4 ms·

The only relevant question is: do the people living in these houses enjoy them? Because if they do, then who cares? I look at some of the houses on the blog a

by blhack 9y ago

The only relevant question is: do the people living in these houses enjoy them? Because if they do, then who cares? I look at some of the houses on the blog and think they're really pretty. Sorry I don't have the correct sort of taste in windows or whatever. Maybe it's because I'm one of those dumb idiots that grew up in a flyover state (Iowa). This house: http://99percentinvisible.org/app/uploads/2016/10/12-hate-people-so-much.png http://99percentinvisible.org/app/uploads/2016/10/12-hate-pe... Looks really pretty to me. What seriously is the problem here?

dgacmu 9y ago
Trying to answer with the author of the mcmansion hell's viewpoint, the digrams on this post are helpful: http://mcmansionhell.tumblr.com/post/148605513816/mcmansions-101-what-makes-a-mcmansion-bad http://mcmansionhell.tumblr.com/post/148605513816/mcmansions... In the one you pointed out, the question arises: "Which part is the actual house?" It has a feeling of "someone stuck on this extra part here, this stairwell here, ..." particularly with the mix of the stone and stucco'd/painted exterior, the multiple incoherent roof angles, and the inconsistent Z-depth of the front of the house. With some architecture, the more you look at it, the more it grows on you. With the picture you posted, at first glance, I had the same reaction you did -- but after I really looked at it for a while, it started to bug the heck out of me. Kind of the same thing that happens after listening to too much auto-tuned music. The effect is cool the first time you hear it, but after a while, ...
- blhack 9y ago
  > It has a feeling of "someone stuck on this extra part here, this stairwell here, ..." Isn't that practically one of the defining characteristics of Frank Lloyd Wright's houses?
  - dagw 9y ago
    I wouldn't really say so: https://s-media-cache-ak0.pinimg.com/736x/3a/44/84/3a4484bdb3bf806f15846c9a0122c078.jpg https://s-media-cache-ak0.pinimg.com/736x/3a/44/84/3a4484bdb... http://media.architecturaldigest.com/photos/56cb8425cd3bcb326e99b77e/master/pass/Frank-Lloyd-Wright-Ingalls%20House%201.jpg http://media.architecturaldigest.com/photos/56cb8425cd3bcb32... http://historylists.org/images/nathan-g-moore-house.jpg http://historylists.org/images/nathan-g-moore-house.jpg https://cdn.vox-cdn.com/uploads/chorus_asset/file/7024761/Elam-House-Peter-Plunkett-1024x683.jpg https://cdn.vox-cdn.com/uploads/chorus_asset/file/7024761/El... https://cdn.vox-cdn.com/uploads/chorus_asset/file/7025319/Peterson-House-Kit-Hogan-1-1024x683.jpg https://cdn.vox-cdn.com/uploads/chorus_asset/file/7025319/Pe... http://midcenturyhome.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/06/Frank-Lloyd-Wright-Reisley-House.jpg http://midcenturyhome.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/06/Frank-L...
    - dgacmu 9y ago
      Concur. The FLW houses I've seen have all been quite consistent. I like Kentuck Knob as an example more than Fallingwater, because it doesn't have the super-obvious "cantilevered over the water" thing as a focus point, so you have to look at the whole a little more: http://kentuckknob.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/01/Kentuck_Spring.jpg http://kentuckknob.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/01/Kentuck_Sp... Consistent roofline, consistently repeated window motif, re-use of the horizontal stonework for the house, the exterior wall, and the chimneys. The drawback of his Usonian houses is that the ceiling height is ridiculous by 2017 standards. At 6'3", I have to duck in several of the rooms, much less the doorways. Oof.
    - blhack 9y ago
      Ah fair enough. I was thinking stuff like this: http://doclibrary.com/MSC146/IMG/ban-home4.jpg http://doclibrary.com/MSC146/IMG/ban-home4.jpg https://imgs.6sqft.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/07/07115505/frank-lloyd-wright-190-JOCKEY-HOLLOW-ROAD2.jpg https://imgs.6sqft.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/07/07115505/f... http://media.architecturaldigest.com/photos/57571c84e84281483697495d/master/pass/fallingwater-frank-lloyd-wright.jpg http://media.architecturaldigest.com/photos/57571c84e8428148...
deleted 9y ago
[deleted]
3xnis 9y ago
It's the other way round. The people who are living in these houses don't have to look at them. It's the people who don't live in those houses that have to look at them. It's an insult to society when somebody builds an ugly house and everybody else has to look at it. Settled neighborhoods are more expensive than new ones because you can avoid living next to an ugly house.
aninhumer 9y ago
So, I tend to agree that this house does not immediately jump out as ugly, and the suggestion that it is obviously flawed does come over as snobbish. I'm not sure I mind the mixed stone and stucco that another comment mentions. It seems like a valid aesthetic style, especially with the chosen colours. However, there are a few weird things I do notice. The double roof gable on the right seems unnecessary and unbalanced. And there are also many random windows in different styles, and in strange places. The ones below the double roof seem particularly obviously mismatched, and the window on the diagonal portion above the main door really looks out of position.

