What exactly is wrong with the mcmansion?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

I disagree. All kinds of painting and drawing and sculpture can be pleasing. But architecture is rooted in math and environment. Buildings which ignore both cannot be pleasing to anyone who knows the least bit about the subject. To have this "to each her own" attitude about architecture is to admit complete ignorance. There really is a right and a wrong.

and back to the topic at hand, McMansions have a whole lot of wrong going on.

I can tell this means a lot to you and that you have a passion for the subject. A little sad, though, that you express it by attacking other people's homes on an anonymous Internet forum.

It just seems like you're aiming rather low. But I'm sure once that Fulbright grant or MacArthur money comes through, you'll have a better platform for educating the masses, or are least conversing with others who hold similar views in a more respectable setting. Ciao.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Yup 20:51....you got me....that last one is my house.

Happy now?

one roofline and very eco friendly. I really like the hand scraped bricks and sustainable lumber roofline

Now that is cozy and has a ton of charm AND character. I mean it has the original stonework and everything.

non hollow core door, i believe it's solid sustainable wood

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Yup 20:51....you got me....that last one is my house.

Happy now?

one roofline and very eco friendly. I really like the hand scraped bricks and sustainable lumber roofline

Now that is cozy and has a ton of charm AND character. I mean it has the original stonework and everything.

non hollow core door, i believe it's solid sustainable wood

Honey STOP THE donkey!

[Anonymous]

McMansions can be blamed on Richard Nixon. He opened up China, allowing the export of massive amounts of cheap shit to the States. Now people need bigger places to store their cheap shit. Simple

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Yup 20:51....you got me....that last one is my house.

Happy now?

one roofline and very eco friendly. I really like the hand scraped bricks and sustainable lumber roofline

Now that is cozy and has a ton of charm AND character. I mean it has the original stonework and everything.

non hollow core door, i believe it's solid sustainable wood

Oh yes, and when you add that cozy loft, SAVE THE TIMBERS...you won't have to spend extra for reclaimed wood because you can reuse, recycle, repurpose your own wood and be ecofriendly about it.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

I disagree. All kinds of painting and drawing and sculpture can be pleasing. But architecture is rooted in math and environment. Buildings which ignore both cannot be pleasing to anyone who knows the least bit about the subject. To have this "to each her own" attitude about architecture is to admit complete ignorance. There really is a right and a wrong.

and back to the topic at hand, McMansions have a whole lot of wrong going on.

I can tell this means a lot to you and that you have a passion for the subject. A little sad, though, that you express it by attacking other people's homes on an anonymous Internet forum.

It just seems like you're aiming rather low. But I'm sure once that Fulbright grant or MacArthur money comes through, you'll have a better platform for educating the masses, or are least conversing with others who hold similar views in a more respectable setting. Ciao.

Ah, I see you're done attempting to engage about architecture, and have moved on to the ad hominem portion of the evening.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

I disagree. All kinds of painting and drawing and sculpture can be pleasing. But architecture is rooted in math and environment. Buildings which ignore both cannot be pleasing to anyone who knows the least bit about the subject. To have this "to each her own" attitude about architecture is to admit complete ignorance. There really is a right and a wrong.

and back to the topic at hand, McMansions have a whole lot of wrong going on.

I can tell this means a lot to you and that you have a passion for the subject. A little sad, though, that you express it by attacking other people's homes on an anonymous Internet forum.

It just seems like you're aiming rather low. But I'm sure once that Fulbright grant or MacArthur money comes through, you'll have a better platform for educating the masses, or are least conversing with others who hold similar views in a more respectable setting. Ciao.

Ah, I see you're done attempting to engage about architecture, and have moved on to the ad hominem portion of the evening.

I am the first pp you were responding to and actually the person making fun of you is different (impostor!). I still respectfully disagree. We all know an ugly house when we see it. The proportions are off, the symmetry is wrong, it just looks like a mess. None of your criticisms thus far have been based in "math," they're just rather arbitrary complaints about garages and shutters and such.

[Anonymous]

I do math and I buy big house because it's better

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

I disagree. All kinds of painting and drawing and sculpture can be pleasing. But architecture is rooted in math and environment. Buildings which ignore both cannot be pleasing to anyone who knows the least bit about the subject. To have this "to each her own" attitude about architecture is to admit complete ignorance. There really is a right and a wrong.

and back to the topic at hand, McMansions have a whole lot of wrong going on.

I can tell this means a lot to you and that you have a passion for the subject. A little sad, though, that you express it by attacking other people's homes on an anonymous Internet forum.

