The Michelin Guide´s terrific influence ruins the world’s best chefs

&

the glance of the haute cuisine.

A couple of months ago Benoit Violier´s restaurant Crissier was

honored as one of the best in the world. At the 1 st of February 2016
the Michelin starred chef was found dead in his apartment in
Lausanne, Switzerland. Investigators proceed on the assumption
that Violier committed suicide due to immense stress probably
caused by the pressure to succeed in the industry.

The Guide Michelin is the oldest guidebook for hotels and

restaurants which is published annually by the tire manufacturer
Michelin. The reference guide is published in country-specific
versions. According to the company 85 reviewers are employed for
the twelve European guides. Evaluation criteria for the Michelin
stars are among others the consistent quality of the ingredients and
their freshness, their professional preparation, the harmony of the
flavor compound, and the innovation and uniqueness of the dishes
which is reflected in creativity and a personal touch of the
restaurants head chef. The reviewed restaurants are aiming for, or
already gained, their raison d’être in the Haute cuisine scene. To
achieve tremendous success in his métier a chef needs to earn a
reputation in the form of Michelin stars to be considered as a part
of the highly respected scene. Nevertheless it takes a lot to get
awarded with Michelin stars, a lot of chefs gave up everything and
worked relentless to reach their lifetime goal, some even to death.
Therefore one needs to have a closer look if the Michelin Guide
terrific influence ruins the world’s best chefs and the glance of the
haute cuisine.

A restaurant which reaches for the stars at the gastronomy heaven

automatically needs to rely on the Michelin guide´s rating to gain
the necessary success. When looking at the yearly published list
The World´s 50 Best Restaurants by theworlds50best.com (2015) it
stands out that most of the first twenty listed restaurants hold about
two to three Michelin stars. The majority of the rest of the list
(place 21-50) possess at least one Michelin star.

Furthermore it can be said that the Michelin Guide´s standards and

its performance are dropping drastically. Rachel Dixon, a British
food & travel journalist of the Guardian, states, on the basis of an
assertion of former Michelin-inspector Pascal Rémy, in a Q&A
article about Michelin stars that the Guide is not able to manage
their duties anymore. Allegedly all tested restaurants are only
visited every three-and-a-half years, although it is supposed to
revisit the restaurants at least every 18 months. Dixon (2008) also
quotes a statement of gourmet-critic Andy Haler who states that
the Michelin guide is too slow to react on the industry and its
restaurants. In addition to that Dixon (2008) claims on the basis of
another critic that: “Rivals Hardens pointed out that the 2008 guide
includes an entry for a London restaurant called Ribbands that
actually closed in summer 2007”. Dixons arguments support the
fact that the Michelin´s standards are slacking, therefore it stands
out that the inadvertent behavior of the gourmet-guide can have a
negative influence on the industry.

It is more or less known that in the gastronomy the high pressure to

succeed is incessant ubiquitous. Like already mentioned above,
one of the many victims of that is Benoit Violier. Michael
Steinberger, food & lifestyle journalist, expounds in his article
“Michelin and the deaths of two French chefs” for The New
Yorker (2016) that Violier´s suicide can be compared with the
suicide of the French chef Bernard Loiseau in 2003, who also
killed himself after it was rumored that his restaurant would lose
its third Michelin star. Steinberg (2016) asserts the following: “
Loiseau´s restaurant, […] was in danger of losing its third star, and
it was widely believed that the possibility of a demotion drove
Loiseau´s to suicide.” Steinberg (2016) also states: “Michelin
denied that it had warned the fifty-two-year-old chef that his third
star was in jeopardy. That claim was not exactly true: a few years
ago, […] I obtained the minutes of a meeting that Michelin
officials had with Loiseau, in the fall of 2002. They told him that
they were concerned about the quality of his restaurant´s cooking.”
Steinberg´s claims vividly substantiate the fact of high pressure in
the industry and the fatal consequences which accompany with it.

Although a lot of controversies are surrounding the Michelin, for

the majority of the industry´s leaders it is not possible to imagine
the haute cuisine without the restaurant guide. For professional
circles the Michelin is still the most important and indispensable
rating institution. In Paula Forbes article “Chefs and Critics Weigh
in on the Relevance of Michelin” for eater.com (2011) several top
chefs support the claim mentioned above. Chef April Bloomfield
for example, who was interviewed by Forbes (2011), mentioned
that her Michelin ratings caused a big customer inflow and it
encouraged the business. Bloomfield also argues the chefs
obsession with stars in a positive way: “I think it ignites a burning
passion for chefs; those who become obsessed with the lovable
Bibendum and all that Michelin presents”. Chef Daniel Humm,
also interviewed by Forbes (2011), has a related opinion: “[…]
Michelin matters because it is, from the beginning of your career,
what you work for. […] Michelin, whether you´re in Paris, Tokyo,
New York or Barcelona, always means the same thing. Everyone
understands what it signifies, what it takes, to have those precious
Michelin stars.”

Certainly not all industry professionals have the same opinion on

that topic. By quoting Robert Sietsema and Bill Buszinski, both
also interviewed by Forbes (2011), one can refute Bloomfield´s &
Humm´s arguments. Sietsema mentions on the basis of the dining
scene in NY that: “I think the guide is way out of touch with New
York dining- they simply haven´t done their research […] “. In
addition to that Buszinski exposes that “Reviews and awards can
be great—they can certainly add to an increase in business and
give an aura of satisfaction that what we are doing is appreciated—
but the reason why I'm in this business is to earn the respect and
gratitude of all the guests that come through our doors.”

When looking back at the thesis one can say that it got confirmed.
In summary in can be said that it is very striking that the majority
of the world´s best restaurants obtain several Michelin stars of the
theworlds50best.com (2015) list and therefore it protrudes that
without being considered or rated by the Michelin it is nearly
impossible to get involved in the haute cuisine. In addition to that
it can be said on the basis of Dixon´s (2008) article that the
behavior and slacking standards likewise influence the industry in
a negative way and aggravate the success. Although Bloomfield
and Humm find the best words to describe the Michelin´s bloom
side in Forbes (2011) article, the suicides of Violier and Loiseau
are a definite knockout-argument against the Michelin´s influence
and functioning and an amber light for the industry & the Michelin
that it´s time for a “shift change”.
 Reference List

Dixon, R. (2008, January 24th). Q&A: Michelin Stars

[Web article]. Retrieved from:
http://www.theguardian.com/lifeandstyle/2008/jan/24/foodanddrin
k.travelfoodanddrink (Last seen on 06.04.16)

Forbes, P. (2011, October 28th) Chefs and Critics Weigh in on the

Relevance of Michelin [Web Journal] Retrieved from:
http://www.eater.com/2011/10/28/6640857/chefs-and-critics-
weigh-in-on-the-relevance-of-michelin (Last seen on 06.04.16)

Steinberger, M. (2016, February 6th). Michelin and the deaths of

two French chefs [Web Article]. Retrieved from:
http://www.newyorker.com/culture/culture-desk/michelin-and-the-
deaths-of-two-french-chefs (Last seen on 06.04.16)

The World´s 50 Best Restaurants 1-50. (2015, April). Retrieved

from : http://www.theworlds50best.com/list/1-50-winners#t11-20
(Last seen on 06.09.16)