South, the restaurant--longish

I had hoped to make my inaugural post one truly LTH- and chow-worthy. But in the interest of timeliness and of posting a review of a place that has not, to my knowledge, been reviewed anywhere yet (Metromix excepted), I offer the following, less-than-completely-up-to-my-own standards contribution.

The Lovely Dining Companion and I recently made a trip up Broadway to South (yes, that’s its name). Owned by a partner in the Speakeasy Supperclub, the space used to be known as The Room (northwest corner of Broadway and Rosedale (aka 5900 North). We had discovered the place by accident one evening and had at last returned to check it out. Metromix is of the opinion that the redecoration is intended to evoke the Garden District of New Orleans. Ummm, really? The room is a fairly large square, high-ceilinged with art for sale hung on the exposed brick walls. Somewhat less than half of the room is marked off by about a dozen old, very-badly-in-need-of-paint, windows hung from the ceiling. Greenery is limited. Metromix also credits the presence of wooden shutters with helping to evoke that New Orleans feel. If that’s all it takes to evoke The Big Easy for you, you’re more imaginative than I am (or we visited different cities). I am not complaining about the ambiance, such as it is, but I think it right to note that the room seemed a little…bereft to me (LDC concurred). Tables are nicely spaced, though, and the space is, lack of character notwithstanding, comfortable, if not warm.

We arrived around 6:00 pm for an early dinner and the place didn’t get many more diners for at least another hour. It was Saturday night of Memorial Day weekend; still we were only the second table of diners. The hostess seemed understandably thrilled to have us and, though the server was competent, he was mostly going through the motions (more of which, anon). Dress is very casual, something emphasized to us over the phone. We were both in jeans and, given the later arrivals, would have been out of place in a jacket or tie. Business casual would seem to be the upper limit here.

The menu is Southern-themed, not Southern. Thus, ingredients we might associate with the South are in evidence, but generally treated in a new or unusual way. We started with one true, unmodified Southern classic: cornbread and fried green tomatoes. The tomatoes, sad to say, were too firm, not quite ripe. More’s the pity since the breading and frying were well done. With tomatoes that aren’t ready, this is just a dish that shouldn’t be ordered. The cornbread “starter” was dismal. No bread basket was served; as a matter of fact, nothing whatsoever was offered before dinner unless you ordered and paid for it. That might be okay if the cornbread in a restaurant named “South” were either exceptional or at least fair-to-middlin’ but of generous portion. Here, $1.50 bought you a piece of bread that was no more than two inches square and no better than mediocre. I’ve tasted boxed mixes that were better. What gives?

Although we were off to a slow start, the menu looked quite promising. That night, the appetizers included a crab cake, scallops with corn polenta and sweet pea custard (!) and chili-spiced shrimp with leeks. Three salads appealed, albeit in different ways: roasted poblanos with mixed greens, carrots and sunflower seeds; romaine with chili-spiced pecans, sliced pear, and Maytag blue dressing; and adobo-marinated grilled shrimp with greens, walnuts and a cilantro-lime dressing. I think this begins to illustrate that there’s a distinct Southern influence, yet it’s the South writ large, not limited to the southeast.

Entrees I found intriguing. All ten shared a style, a creativeness—the kind of intrigue that syncopation in music promises. Sadly, this cuts both ways: I found almost all of the entrees tempting in some way. The LDC found almost none of them so. There’s the serrano/garlic marinated strip steak with asparagus and jalapeno/white cheddar mashed potatoes (at $23 the priciest entrée). But there’s also a cheese tortellini with spinach, mushrooms, and (are you ready?) a chipotle basil cream sauce (at $15, the most inexpensive entrée). They also featured “Cajun polenta fried catfish with cactus,” lamb chops with mashed sweet potatoes and collard greens, and a southwest influenced, New Orleans-style staple: shrimp, andouille, and chorizo jambalaya. Nothing was without the obligatory Southern facet, but “South,” as noted above, is as often southwest as southeast. That’s not a complaint, merely a description.

So how was the food, already? I chose the pork chop with apple brandy/gorgonzola cream sauce and apple-onion confit. The chop was on the thin side…pleasant, to damn it with faint praise. But the sauce. I didn’t care who watched me lick my plate. Amazingly rich. Smooth. Delicious with a capital D. Really excellent. They could have put that sauce on slices of bread and I would have been happy. (Though the quality of the sauce highlighted the “pleasantness” of the chop. With a great piece of meat, this would be a signature dish to compete with anything in the city.) The confit was done a bit differently than I am used to. Large hunks of apple with large pieces of onion, lightly sauteed. The apples retained their integrity (somehow that doesn’t seem the right descriptor) while still being thoroughly cooked. What I missed was the dish, as a whole, coming together. No unifying flavor, no meshing of apple and onion. A surprising miss, I thought.

The LDC ordered a special: a generous piece of grilled salmon with a sauce that neither of us can recall (not a good sign). The salmon itself was excellent; the portion, as noted, quite generous. My only recollection of the sauce was that I favored it and she didn’t. She also had a side of really very good sweet potatoes. They were mashed in a way that leaves some integrity to the potatoes, rather than creamy. And yet, as a “creamy” guy, I found myself very taken (as was the LDC). In fact, the dish illustrated one of the strengths of the place: a clear appreciation of the fact that sometimes less is more. Nothing too much was done to the potatoes, not too much mashing, not too much in the way of flavoring. Just enough to make it something special and then leave it alone. It spoke for itself.

