travelguy_73 Posted October 20, 2008 Share Posted October 20, 2008 I never thought I would say this, but after attending this weekend's 2008 AIA home tour, I think that modern is the new mcmansion. I don't know if it is just this year's selection of homes or what, but to my untrained eye they mostly looked alike. Excluding Rutland, Memorial, and 8 1/2, the rest were a blur of large windows, white walls (don't forget the accent wall!), stark landscapes, honed floor tiles, and of course, stucco. Perhaps there is only so much you can do with those materials on a 5000 sq ft lot? Of the modern homes, Haskell was the most appealing (it was by MC2 and had features seen in their earlier work a few years ago), Southmore had stunning artwork, and South Shepherd seemed nearly identical to a W Alabama model from a couple of years ago (I assume the same designer). Of the others, Rutland and 8 1/2 homes were fantastic, especially Rutland. Didn't make it to Memorial. I'm sure those trained in architecture and design can pick out 100 things that were different between these modern homes, but they looked the same to me Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
texas911 Posted October 20, 2008 Share Posted October 20, 2008 They are all different. To architects, its the spaces and the way buildings are put together that makes them interesting. You just noticed the superficial stuff. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
musicman Posted October 20, 2008 Share Posted October 20, 2008 here are some pics from the AIA page. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
globalvillager Posted October 21, 2008 Share Posted October 21, 2008 My favorite is the 8 1/2 and Rutland. The 8 1/2 has rich details and is such a pleasure to explore. It's the most impressive overall. You'll find innovative touches in many parts of the house. Rutland has funky taste to it, and its integration of new construction with old one is sublime yet distinct. Some weird touches like particle board and plastic grass flooring. These two houses has some strong Japanese touch to it. Haskell has nice concept, monumental presence and central atrium but the construction can have better quality. Southmore is playful but too student-ish and rather bland (maybe because it's space for sale). While minimalist, orthogonal designs with material and planar plays have their appeals, I have a feeling that they are starting to be overused.here are some pics from the AIA page. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
flipper Posted October 21, 2008 Share Posted October 21, 2008 I never thought I would say this, but after attending this weekend's 2008 AIA home tour, I think that modern is the new mcmansion. You gonna get punched in the mouth around here for that comment flipper Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
travelguy_73 Posted October 21, 2008 Author Share Posted October 21, 2008 They are all different. To architects, its the spaces and the way buildings are put together that makes them interesting. You just noticed the superficial stuff.Like I said, I'm not trained in architecture or design, so yes I did notice the "superficial" stuff. However, apparently so did my friends, and so did many of the people around us on these tours. I'm sure an architect could point out the differences that make one Georgian or Colonial stand out from another, I probably could not.While minimalist, orthogonal designs with material and planar plays have their appeals, I have a feeling that they are starting to be overused.Maybe that's what it is, that since I am noticing more and more of these from the outside, that my mind is already in "cookie cutter" mode by the time I get inside. Afton Oaks/Highland Village area has a few modern homes, as does Museum District, Memorial Park area, etc. From the outside, white stucco and stark landscapes start to run together as much as any other style, maybe moreso. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
texas911 Posted October 21, 2008 Share Posted October 21, 2008 Contemporary is not a style. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
travelguy_73 Posted October 21, 2008 Author Share Posted October 21, 2008 Contemporary is not a style.Didn't realize there was mention of contemporary here, but your point is taken and thanks for the post. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
texas911 Posted October 22, 2008 Share Posted October 22, 2008 Ummm, your use of the word modern means contemporary. Its just more logical to use because modern was an actual period in architectural history. In which case they would have been "modern" in style but actually, they're just contemporary architecture. Sorry I offended you, but since you readily admit that you know nothing of architecture, why so be defensive? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
infinite_jim Posted October 22, 2008 Share Posted October 22, 2008 Ummm, your use of the word modern means contemporary. Its just more logical to use because modern was an actual period in architectural history. In which case they would have been "modern" in style but actually, they're just contemporary architecture. Sorry I offended you, but since you readily admit that you know nothing of architecture, why so be defensive? Please quit picking on the lay folk with your retorts and wasted semantics. As a professional I'd expect you to translate intentions, instead of worthlessly "educating" clients. Travelguy brings up a valid point w/r/t what you termed "superficial" elements; things architects, if they had any talent & common sense, would be more adept at controlling the perception of. Now that I think about it, if not for folks of other professions this forum would be a meaningless circle jerk. He also brings up an interesting point about being prejudiced towards "designed" homes, imo the mark of a great design is it's "anonymity" (according to Bontempelli's ideal of art). EDIT: I didn't go on the tour this year mostly b/c every year of late it has been a rather boring experience and I usually can't get anyone to go with. Actually, I haven't done a tour since I was a docent years ago. Being in the field long enough you can decipher space from the projected images their selling, or obscuring. Obviously Haskell St., Rutland, & 8-1/2 had a domestic scale and tactile materiality in mind and it shows a value set that Travelguy identifies with, that maybe disarmed his prejudices (correct me here Travelguy). AIA is all about wearing pants and this town is an architectural backwaters waiting for high water. I don't expect the AIA to be doing anything more "revealing" than holding their own version of the Bellaire showcase. See the Outgrow Home v. Grow Ego thread for more of my thoughts w/r/t the OP and here's to hoping decon breaks through into condo cool. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
marmer Posted October 22, 2008 Share Posted October 22, 2008 I saw way too many dangerous staircases and visibly un-marked level transitions. Almost every one of the modern houses had at least one. Also the sharp edged glass tabletop in the daughter's room of the Rutland house. I find concrete floors, cinderblock walls and huge tall glass expanses to be a little cold and stark after a while, so I wonder if the occupants will come to feel the same way.On the other hand, the Hunters Creek house was almost funny in its attempts to cram every possible "traditional" element into a very large new house. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
texas911 Posted October 23, 2008 Share Posted October 23, 2008 a value set that Travelguy identifies with, that maybe disarmed his prejudices (correct me here Travelguy). AIA is all about wearing pants and this town is an architectural backwaters waiting for high water. I don't expect the AIA to be doing anything more "revealing" than holding their own version of the Bellaire showcase. See the Outgrow Home v. Grow Ego thread for more of my thoughts w/r/t the OP and here's to hoping decon breaks through into condo cool. Well with the general population of Houston, such as the original poster, can you blame Houston, for being a "backwater" in terms of architecture? No educated clients = no cool architecture. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
travelguy_73 Posted October 23, 2008 Author Share Posted October 23, 2008 Well with the general population of Houston, such as the original poster, can you blame Houston, for being a "backwater" in terms of architecture? No educated clients = no cool architecture.Oh good lord. Cool architecture is great and all, but if you don't take the time to educate your clients on why it is cool, then frankly you aren't any more sophisticated than they are. Niche design needs people who can sell it, not just turn their noses up and say "you wouldn't understand." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gwilson Posted October 23, 2008 Share Posted October 23, 2008 The term McMansion shouldn't be style specific. A McMansion can be any style. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.