The Chicagoist will be launching later but in the meantime please enjoy our archives.

Critic Says New River North Restaurant Represents 'Everything Wrong With Humanity'

By Anthony Todd in Food on Aug 26, 2015 5:46PM

CChicagoTunaSashimi.jpg
Photo provided by C Chicago.

Chicago Mag critic Jeff Ruby is one of the best food writers in town, and he's not usually a cruel critic. So when he says a restaurant "exemplifies everything that is wrong with restaurants, and humanity," our ears perked up. Strap in for a burn fest.

The restaurant in question is C Chicago, a new high-end fish spot in River North. If the phrase "high-end fish spot in River North" isn't enough to send you running in the other direction, how about this: Their whole black bass for two (which Ruby claims is awful) costs $74.25. Or you could buy a 55-day dry-aged steak at Boeufhaus and still have enough left over for a movie.

According to Ruby, this place has bad food, obnoxious waiters, a requirement that you look at the raw version of your food before you eat it, and my new favorite term for a restaurant putting food on the table: "Hate-plopping."

Ruby breaks down the restaurant's problems into the seven deadly sins. Our favorite may be wrath:

WRATH: Any self-serious restaurant that puts diners in a balcony with a ginormous curved flat-screen TV right at eye level and then makes certain every item arrives tepid, even the ones that aren’t terrible, must hate us all. Or at least me.

Also a treat is greed:

Here is a restaurant so cynical about the expense-account crowd that it never tells diners prices for the whole fish and then sends out a $74.25 black bass that has been methodically eviscerated into a mealy, miserable carcass. At which point our supremely awful waiter has the temerity to announce, “The sides are really per person.” So if you want to share that $10 plate of English peas, you may as well get two. Or better: zero.

Read the whole thing, it's worth the time. In fairness, Ruby is a bit of an outlier, as the Tribune gave the place three stars, while the Reader gave it a more so-so review.