EDIT: Small change, looks like there are few Chinese restaurants!
EDIT: Small change, looks like there are few Chinese restaurants!
There are obvious factors that contribute to a restaurant being visited by Michelin judges, not the least of which is its location relative to other restaurants that are visited. There is also the matter of judges needing to be familiar with a cuisine in order to judge it properly. Without extensive knowledge of ingredients, preparation methods and presentation patterns it is difficult to issue a Michelin rating. If they do not know the culinary landscape how do you imagine they will issue a rating? Doing so would destroy their credibility as a knowledgeable school of critics.
There used to be zero stars in Japan but that has changed over time as the Michelin system has embraced the cuisine and visa versa. It is easy to point out that many cuisines are not represented in the Michelin guide but what are the alternatives? That a limited number of people learn everything there is to know in an instant? That the ratings become so arbitrary that they are meaningless? There is nothing in the Michelin guide that claims that good food cannot be found elsewhere. I fail to see the controversy in a publication that is seemingly doing what it can to stick to what it knows while progressively broadening its horizons.
By hiring more inspectors?
I'm not saying there is cultural bias or something like that. I'm just pointing out the fact that they have certain cuisines that are not represented.
If you consistently claim to be - "the world’s best known independent restaurant and hotel guide" with proudly boasting 100 odd year history, then you better show gastronomic variety. Else it just seems weird.
[1] From their twitter handle description - twitter.com/MichelinGuideUK
Rather than resenting the Michelin system for not representing the kind of restaurants we love, maybe just recognize that it's not supposed to do that, and find other ways to find and measure restaurants that don't fit the Michelin data model?
Michelin stars are awarded based on food "quality" alone [1]:
> the quality of ingredients used, the skill in food preparation, the combination of flavours, the value for money, the consistency of culinary standards.
[1] https://guide.michelin.com/hk/en/hong-kong-macau/features/5-...
This is not to say they aren't improving. But it does say that they didn't always live up to their own stated standards.
https://www.abc.net.au/news/2018-10-27/asian-food-fine-dinin...
Also, Michelin gives awards for fine dining, meaning a specific style of service. Any type of restaurant that meets the service requirements can be awarded Michelin stars, there's a Nigerian restaurant in London that's recently been awarded a star.
The Michelin Guide itself disagrees: “The Michelin Guide isn't in any of the Indian cities but that doesn't mean the red book is void of the subcontinent’s cuisine. In fact, Indian restaurants are listed in most of the territories with the Guide, some of which are in truly surprising cities. Tokyo for instance, is home to three Bib Gourmand rated Indian eateries, while the first Indian restaurant awarded with a Michelin star in Asia happens to be in Macau.”
https://guide.michelin.com/hk/en/hong-kong-macau/travel/8-mi...
Also:
https://guide.michelin.com/us/san-francisco/indian-pakistani...
Two 1-star, One “The Plate”, and Five “Bib Gourmand” in SF Bay.
> South American
Alex Atala’s D.O.M.in São Paolo is a two-star “contemporary Brazilian” restaurant, the first counterexample I could find.
> Mediterranean
https://guide.michelin.com/us/san-francisco/mourad/restauran...
> Thai
https://guide.michelin.com/us/san-francisco/kin-khao/restaur...
EDIT: On review, you might have been referring to geography rather than cuisine, so we’ll do that again from that perspective to cover all bases.
> Indian
As noted above, geographically, that's correct
> South American
https://guide.michelin.com/br/rio-de-janeiro
https://guide.michelin.com/br/sao-paulo
> Mediterranean
Also a valid point, geographically.
> Thai
https://guide.michelin.com/th/bangkok
> Chinese
But hey, at least you got the til (~ diacritic) right. A lot of people don't even know that's a thing.
>Also a valid point, geographically.
Surely there must be loads of michelin-starred restaurants within the various Mediterranean culinary regions.
But there is no Michelin coverage for Africa or for Asia outside of East Asia. Unless I haven't found the right secret path into the guide.
[1] Butter Chicken - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Butter_chicken
A Michelin star doesn't just come from the literal taste of the food (or the presentation), it comes from every aspect of the restaurant and staff - down to the very cleanliness of the curtains.
And then there's Nirvana in Manhattan, at penthouse level on on Central Park South. Beautiful cityscape at night. But it's really Bangladeshi, and they don't do Vindaloo.
Or are you arguing that Michelin just wouldn't rate traditional Japanese, Indian or Chinese restaurants highly?
Unfortunately I'm not super familiar with nicer Chinese food, but I'd presume that it's not incompatible with drinks either.
I'm not saying that you need to have a sommelier, I'm just saying that the lack of a sommelier is usually a pretty good sign that a restaurant isn't even trying for a star (extremely few restaurants are!).
I don't think Michelin would tend to rate any "traditional" restaurants very highly, to get stars you need to offer the specific Michelin experience.