by blhack 9y ago

dgacmu 9y ago

Trying to answer with the author of the mcmansion hell's viewpoint, the digrams on this post are helpful: http://mcmansionhell.tumblr.com/post/148605513816/mcmansions-101-what-makes-a-mcmansion-bad http://mcmansionhell.tumblr.com/post/148605513816/mcmansions... In the one you pointed out, the question arises: "Which part is the actual house?" It has a feeling of "someone stuck on this extra part here, this stairwell here, ..." particularly with the mix of the stone and stucco'd/painted exterior, the multiple incoherent roof angles, and the inconsistent Z-depth of the front of the house. With some architecture, the more you look at it, the more it grows on you. With the picture you posted, at first glance, I had the same reaction you did -- but after I really looked at it for a while, it started to bug the heck out of me. Kind of the same thing that happens after listening to too much auto-tuned music. The effect is cool the first time you hear it, but after a while, ...

blhack 9y ago
> It has a feeling of "someone stuck on this extra part here, this stairwell here, ..." Isn't that practically one of the defining characteristics of Frank Lloyd Wright's houses?
- dagw 9y ago
  I wouldn't really say so: https://s-media-cache-ak0.pinimg.com/736x/3a/44/84/3a4484bdb3bf806f15846c9a0122c078.jpg https://s-media-cache-ak0.pinimg.com/736x/3a/44/84/3a4484bdb... http://media.architecturaldigest.com/photos/56cb8425cd3bcb326e99b77e/master/pass/Frank-Lloyd-Wright-Ingalls%20House%201.jpg http://media.architecturaldigest.com/photos/56cb8425cd3bcb32... http://historylists.org/images/nathan-g-moore-house.jpg http://historylists.org/images/nathan-g-moore-house.jpg https://cdn.vox-cdn.com/uploads/chorus_asset/file/7024761/Elam-House-Peter-Plunkett-1024x683.jpg https://cdn.vox-cdn.com/uploads/chorus_asset/file/7024761/El... https://cdn.vox-cdn.com/uploads/chorus_asset/file/7025319/Peterson-House-Kit-Hogan-1-1024x683.jpg https://cdn.vox-cdn.com/uploads/chorus_asset/file/7025319/Pe... http://midcenturyhome.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/06/Frank-Lloyd-Wright-Reisley-House.jpg http://midcenturyhome.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/06/Frank-L...
  - dgacmu 9y ago
    Concur. The FLW houses I've seen have all been quite consistent. I like Kentuck Knob as an example more than Fallingwater, because it doesn't have the super-obvious "cantilevered over the water" thing as a focus point, so you have to look at the whole a little more: http://kentuckknob.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/01/Kentuck_Spring.jpg http://kentuckknob.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/01/Kentuck_Sp... Consistent roofline, consistently repeated window motif, re-use of the horizontal stonework for the house, the exterior wall, and the chimneys. The drawback of his Usonian houses is that the ceiling height is ridiculous by 2017 standards. At 6'3", I have to duck in several of the rooms, much less the doorways. Oof.
  - blhack 9y ago
    Ah fair enough. I was thinking stuff like this: http://doclibrary.com/MSC146/IMG/ban-home4.jpg http://doclibrary.com/MSC146/IMG/ban-home4.jpg https://imgs.6sqft.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/07/07115505/frank-lloyd-wright-190-JOCKEY-HOLLOW-ROAD2.jpg https://imgs.6sqft.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/07/07115505/f... http://media.architecturaldigest.com/photos/57571c84e84281483697495d/master/pass/fallingwater-frank-lloyd-wright.jpg http://media.architecturaldigest.com/photos/57571c84e8428148...

deleted 9y ago

[deleted]

3xnis 9y ago

It's the other way round. The people who are living in these houses don't have to look at them. It's the people who don't live in those houses that have to look at them. It's an insult to society when somebody builds an ugly house and everybody else has to look at it. Settled neighborhoods are more expensive than new ones because you can avoid living next to an ugly house.

aninhumer 9y ago

So, I tend to agree that this house does not immediately jump out as ugly, and the suggestion that it is obviously flawed does come over as snobbish. I'm not sure I mind the mixed stone and stucco that another comment mentions. It seems like a valid aesthetic style, especially with the chosen colours. However, there are a few weird things I do notice. The double roof gable on the right seems unnecessary and unbalanced. And there are also many random windows in different styles, and in strange places. The ones below the double roof seem particularly obviously mismatched, and the window on the diagonal portion above the main door really looks out of position.