What exactly is wrong with the mcmansion?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:
Not all big new homes are McMs, obviously But some are, and McMs are truly horrible -- and you know a McM when you see one. It's not jealousy -- it's just being fair to a simple sense of aesthetics.

I would never trade my smaller, older home for a McM. I would, however, trade it for a newer home that is well built, architecturally correct, and appropriate for the lot and neighborhood -- and close in with a very short commute. Those kinds of homes are, however, too expensive for me.

Who gives a shit? Many older houses are basic and ugly, and no one with any sense of aesthetics would want to live in them, either.

[Anonymous]

I don't fully agree with this guy, but he makes many good points.

http://www.oldhouseguy.com/aesthetics.php
Aesthetics in Architecture -
Curb Appeal - What makes a house look beautiful?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I do not have a problem with the "mc mansion" in general.

I do have a problem when they shove them in a small lot, in an established quaint neighborhood and it becomes an eye sore for everyone around it.

Not to mention that it towers over some of the other homes, taking their sunlight for their gardens, etc. Go out it out in Potomac on a huge plot of land.

I agree with this. I also consider something a McMansion if it has no discernible architectural style or is a mish-mash of styles or poorly constructed (i.e., vast expanses of vinyl siding with nothing interesting to break up the monotony, brick facades with siding on the sides and back and no windows on the sides).

If it was built just to be big, I consider it a McMansion. I am not jealous of McMansions.

Of the three houses that pp above has posted, can we all agree that the last one (yellow) is the only one that looks really, really bad?

I don't mind McMansions but I see houses like that all over Nova and I think they're just too horrific to even be mcmansions.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
Not all big new homes are McMs, obviously But some are, and McMs are truly horrible -- and you know a McM when you see one. It's not jealousy -- it's just being fair to a simple sense of aesthetics.

I would never trade my smaller, older home for a McM. I would, however, trade it for a newer home that is well built, architecturally correct, and appropriate for the lot and neighborhood -- and close in with a very short commute. Those kinds of homes are, however, too expensive for me.

Who gives a shit? Many older houses are basic and ugly, and no one with any sense of aesthetics would want to live in them, either.

That's true. I would suggest you start a thread about basic and ugly older homes. But that doesn't negate the fact that McMs (which, again, is not synonymous to "larger new home") are truly hideous. The issue is that, while no one with any sense of aesthetics would want to live in a basic ugly older home, quite a few PPs seem content about living in a McM. But, hey, people are entitled to have bad taste.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I do not have a problem with the "mc mansion" in general.

I do have a problem when they shove them in a small lot, in an established quaint neighborhood and it becomes an eye sore for everyone around it.

Not to mention that it towers over some of the other homes, taking their sunlight for their gardens, etc. Go out it out in Potomac on a huge plot of land.

I agree with this. I also consider something a McMansion if it has no discernible architectural style or is a mish-mash of styles or poorly constructed (i.e., vast expanses of vinyl siding with nothing interesting to break up the monotony, brick facades with siding on the sides and back and no windows on the sides).

If it was built just to be big, I consider it a McMansion. I am not jealous of McMansions.

Of the three houses that pp above has posted, can we all agree that the last one (yellow) is the only one that looks really, really bad?

I don't mind McMansions but I see houses like that all over Nova and I think they're just too horrific to even be mcmansions.

No all 3 are really fucking bad, IMO. They look cheap, tacky and flimsy. Skinny alumin siding is a huge pet peeve of mine--as well as mixed media and faux stone.

[Anonymous]

Realistically, board dcum mommies are going to insult anyone who can or does make a choice different than one that they would make. There is no room for disagreement. There is no room for different opinions, tastes or needs. There is only one way and that way is that of the person making the comment. The depth of insecurity and/or egotism on this board is astounding and more than a little disconcerting for the future of our society. Guess a haters gotta hate.

[Anonymous]

IMO- Everything is wrong w/ the McMansion- Especially lacking is the charm and individuality. I LOVE older homes with a ton of character!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I do not have a problem with the "mc mansion" in general.

I do have a problem when they shove them in a small lot, in an established quaint neighborhood and it becomes an eye sore for everyone around it.

Not to mention that it towers over some of the other homes, taking their sunlight for their gardens, etc. Go out it out in Potomac on a huge plot of land.

I agree with this. I also consider something a McMansion if it has no discernible architectural style or is a mish-mash of styles or poorly constructed (i.e., vast expanses of vinyl siding with nothing interesting to break up the monotony, brick facades with siding on the sides and back and no windows on the sides).

