two things.
One is sometimes, with some of the companies,
they have sort of innovation workshop or science workshops,
and too often they're in the bottom of some terrible hotel
in a windowless room.
That you're stuck there for 48 hours.
And you think that is not the environment for creativity.
And also from Charles Michelle, the guy
who made the Kandinsky on a plate dish,
he comes from Colombia, as do many of my students.
And there it's kind of a country with 50 years of turmoil
and war.
And you think of sort of the multi-sensory approach there.
It's kind of a peacemaking process.
And so, this whole idea of kind of gastro diplomacy
becomes kind of an interesting one.
How many meetings where they don't
think about deciding the fate of a nation and no one
serves any food or it's dreadful food or-- would
things have gone differently if somebody had paid attention
to that?
For my students who've been here,
they say, they were very impressed
about the gustatory element to some of the things
that you were doing.
MALE SPEAKER: Thank you very much.
Please join me in thanking Charles.
[APPLAUSE]