4 ms·

The chair-TV axis should run the other way, so you can walk from the door to the kitchenette without bumping into the chair. Other than that yeah... it's fine..

The chair-TV axis should run the other way, so you can walk from the door to the kitchenette without bumping into the chair. Other than that yeah... it's fine... I'm not gonna shame people for being minimal.

brimble 5y ago
After thinking about this a bit, I don't think the minimalism is the problem. I think the main problem is that it looks both cheap and "low". TVs are "low" and having one so prominent makes the room look low-class. The room itself looks like a cheap apartment. The fix is to buy more stuff for the room—and especially to put on the walls—to compete with the TV so it's less prominent, or to keep things very minimal but replace the TV (too "low") with something else and re-do the entire room (chair included) to fit some minimalist trendy design. Like if this were an ultra-modern concrete room or something traditional-Japanese themed (walls, windows, flooring and all) it'd be Instagram worthy, even if it were just as minimal—but those are expensive looks to attain. No one would be saying the sleek designer room looked unlivable because it didn't have pictures on the walls or curtains or more furniture. Reminds me of Rusty's apartment in True Detective. His minimalism is (I think it's fair to say) at least in part a philisophical choice, which could look cool or respectable or impressive coupled with surroundings to make it so, but because it's a normal, cheap apartment with normal, cheap stuff (and not much of it), it just looks... well, cheap. That he doesn't care about making it nicer-looking and more in line with impressive takes on minimalism probably says something about his character—a preference for substance over appearance, for one, and maybe some other things. Or how "minimalism" trends in pop culture are often coupled with a consumerist focus on expensive, nice-looking items that'll still impress and signal certain things about the owner, while the same thing on a small budget usually looks far less impressive (because it's mostly cheap stuff). Tiny house vs. trailer home or RV. All that kind of thing. That the good couldn't have been acquired cheaply is about as important is its practical functionality, to certain buyers. Nobody wants to look at Wal-Mart minimalism, which is what this room is.

brimble 5y ago

After thinking about this a bit, I don't think the minimalism is the problem. I think the main problem is that it looks both cheap and "low". TVs are "low" and having one so prominent makes the room look low-class. The room itself looks like a cheap apartment. The fix is to buy more stuff for the room—and especially to put on the walls—to compete with the TV so it's less prominent, or to keep things very minimal but replace the TV (too "low") with something else and re-do the entire room (chair included) to fit some minimalist trendy design. Like if this were an ultra-modern concrete room or something traditional-Japanese themed (walls, windows, flooring and all) it'd be Instagram worthy, even if it were just as minimal—but those are expensive looks to attain. No one would be saying the sleek designer room looked unlivable because it didn't have pictures on the walls or curtains or more furniture. Reminds me of Rusty's apartment in True Detective. His minimalism is (I think it's fair to say) at least in part a philisophical choice, which could look cool or respectable or impressive coupled with surroundings to make it so, but because it's a normal, cheap apartment with normal, cheap stuff (and not much of it), it just looks... well, cheap. That he doesn't care about making it nicer-looking and more in line with impressive takes on minimalism probably says something about his character—a preference for substance over appearance, for one, and maybe some other things. Or how "minimalism" trends in pop culture are often coupled with a consumerist focus on expensive, nice-looking items that'll still impress and signal certain things about the owner, while the same thing on a small budget usually looks far less impressive (because it's mostly cheap stuff). Tiny house vs. trailer home or RV. All that kind of thing. That the good couldn't have been acquired cheaply is about as important is its practical functionality, to certain buyers. Nobody wants to look at Wal-Mart minimalism, which is what this room is.