It just seems like you're aiming rather low. But I'm sure once that Fulbright grant or MacArthur money comes through, you'll have a better platform for educating the masses, or are least conversing with others who hold similar views in a more respectable setting. Ciao.

Ah, I see you're done attempting to engage about architecture, and have moved on to the ad hominem portion of the evening.

Wrong. I never engaged with you about architecture, as I have no need for your practice pointers. I begin and end with the observation that you are much smaller and pettier than you are prepared to admit. The sum total of your posts is still very thin beer.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
You're making the point that shoddy construction isn't a new thing? Thanks, I guess.

My 1908 rowhouse is quiet inside. Solid wood everywhere. We're one of those families who doesn't need to turn on the heat or AC until weeks after others do. The house is inviting and comfortable, with the right amount of space in each room for family use. True, when we entertain, things get a little cramped. But that's what, every other month or so? No big deal.

And as for "jealousy", as a PP said, if I sold my DC rowhouse, I could buy a giant cardboard box in the burbs and have money left over for a full-sized SUV and top-to-bottom Pottery Barn. Ain't gonna do it, though. I have more to add, but it's time for me to stroll two blocks with my granny cart to the grocery store. And I can't later, either, because I'm meeting friends at the restaurant a block away, unless we decide to go further afield, in which case I'll walk two blocks to the metro.

I think you protest too much. A 1908 rowhouse is vulnerable at any time to noisy neighbors, regardless of the quality of the masonry. You also likely have a small family/living room, one place to eat, and none of the amenities that most families, given a choice, would prefer. If you sold your DC rowhouse, you could not readily afford a newer home in a close-in suburb like Bethesda, Arlington or McLean. They cost considerably more. Instead, you'd be relegated to another older house or a newer house many miles from DC. And, I can't imagine wanting to limit myself to restaurants within walking distance of the Metro, when so many of the area's best - and most enjoyable - restaurants are outside the city.

Net net - you want to advertise your good taste, but just end up coming across as small-minded and parochial.

Oh my GOD! One place to eat! Oh, the humanity!!!!!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Oh my GOD! One place to eat! Oh, the humanity!!!!!

Silly twit. Live in a McNugget if you want.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Oh my GOD! One place to eat! Oh, the humanity!!!!!

Silly twit. Live in a McNugget if you want.

Why don't you post your house and all it's architectural perfection?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

I like this one

No, seriously... Is this a joke? Someone admits to liking this mishmash of architectural styles and having HALF your frontage be garage? Do you put your toilet in the living room, too? I mean, I know you have to have one (or three, or whatever) but WHY would you want to put it out front and center??? Painful.

Oh, for shame! The tackiness, the tackiness! Where do you live? Have you not noticed that most lots are too small to put the garage anywhere other than the front? Yeah, it's less than preferable but I'd rather have a garage anyway.

So you get it! The lots are too small. Also, it's one thing to have to put up with ugliness for the sake of necessity ("need" a garage, admit that it sucks to have it represent half your frontage), it's another thing entirely to claim that you love that look. That's like saying "I think I look best when my $350 honey blond salon job grows out and shows at least two inches of salt and pepper."

Sorry, but I have to: LOOK AT THE SHUTTERS!!! I am literally, no joke, giggling madly looking at those shutters. Some poor soul went to architecture school, wept at the beauty of classical, mathematical design, marveled at the sheer balls of Wren and Wright and Pei, and then said "eh, it doesn't matter if we put the same size shutters on all the windows, even the one that is half the width of the others." Ok, now I'm not giggling anymore, I'm actually really sad for that guy.

So every house with a front-loading garage and cosmetic shutters is tacky, in your opinion? That's fine, I suppose, to each his own. I just think it's a nice house, I don't really understand what makes it less attractive than the little boxes in Arlington and Alexandria and elsewhere.

FOR THE LOVE OF GOD, you must be joking. Stop poking the troll people.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Oh my GOD! One place to eat! Oh, the humanity!!!!!

Silly twit. Live in a McNugget if you want.

Why don't you post your house and all it's architectural perfection?

Didn't think so

[Anonymous]

NP here. OP could you make your jealousy more glaringly obvious? Grow up and stop using that stupid slang McMansion word that just oozes "what I'll never have because I didn't live up to mommy and daddy's expectations, and they notice when they visit..."

Really, be at peace with yourself first. Don't so lamely try to attack others that you are so easily threatened by. Reconcile your own issues. They are blinding.

BTW, my neighborhood was about 10% knock downs when I moved in and just a few years later are easily 80% knock downs. Because people can. I would if I could. And so clearly would you.