3 ms·

I agree; an open kitchen caters to the pleasure of cooking alone, or at most with family and close friends you don't being less than elegant in front of, not th

by dkarl 7y ago

I agree; an open kitchen caters to the pleasure of cooking alone, or at most with family and close friends you don't being less than elegant in front of, not the pressure of entertaining. I think there's an element of class-based bravado in many modern houses. Huge windows without curtains, open floor plans, these send a message that your life doesn't have any mess that you need to hide from the world. You can live every aspect of your life in perfect comfort without giving a thought to who is watching, because all they would see is how elegant and attractive your life is. There's also an elevation of the social and a deprecation of individual activity. The author points out that it's hell to try to read or watch a movie while someone is using a food processor twenty feet away, but that scenario is not part of the perfect showroom lifestyle. In the ideal life, people within earshot of each other are engaged in sparkling conversation. Solitude can perhaps be engaged in stylishly, but two people not speaking to each other because they're each absorbed in their own thing is a bit gross, or at the very least, less than perfect, and therefore it's not properly aspirational to ask your home to cater to it.

mwcampbell 7y ago
> two people not speaking to each other because they're each absorbed in their own thing is a bit gross First, none of what follows is applicable for people who are absorbed in their own thing even though they're near each other because they can't afford separate rooms. In that case, you do what you have to do. But if we choose to be in the same room together, shouldn't we interact with each other rather than being absorbed in our own things? Otherwise, why not go to our own rooms? Mind you, I'm an introvert. And most of the time, I merely tolerate family gatherings, even though I choose to fly back home to spend time with my family. (I'm single and currently living in a tech hub, across the country from my family.) But I try to participate, at least a little. And I generally don't put my earbuds on until I've spent my time with the family and go back to being alone.
- Aeolun 7y ago
  Because doing your own thing together is still much better than doing it on your own?
  - mwcampbell 7y ago
    Depends on what you're doing, I guess. If you're wearing headphones, that makes it harder for the other person to get your attention. That seems to annoy my mother sometimes when my father is wearing headphones and listening to music while sitting in their living room.

by dkarl 7y ago

mwcampbell 7y ago

> two people not speaking to each other because they're each absorbed in their own thing is a bit gross First, none of what follows is applicable for people who are absorbed in their own thing even though they're near each other because they can't afford separate rooms. In that case, you do what you have to do. But if we choose to be in the same room together, shouldn't we interact with each other rather than being absorbed in our own things? Otherwise, why not go to our own rooms? Mind you, I'm an introvert. And most of the time, I merely tolerate family gatherings, even though I choose to fly back home to spend time with my family. (I'm single and currently living in a tech hub, across the country from my family.) But I try to participate, at least a little. And I generally don't put my earbuds on until I've spent my time with the family and go back to being alone.

Aeolun 7y ago
Because doing your own thing together is still much better than doing it on your own?
- mwcampbell 7y ago
  Depends on what you're doing, I guess. If you're wearing headphones, that makes it harder for the other person to get your attention. That seems to annoy my mother sometimes when my father is wearing headphones and listening to music while sitting in their living room.