mishelin stars must be deserved!
Michelin stars can make a reservation seem like a promise. Vivi and I have enjoyed meals where the cooking gave us plenty to think about long after we left the table. Then we visited Hawker Chan in Singapore and had a very different lunch. It made me question what I expected from a star, what Michelin actually awards, and whether the two had ever been quite the same thing.
Contents
Michelin stars recognize cooking, not the entire evening around it. According to the Michelin Guide’s explanation of its criteria, inspectors consider ingredient quality, harmony of flavors, technical skill, the chef’s personality in the cuisine, and consistency across dishes and visits. Décor, formality, and service do not determine the star. That last distinction matters more than I understood when I wrote the original version of this article.
We have eaten at starred restaurants where the food and the wider hospitality worked beautifully together. At Le Normandie, the presentation and service stayed in my memory alongside the dishes. I came to associate the Michelin name with that whole experience. The guide’s narrower definition leaves room for a tiny hawker stall to earn the same culinary distinction as a grand dining room, and rightly so when the food merits it.
Inspectors visit anonymously, pay for their meals, and assess the food against Michelin’s criteria. Michelin says its inspectors return as often as needed to understand a restaurant and reassess starred establishments each year. There is no published promise that a request for inspection will lead to a visit within twelve months, or that every restaurant receives a fixed number of visits. Those claims appeared in our original article and should not have been presented as facts.
The consistency requirement is the part I find most persuasive. One memorable plate cannot carry every service, and one disappointing lunch does not reveal everything a kitchen can do. That is precisely why inspectors return. It is also why a diner’s account of one meal should remain an account of one meal, however strongly that diner feels about it.
Michelin judges the cooking. I judge a meal as a guest, which also means noticing the pace, welcome, comfort, and whether I would want to return. Neither perspective cancels the other. A superb plate can emerge from a counter with plastic chairs, and a lovely dining room can serve forgettable food. When both kitchen and hospitality are generous, the memory lasts for reasons no single symbol can capture.
Our Hawker Chan meal in Singapore was disappointing. We waited about thirty minutes with roughly ten people ahead of us while the kitchen also handled an order of around forty takeaway meals. The low price was welcome, and queuing by itself would not have bothered me so much if the food had delivered. It did not on our visit.
We ordered wonton soup and soya sauce chicken noodles. The soup was only a little above room temperature; the noodles arrived cold. We had eaten better wonton soup elsewhere in Singapore. I did not take out my camera for the food photographs, and the phone pictures below are part of that unvarnished account. This was our meal, not a claim that everyone who eats there will have the same one.
Here is the correction the original essay needed. Chef Chan Hon Meng’s Liao Fan Hong Kong Soya Sauce Chicken Rice & Noodle stall in Chinatown Complex received a Michelin star in 2016. Liao Fan Hawker Chan grew into a separate quick-service restaurant chain; Michelin described its 78 Smith Street outlet as a Bib Gourmand in a 2019 comparison of the two places. Our photographs show a Hawker Chan restaurant, not the original stall. The original essay conflated the two. We cannot use the meal we had at the restaurant to judge whether the original stall deserved its star.
I used to joke that an inspector must have had a particularly cheerful late-night meal to put a hawker stall in the guide. It was a joke, not an account of how Michelin makes decisions. The actual story is better: excellent cooking can come from a stall, and a small bill need not limit a kitchen’s ambition. Our lunch at the restaurant disappointed us all the same. Both things can be true.
A Michelin star is useful when I want a guide to exceptional cooking. It cannot guarantee that I will like every dish, or that the service and setting will suit the evening I have in mind. Looking back, my disappointment at Hawker Chan was real; the accusation I directed at the starred stall was misplaced. Next time, I will check exactly which address earned which distinction, then let the meal answer for itself.
No. Michelin awards stars for cooking. It says décor, formality, and service do not determine the star, although diners may reasonably care about all three.
The original Liao Fan hawker stall received a star in 2016. Michelin separately listed the Hawker Chan restaurant at 78 Smith Street as a Bib Gourmand in 2019. Our essay describes a meal at a Hawker Chan restaurant, not an inspection of the original stall.
No. It tells readers what we experienced on that visit. Michelin assesses consistency through multiple inspections, and its distinctions apply to specific establishments, not every restaurant under the same brand.
Melaka is easy to remember through red colonial buildings, ornate temples and plates of Nyonya…
Dining in a castle has carried a certain prestige for centuries. Once, such tables were…
Afternoon tea has a way of making a simple wardrobe decision feel unnecessarily complicated. There…
Could Otočec Castle be the most romantic hotel in Slovenia? The first view certainly makes…
Editor’s Note: Updated September 2026. This review describes our spring meal at JAZ; dishes may…
Editor’s Note: Updated September 2026. This review records our earlier lunch; current practical details were…