Forget GM.
What about just the idea—one that has captured my attention—that great cuisine is not so much “inspired” as “correct”? Agree? Disagree?
--Dan





Skip King wrote on 7/3/10 4:45 PM:

On 7/3/2010 4:38 PM, telenaut wrote:
Re: Happy 14th A Guide Michelin reviewer was quoted recently saying that, at a top level restaurant, cooking is judged less for whether it’s “inspired” than for whether it’s “correct.”
 
What say you, maitre Skip?

It's been several decades since I paid any attention to the standards utilized by the Guide Michelin in awarding stars - and they've always been a secretive bunch anyway.  Much like Google, they tend not to give away how they rank things in order to keep people from gaming the system.

Tastes and standards change, and the Guide Michelin isn't immune to judging restaurants based on being brilliant expressions of popular taste (as long as you can afford it).  Technique is certainly important.  But to win stars, at any level, the food must be of exceptional quality, the room soignee and the service top-shelf.  Longevity and continued improvements in both food and facility are necessary to increase the star count - or to keep it. Chefs have killed themselves after losing a star.

The physical plant of the restaurant is important.  Back in the mid-'80s, the joke among Paris chefs was that the primary difference between a two-star and a three-star restaurant was that the three-star had replaced its toilette a la turque with a throne.
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - SkiVt-L is brought to you by the University of Vermont.

To unsubscribe, visit http://list.uvm.edu/archives/skivt-l.html
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - SkiVt-L is brought to you by the University of Vermont.

To unsubscribe, visit http://list.uvm.edu/archives/skivt-l.html