Dustbury linked to this page bemoaning the large and ugly houses - a.k.a. McMansions - being built by the thousands these days. (Wikipedia has allowed a highly-biased article on the topic as well.)
The issue does require some clarification though.
I wholeheartedly agree that the exteriors of the homes shown are hideous, and the interiors most probably are as well. And I also agree that the McMansionist trend should end as soon as possible (not by force of law, but by people coming to their senses and demanding better aesthetics). However, the author of the page seems to confuse the issues of size and style.
Large does not automatically mean ugly.
Small does not automatically mean pretty.
I suspect that most of the complaints about these houses are fueled by urban snobbery and petty jealousy - i.e. "sour grapes".
p.s. there is no way anyone could get me to live like a sardine in a beehive like this.
1 comment:
On the other hand, a 5000-square-foot house on a 9000-square-foot lot is going to be hideous, not so much for its own aesthetic qualities, but simply because it overwhelms what little space it has.
We have plenty of these humongous houses around town. They don't bother me generally, since mostly they're far away. But one reason I live where I do is because teardowns and rebuilds to twice the size are forbidden by city ordinance - an ordinance which was petitioned for by a majority of residents in this district.
Post a Comment