5 ms·

The guest on that article and the blog author are the same person. How can you "understand that mcmansions are bad architecture" and also say "the whole thing

The guest on that article and the blog author are the same person. How can you "understand that mcmansions are bad architecture" and also say "the whole thing stank of classist elitism"? The blog points fun at clearly bad buildings. Fake columns, unnecessary rooms, poor placement of re-used furniture, etc. Sarcasm is funny. The blog is sarcastic in nature. What's wrong with that?

KaiserPro 9y ago
to add, the blog doesn't just go: "its horrid" it goes: "its horrid because its trying to copy this style, here is what this style is supposed to be, and this is why it fails to look right here" Its basically a wonderfully funny incident post mortem. I wish my post mortems were so funny and illuminating
falsedan 9y ago
> The blog is sarcastic in nature. What's wrong with that? It's punching down: the builders/purchasers didn't know/care how to make architecturally sophisticated dwellings, which is no reason to make fun of someone. The commentary applies equally-well to pre-fab apartments, shotgun shacks, suburban housing developments, etc. It's poorly-targeted. It's also elitist a.f. "Look at these gauche bungalows, drawn up no doubt by someone who never heard of Falling Water, let alone ever showered"
- chadgeidel 9y ago
  Builders and purchasers don't care about architecturally sophisticated dwellings because they are too busy "keeping up with the Joneses". I disagree with your assessment of elitism. If every "critique" is "elitism" then I really don't know how to respond.
  - falsedan 9y ago
    There's critiquing, and there's constructive feedback.
- careersuicide 9y ago
  > It's punching down I generally reject the premise of punching up versus down; but McMansion Hell is emphatically not punching down. Anyone who can afford a $1 million 5000+ square foot house deserves very little sympathy for their bad taste.
  - averagewall 9y ago
    It's OK to be mean to people because of the socioeconomic class they belong to? They're all humans just like each other. I bet half of poorer people would opt to design their own house in an ugly way if they had the chance. They just don't have the chance. Some of them certainly try hard though: https://www.pinterest.com/pin/543809723727647414 https://www.pinterest.com/pin/543809723727647414
    - careersuicide 9y ago
      > It's OK to be mean to people because of the socioeconomic class they belong to? No, see the first sentence where I say I generally reject the premise of the whole concept of punching up and down (I think there is such a thing as bad tactics). My point was, however, that if you're gonna use that framework, perhaps one percenters buying ugly houses aren't exactly a sympathetic group. Even more importantly, the OP misses the entire reason punching up and down is a thing. Being rich enough to afford a McMansion means you're pretty much guaranteed to be highly privileged. It'd be pretty silly, if you're going to talk about punching up and down, to believe that ridiculing the rich with bad taste is anything but a big ol' shoryuken. I mean, even I, someone who thinks you should treat people kindly regardless of background, roll my eyes at the thought of McMansion owners feelings being hurt because people think their houses are ugly.
      - Applejinx 9y ago
        Also, the blogger skewers the exact pretensions of this class with hilarious skill and deftness. I can't tell you how many times I've seen some very motel-like painting or elaborately framed print up there captioned 'An Art', and that always makes me grin: it criticises a very real and troubling class tendency to commoditize and stupefy art, and to see this tendency called out for mockery pleases me.
- jonahx 9y ago
  > The commentary applies equally-well to pre-fab apartments, shotgun shacks, suburban housing developments, etc. It's poorly-targeted. That's a false equivalence. Shotgun shacks and suburban housing developments aren't trying to be something they're not. And that is why you don't find ironic commentary like this directed at them. When you put on airs, you get cut down. Is that mean? Probably. Sometimes it's also appropriate.
criddell 9y ago
Maybe it will just take time for some of these design choices to be appreciated? Is a fake column on a house any different than fins on a 1959 Cadillac?
- chadgeidel 9y ago
  It's a good question. I'm not well-versed enough in design theory to answer, but I'll offer my opinion anyway. :-) The fins on a 1959 Cadillac are well-integrated (design-wise) on the car. It's a theme of the era and the car was designed from the ground up to look like a jet or a rocket. The design elements in a McMansion are not well integrated (see the posts on the site) - they are added on as an afterthought because "nice houses have these things". There is no coherent style or design. If I had to guess, I would say the "gaudy" (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Antoni_Gaud%C3%AD https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Antoni_Gaud%C3%AD !!) design of a Cadillac will be well-regarded for at least 100 years. I don't think the design of McMansions will ever be well-regarded.
  - cat199 9y ago
    Also: 50's US cars were also exceedingly well built using high quality materials and mostly/nearly by hand.. which goes against the 'cheap / phony materials' ethos critiqued in mcmansions.. that said, plenty of people I'm sure critiqued the 'chintzy' 50s asthetic and increased use of plastics in the day..
  - InspiredIdiot 9y ago
    It doesn't appear that Antoni Gaudí had anything to do with the etymology of the term "gaudy" as it was in use hundreds of years before he was born. https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/gaudy https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/gaudy https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/gaudy https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/gaudy I couldn't help looking it up because the idea that a single artist could stand out so much to be singularly associated with that term was tempting. I expect that is why such a false association persists.
    - chadgeidel 9y ago

