4 ms·
I really dislike this blog. Their rules are just subjective opinions and completely arbitrary. They don't give any arguments or reasoning to support them. When
by Houshalter 9y ago
I really dislike this blog. Their rules are just subjective opinions and completely arbitrary. They don't give any arguments or reasoning to support them. When they do the side by side comparisons with traditional architecture, I usually prefer the McMansions. They just look cooler. I like that they aren't perfectly symmetrical and simple.
Much of their advice could actually be harmful. E.g. reducing the number of windows to make it fit into their desired style. Windows have been shown to be very beneficial to mental health. E.g. hospital patients in a room with a window recover earlier, depressed people improve a bit when they can see trees, bright sunlight is hugely important in establishing the circadian rhythm, etc.
Or the demands for the houses to be perfectly symmetrical and "balanced" is very constraining. It eliminates 99% of design space. There are otherwise more optimal designs that must be discarded because they don't meet that constraint. A room must arbitrarily become so much bigger or smaller, or eliminated entirely, to satisfy it.
And the same is true for all of the rules. They are all purely aesthetic constraints.
- jameskegel 9y ago"What she said is invalid because I have personal preferences"
- Houshalter 9y agoThat's their argument not mine. They don't talk about personal preferences. They talk about their rules like they are objective facts, and are extremely condescending to anyone that thinks differently. If they would admit it was their personal aesthetic preferences, then that's fine.