3 ms·

For when you have money but no taste. Or modesty perhaps

HarryHirsch 3y ago
It's the Keynesian beauty contest - if the exterior or the layout conformed to someone's taste or use case the seller will exclude the group with different tastes. So the outcome is a mishmash that appeals badly to everyone. It's no accident that so many supermodels are from Brazil - the nation is a true melting pot of races, it attracted immigrants from everywhere. If you need a clotheshorse you go to rural Rio Grande do Sul and look for "generic white".
- woodruffw 3y ago
  McMansions don’t appeal badly to everyone: millions of Americans happily live in them. The more accurate observation isn’t that they’re the product of a Keynesian contest, but they’re the product of distorted real estate and home ownership incentives: homeowners conflate size and apparent luxury with investment safety, and our housing and development policies encourage that conflation.
  - HarryHirsch 3y ago
    millions of Americans happily live in them With a more individualized layout a good chunk would live happier - the standard examples are the dramatic rooflines that just encourage leaks at the edges and the two-story foyer that wastes so much space. But as you say, it's not about comfort or practicality, it's about resale value.
- ghaff 3y ago
  Even if, for purposes of argument, you stipulate that there are families that would make effective use of a very large house, the design for a family with a lot of kids and/or an older parent living with them is going to look very different from that for a couple or small family that throws large parties on a regular basis.
LanceH 3y ago
What I hate is that it seems to be a dichotomy. Small house, simple style. But as soon as it gets to a certain size, you have to put in stupid things like the grand entrance with a showpiece staircase. Other things have to happen, apparently. The vaulted 20 foot ceilings above the living room. I now have the choice in the winter to heat the upstairs to 80 or keep the living room at 60. Of course, you'll need an ostentatious fireplace that will never be used here in Texas. It has helpfully been placed as the focal point of your living room, where most would want a tv. I'm continually amazed at how bad designs are on half-million dollar purchases which require 30 years to pay off.
- ghaff 3y ago
  There certainly are large house designs that are, to me, aesthetically pleasing. They tend to be simpler and more classic. I see quite a few up in coastal Maine. It probably helps when you have a view from the house which tends to focus the design on features that take advantage of that.
- rsynnott 3y ago
  > But as soon as it gets to a certain size, you have to put in stupid things like the grand entrance with a showpiece staircase. I mean, you don't, but people tend to. Though, also, the "certain size" here is generally a minimum of about 6000sqft. This is too large to be a practical house, so you end up with either unreasonably large rooms (uncomfortable, undesirable), completely superfluous rooms (probably the least-worst option) or massive grand entrances and other not-quite-room features (most common approach). Of course, the sensible thing would be to build a smaller house, but that doesn't appear to work for the people who like these.

It's the Keynesian beauty contest - if the exterior or the layout conformed to someone's taste or use case the seller will exclude the group with different tastes. So the outcome is a mishmash that appeals badly to everyone. It's no accident that so many supermodels are from Brazil - the nation is a true melting pot of races, it attracted immigrants from everywhere. If you need a clotheshorse you go to rural Rio Grande do Sul and look for "generic white".

woodruffw 3y ago
McMansions don’t appeal badly to everyone: millions of Americans happily live in them. The more accurate observation isn’t that they’re the product of a Keynesian contest, but they’re the product of distorted real estate and home ownership incentives: homeowners conflate size and apparent luxury with investment safety, and our housing and development policies encourage that conflation.
- HarryHirsch 3y ago
  millions of Americans happily live in them With a more individualized layout a good chunk would live happier - the standard examples are the dramatic rooflines that just encourage leaks at the edges and the two-story foyer that wastes so much space. But as you say, it's not about comfort or practicality, it's about resale value.
ghaff 3y ago
Even if, for purposes of argument, you stipulate that there are families that would make effective use of a very large house, the design for a family with a lot of kids and/or an older parent living with them is going to look very different from that for a couple or small family that throws large parties on a regular basis.

LanceH 3y ago

What I hate is that it seems to be a dichotomy. Small house, simple style. But as soon as it gets to a certain size, you have to put in stupid things like the grand entrance with a showpiece staircase. Other things have to happen, apparently. The vaulted 20 foot ceilings above the living room. I now have the choice in the winter to heat the upstairs to 80 or keep the living room at 60. Of course, you'll need an ostentatious fireplace that will never be used here in Texas. It has helpfully been placed as the focal point of your living room, where most would want a tv. I'm continually amazed at how bad designs are on half-million dollar purchases which require 30 years to pay off.

ghaff 3y ago
There certainly are large house designs that are, to me, aesthetically pleasing. They tend to be simpler and more classic. I see quite a few up in coastal Maine. It probably helps when you have a view from the house which tends to focus the design on features that take advantage of that.
rsynnott 3y ago
> But as soon as it gets to a certain size, you have to put in stupid things like the grand entrance with a showpiece staircase. I mean, you don't, but people tend to. Though, also, the "certain size" here is generally a minimum of about 6000sqft. This is too large to be a practical house, so you end up with either unreasonably large rooms (uncomfortable, undesirable), completely superfluous rooms (probably the least-worst option) or massive grand entrances and other not-quite-room features (most common approach). Of course, the sensible thing would be to build a smaller house, but that doesn't appear to work for the people who like these.