KaiserPro 9y ago

to add, the blog doesn't just go: "its horrid" it goes: "its horrid because its trying to copy this style, here is what this style is supposed to be, and this is why it fails to look right here" Its basically a wonderfully funny incident post mortem. I wish my post mortems were so funny and illuminating

falsedan 9y ago

> The blog is sarcastic in nature. What's wrong with that? It's punching down: the builders/purchasers didn't know/care how to make architecturally sophisticated dwellings, which is no reason to make fun of someone. The commentary applies equally-well to pre-fab apartments, shotgun shacks, suburban housing developments, etc. It's poorly-targeted. It's also elitist a.f. "Look at these gauche bungalows, drawn up no doubt by someone who never heard of Falling Water, let alone ever showered"

chadgeidel 9y ago
Builders and purchasers don't care about architecturally sophisticated dwellings because they are too busy "keeping up with the Joneses". I disagree with your assessment of elitism. If every "critique" is "elitism" then I really don't know how to respond.
- falsedan 9y ago
  There's critiquing, and there's constructive feedback.
careersuicide 9y ago
> It's punching down I generally reject the premise of punching up versus down; but McMansion Hell is emphatically not punching down. Anyone who can afford a $1 million 5000+ square foot house deserves very little sympathy for their bad taste.
- averagewall 9y ago
  It's OK to be mean to people because of the socioeconomic class they belong to? They're all humans just like each other. I bet half of poorer people would opt to design their own house in an ugly way if they had the chance. They just don't have the chance. Some of them certainly try hard though: https://www.pinterest.com/pin/543809723727647414 https://www.pinterest.com/pin/543809723727647414
  - careersuicide 9y ago
    > It's OK to be mean to people because of the socioeconomic class they belong to? No, see the first sentence where I say I generally reject the premise of the whole concept of punching up and down (I think there is such a thing as bad tactics). My point was, however, that if you're gonna use that framework, perhaps one percenters buying ugly houses aren't exactly a sympathetic group. Even more importantly, the OP misses the entire reason punching up and down is a thing. Being rich enough to afford a McMansion means you're pretty much guaranteed to be highly privileged. It'd be pretty silly, if you're going to talk about punching up and down, to believe that ridiculing the rich with bad taste is anything but a big ol' shoryuken. I mean, even I, someone who thinks you should treat people kindly regardless of background, roll my eyes at the thought of McMansion owners feelings being hurt because people think their houses are ugly.
    - Applejinx 9y ago
      Also, the blogger skewers the exact pretensions of this class with hilarious skill and deftness. I can't tell you how many times I've seen some very motel-like painting or elaborately framed print up there captioned 'An Art', and that always makes me grin: it criticises a very real and troubling class tendency to commoditize and stupefy art, and to see this tendency called out for mockery pleases me.
jonahx 9y ago
> The commentary applies equally-well to pre-fab apartments, shotgun shacks, suburban housing developments, etc. It's poorly-targeted. That's a false equivalence. Shotgun shacks and suburban housing developments aren't trying to be something they're not. And that is why you don't find ironic commentary like this directed at them. When you put on airs, you get cut down. Is that mean? Probably. Sometimes it's also appropriate.

criddell 9y ago

Maybe it will just take time for some of these design choices to be appreciated? Is a fake column on a house any different than fins on a 1959 Cadillac?

chadgeidel 9y ago
It's a good question. I'm not well-versed enough in design theory to answer, but I'll offer my opinion anyway. :-) The fins on a 1959 Cadillac are well-integrated (design-wise) on the car. It's a theme of the era and the car was designed from the ground up to look like a jet or a rocket. The design elements in a McMansion are not well integrated (see the posts on the site) - they are added on as an afterthought because "nice houses have these things". There is no coherent style or design. If I had to guess, I would say the "gaudy" (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Antoni_Gaud%C3%AD https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Antoni_Gaud%C3%AD !!) design of a Cadillac will be well-regarded for at least 100 years. I don't think the design of McMansions will ever be well-regarded.
- cat199 9y ago
  Also: 50's US cars were also exceedingly well built using high quality materials and mostly/nearly by hand.. which goes against the 'cheap / phony materials' ethos critiqued in mcmansions.. that said, plenty of people I'm sure critiqued the 'chintzy' 50s asthetic and increased use of plastics in the day..
- InspiredIdiot 9y ago
  It doesn't appear that Antoni Gaudí had anything to do with the etymology of the term "gaudy" as it was in use hundreds of years before he was born. https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/gaudy https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/gaudy https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/gaudy https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/gaudy I couldn't help looking it up because the idea that a single artist could stand out so much to be singularly associated with that term was tempting. I expect that is why such a false association persists.
  - chadgeidel 9y ago