When we began to explore France with Michelin, we were guided by the stars and slept in red houses. We were thrilled by the world that Michelin revealed. Although some of the stars appeared to be burning out, most of the houses rested on solid foundations. We also recognized that the Michelin inspectors had some very distinct preferences that sometimes differed from our own.
Restaurants: Our first goal was to travel to the stars. From the mid-80’s through the 90’s, we ate at approximately a dozen three star restaurants, and many more two and one stars. Most of our three stars meals met or exceeded the standard first established at Lameloise. Others fell short. We never had a bad meal, but at some restaurants the courses were slightly off or the service perfunctory. There was often a noticeable difference in quality among restaurants with the same rating. Some were still reaching for the stars, while others had accepted their rating and were falling to earth.
Restaurants that had recently received increases in their ratings were generally more creative than ones that had remained with the same rating for years. We sometimes had a far more satisfying at a two star with higher ambitions than at a three star resting on its laurels. Although it was disappointing to dine at an undeserving three star, it was exhilarating to leave a two star thinking that it deserved to be raised to culinary sainthood.
One star meals were sometimes excellent, but others were duds. After several disappointing one star meals, we decided to only visit two and three stars. This policy significantly increased our expenses, and was quickly abandoned. We then tried Bib Gourmet restaurants, and almost without exception ate well at reasonable prices.
Until recently, the guide did not indicate when stars were awarded, taken away, or when a restaurant was on the verge of promotion. This all changed a few years ago when the guide began to highlight restaurants that had just received their first star, or had received an increase in stars. Even more interesting, the guide began to note a handful of restaurants that were considered on the verge of rising in rank for the next edition. This information has proven invaluable in determining whether the restaurant was a rising or a falling star.
When I discovered the guide in Chagny, my mentor never mentioned fork and spoon restaurants, and perhaps for that reason we initially ignored them. Eventually we began to try one and two fork and spoon restaurants, and happily found that their meals were often as good as the one stars, yet more reasonably priced.
The Michelin Man apparently likes to be comfortable when he eats, and sometimes his level of comfort is more important than the quality of his food. For that reason, the guide sometimes lists a fork and spoon restaurant ahead of a one star. A good meal in a beautiful restaurant is preferred over a better meal in a more pedestrian setting.
As we ate our way through France, we agreed with the high weight that Michelin places on dining comfort. The combination of good food presented in a setting of beauty and comfort exponentially increases the dining experience. All two and three star restaurants are exceedingly comfortable, but a comfortable fork and spoon restaurant would almost always be more enjoyable than a black one star. We also especially enjoyed restaurants listed in red, regardless of rating. The experience of dining in a 14th century vaulted wine cellar, or in a restaurant overlooking the ocean, almost always outweighed the lack of stars.