There are a variety of sides on offer, all for $3. These include the aforementioned jalapeno/white cheddar mashed potatoes as well as smoked cheddar mashed and mashed sweet potatoes with praline (from assorted nuts). On a lighter front, you have a rather limited choice of grilled asparagus or sauteed assorted greens. Most intriguing of all—and I was disappointed that we couldn’t work it in—a maple and walnut risotto. Not sure I see the “South” here except for the jalapeno and the sweet potatoes and, I suppose, the praline.

Dessert was bread pudding. Some day I will either discover someplace that knows how to make this really well or just give up ordering it. I’m eating way too much mediocre bread pudding. No exception here. Matter of fact, I would give it a C-. Not much flavor, extraordinarily uniform texture (which may be tempting to some, but not how I happen to think of good bread pudding). I ordered coffee to accompany. The first cup came and was not hot. Not hot? Heck, it wasn’t even warm. I found it odd, the more so that the server hadn’t noticed cold coffee. When he came over at my request, he seemed neither particularly surprised nor concerned. No apology, but he did brew a fresh pot. The coffee was good but I found the server’s reaction more noteworthy than the coffee.

Dinner, tax, tip, greens fees, and assorted miscellaneous costs and accoutrements came to rest in the neighborhood of $50-$60. I think we may go back (if I can convince LDC that there are enough tempting things for her to choose from), but I am somewhat chagrined to offer a less-than-thoroughly-positive recommendation.

Your humble and obedient servant,

Gypsy Boy



South
5900 N. Broadway
773-989-7666

Gypsy Boy wrote:I offer the following, less-than-completely-up-to-my-own standards contribution.

Your stanards are apparently quite high. Thanks for the post, Gypsy Boy.

Gypsy Boy,

If this constitutes a "less-than-completely-up-to-my-own standards" review, you have set a high bar for yourself! Thanks for a post that provided a full, clear, fair, and complex view of South.

Southern restaurants (or as you correctly point out) "Southern-theme" restaurants often have the problem you cite. How far from authentic tradition can ches go, particularly given the resistence that many upscale diners have to southern techniques of cooking ('overcooking" vegetables, frying, breading, etc.) Even restaurants down south (e.g., Five and Ten in Athens have something of this problem). How can one be regionally-inspired, maintaining some authenticity, while finding an audience.

It seems that the sauces at South are of particular note, and that may be good advice for other diners, who might try this flawed but ambitious addition to Chicago. Given the rather mediocre quality of many southern-themed restaurants here, if South can get its act together, it might be a useful addition to the dining scene.

Welcome to the Board.

Sounds like it has potential if you order from the menu between the appetizers and desserts. How can a place named after a region known for its great desserts not have great desserts?

Excellent post, Gypsy Boy. And if I remember past posts of yours, they must be from CH, then?

I went to the Room a while back, and it does not sound like they changed the room much, just the name and some of the menu. Trying to cash in on the latest dining fad, perhaps? I was not impressed by my meal at the Room, either, and it seemed to suffer from the same disease your meal did - ambition that far exceeded any ability to execute. Perhaps it is a cook who yearns to be a chef, but falls back to earth with some regularity (I should be slapped for that meta-phor).

Since it seems to be the same owners, is it also BYOB, still? My final annoyance with the place was that whole game - BYOB is sold as some form of economy, but at the prices, it does not sound like a cheap meal, at all. Plus the BYOB corkage there was not less than at many places with a liquor license, tho they did make a bit more of a fuss out of opening my bottle.

There is only one place of that style (modern-American, semi-haute cuisine prepared by a kitchen with a heavy touch and uneven execution) which I tolerate willingly, and that is because the place is frankly a fancied-up diner with prices to match, Zander's in Downers Grove. Paying $15 to $20 or more a plate for such food just seems a waste to me. but at $8 or $9 I will enjoy the blissful sauce or the excellent salmon and ignore the fact that the dish did not quite meld, the ingredients were not the best, and the seasoning overwhelmed, when it should be accenting.

Thanks for the warning, GB.

Last time I was at South, I spoke with Jody. I know she changed it from "The Room" to "South" because she wanted to differentiate it somewhat from her other place nearby - Speakeasy. She admitted they'd been going through some growing pains since it's been South, so they're actively trying to tweak the concept. I've been several times, and my meals there have always been good, and I think better more recently, to the point where I think it marginally outshines Speakeasy (although both are good, especially for semi-upscale BYOBs).

It's been a couple of months, so I don't remember and can't comment specifically on what I had, but I remember being pleased, although the fact that a couple of dining companions were good friends with Jody may have had an impact on the meal and the experience. FWIW, I kinda like the decor, though.

(And I have to be somewhat perplexed by the comment that the tomatoes used for the fried green tomatoes weren't ripe enough.)

Hey now - We went last Sunday and were 2 of 4 people there (we arrived at 7 and left at 8:30 or 9 and they were closing for the night soon after). My guess is that if they are not getting more than 4 people for dinner, even on a Sunday, they will be closing for good soon. AND they didn't have outside seating, which they used to have.

I tried South a couple months back and was so disappointed. I thought the food was mediocre at best, and the service not much better. However, I did like the restaurant when it was the Room. I was excited when it changed over to South because I love southern food and I'm not aware of any other place on the north side of Chicago that serves good southern food. When in D.C., I dined at Georgia Browns and I wish a similar place (upscale & southern) would open up here.

On another note, I have been to Speakeasy 3 times and like the food very much. However, each time I went to Speakeasy my party had major service issues -- one night my group of 6 spent 3 hours dining there (3 courses) and we practically fell asleep during the long wait between courses. Maybe that's a weekend issue for them? Maybe they've worked out their service kinks? I don't know since it's been a while since I've dined there.

We have also had service problems at Speakeasy (and one time, when we commented on the way out to the manager that they needed to work on it a bit, she started arguing with us about it!)