If it was built just to be big, I consider it a McMansion. I am not jealous of McMansions.

Of the three houses that pp above has posted, can we all agree that the last one (yellow) is the only one that looks really, really bad?

I don't mind McMansions but I see houses like that all over Nova and I think they're just too horrific to even be mcmansions.

.

I like #2 , #1 looks like an addition, #3 belongs in a warmer climate like florida.

I like this one

[Anonymous]

Haven't read the whole thread but the words that come to mind are gauche, tacky, and new money. Also no character. Lack of mature trees is also horrible. Skinny little saplings and three cars in every driveway don't do it for me. Yuck.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I do not have a problem with the "mc mansion" in general.

I do have a problem when they shove them in a small lot, in an established quaint neighborhood and it becomes an eye sore for everyone around it.

Not to mention that it towers over some of the other homes, taking their sunlight for their gardens, etc. Go out it out in Potomac on a huge plot of land.

I agree with this. I also consider something a McMansion if it has no discernible architectural style or is a mish-mash of styles or poorly constructed (i.e., vast expanses of vinyl siding with nothing interesting to break up the monotony, brick facades with siding on the sides and back and no windows on the sides).

If it was built just to be big, I consider it a McMansion. I am not jealous of McMansions.

Of the three houses that pp above has posted, can we all agree that the last one (yellow) is the only one that looks really, really bad?

I don't mind McMansions but I see houses like that all over Nova and I think they're just too horrific to even be mcmansions.

.

I like #2 , #1 looks like an addition, #3 belongs in a warmer climate like florida.

I like this one

You MUST be joking! The third one is horrible...almost as bad as the yellow one! Hideous!

[Anonymous]

OP here, when i left this thread there were 7 replies. now there are 7 pages. Thanks DCUM for writing a manual on why McMansions are hideous

[Anonymous]

Not everyone can afford a Victorian in Hyde Park + the lot next door on a state senator's and hospital lobbyist salary. Just sayin.

Oh snap, forgot tha adj. profs pull down some bank.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I do not have a problem with the "mc mansion" in general.

I do have a problem when they shove them in a small lot, in an established quaint neighborhood and it becomes an eye sore for everyone around it.

Not to mention that it towers over some of the other homes, taking their sunlight for their gardens, etc. Go out it out in Potomac on a huge plot of land.

I agree with this. I also consider something a McMansion if it has no discernible architectural style or is a mish-mash of styles or poorly constructed (i.e., vast expanses of vinyl siding with nothing interesting to break up the monotony, brick facades with siding on the sides and back and no windows on the sides).

If it was built just to be big, I consider it a McMansion. I am not jealous of McMansions.

Of the three houses that pp above has posted, can we all agree that the last one (yellow) is the only one that looks really, really bad?

I don't mind McMansions but I see houses like that all over Nova and I think they're just too horrific to even be mcmansions.

.

I like #2 , #1 looks like an addition, #3 belongs in a warmer climate like florida.

I like this one

You MUST be joking! The third one is horrible...almost as bad as the yellow one! Hideous!

Well. What does your glorious house look like

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:IMO- Everything is wrong w/ the McMansion- Especially lacking is the charm and individuality. I LOVE older homes with a ton of character!

And for me, this post is a list of red flags warning me that this house is tiny, old and "needs TLC".

Charm usually means old features that went out of style 40 years ago and that people hold onto like their grandmother's broach. Ton of character means that it's old and needs work or has been lovingly restored costing an arm and a leg and that you're paying something like $5K per sq ft so that you can have a lovely $1M 1200 sq ft home.

[Anonymous]

[
Not all big new homes are McMs, obviously But some are, and McMs are truly horrible -- and you know a McM when you see one. It's not jealousy -- it's just being fair to a simple sense of aesthetics.

I would never trade my smaller, older home for a McM. I would, however, trade it for a newer home that is well built, architecturally correct, and appropriate for the lot and neighborhood -- and close in with a very short commute. Those kinds of homes are, however, too expensive for me.



Agreee with you -my older home, in a highly desirable close in neighborhood built by an architect! -charming details has major issues - lack of structural footings (added steel so it stays standing), bad plumbing - heating - electric (fixed), mold (hope that is fixed). $$$ every year. I'd like a larger newer home too - architecturally contextual, well built fitting needs of a large family.

But interestingly even those archtiecturally correct/ right for lot size, in our neighborhood can be critized as too large "mcmansions" - often by people who have large homes - but older homes.