Sunday, February 8, 2009

Modern or Traditional?

Lately, I've been thinking a bit about the aesthetics of the actual house itself. (Strange that this would be one of the later things I've considered, but up until now I've been so concerned with how it will function as a system. )

Do we want a very streamlined modern aesthetic?

Or should we go more in the direction of a traditional home?

What I'm thinking is that many of the homes with a streamlined modern aesthetic have some of the same design issues as a computer. They look great all shiny and new, but once you get that first scratch, they're never the same. They aren't made to age gracefully.
They are also not very cozy or comforting, qualities which I think are important in a home.

On the other hand, the traditional aesthetic doesn't translate as well to the tiny home design. It looks... crowded, and gives the impression of disorganization.

I think that we need to find some happy medium. Simplicity is vital, but the ability for the user to adapt the home and "make it their own" is absolutely imperative.


  1. What about approaching through critical regionalism? Kenneth Frampton talked about achieving local-ness through indigenous production methods and materials instead of merely through style. In the case of Vancouver one can picture using recycled materials and other materials while experimenting with 'style'. The use of recycled materials is in line with Vancouver's ethos.

  2. That's a great idea for approaching the appearance. We've had some chat about materials- and integrating naturally occurring materials (eg driftwood and stones, and recycled urban materials) into the look.