Living in it


i love art nouveau. it makes me so so happy. so graceful, so stylized.
but i'm personally more of a craftsman bungalow.

if it came down to it, i would like to look at art nouveau, but i would like to live in that bungalow.

does the architecture you find most appealing correspond in any way with the fashion you choose?

8 comments:

Iheartfashion said...

Interesting question! I live in a Queen Anne Victorian, all turrets and porches and moldings, with multi-colors, but I'd say my style of dress is more understated, not exactly minimalist, but definitely not frou frou like my house. I'm more of a Federalist, classic, elegant, but not over-the-top...

landis smithers said...

when tim and i met, he was "blade runner", i was "dangerous liaisons".
(not architectural styles, but you get the gist). our first place was federalist, a great blend of clean lines, open spaces, and elegant details.

then, a really modern stone and glass bungalow from the fifties.

now, an eighties edwardian riff.

and i've learned i love the ease, glamour, and sexiness of the glass and stone house most . . . regardless of how off from a fainting couch it may be.

coco said...

I've never thought about it
But I think in a way it does
I like very modern interior and I love dressing chic so I guess it does

Vildy said...

Now I understand why all those recommendations to make up an inspiration book of what you like in order to transfer those ideas to building a wardrobe don't work for me. I love the Shaker chairs hung out of the way on the wall and Zen raked sand gardens but I look too strict and rigid in minimalist clothes.

Candid Cool said...

i think so, but i have several different styles i like to reference, maybe one would be black sleek minimalism to go with my dior homme side, a moroccan room for my "jet set" side...

a. said...

yes, i suppose, in that i would define my style as eclectic (a mix of almost everything out there), and my taste in architectural style is probably about the same. and, i am not in general a fan of severe minimalism (which made me stick out like a sore thumb during my time in architecture school. pah.) sometimes i wonder if i don't like minimalism simply because it's what the cool ppl are supposed to like... probably that's the case, but still, there is no style that i like exclusively, and so it would be the same with minimalism. sort of akin to the idea of "palate cleansing" discussed previously re: ads.

editor said...

iheartfashion - that is interesting, that there is that contrast between your style and your home. i like contrasts.

landis - wow, i would never have guessed 'dangerous liaisons.' i can definitely see you in that bungalow.

coco - i never thought about it before either. architecture aside, my decor style is s.l.o.b.

vildy - well, personal space and personal style are definitely for different purposes, or have a different effect on us i guess.

candid cool - the house with many faces. :)

a. - variety is good. i wonder why minimalism is "cool" in architectural circles. is it deemed the most reflective of current times? is it futuristic (instead of old-fashioned, been there, done that)? has anyone ever tried to propose a new option/vision besides minimalism?

a. said...

editor,

funny you ask, i have wondered the same exact thing for quite some time. i have a lot of guesses and theories, but in the end i find myself perplexed.... my guesses would take a while to get into, really, but i will try and state them.... ok actually there's two - 1) the silly and 2) the deeply theoretical

1) architects are so used to staring at stark black and white and grey drawings, esp. with the advent of CAD, that that's what they get used to seeing and liking. this sounds like an RIDICULOUSLY facile explanation, until i tell you that just as archs tend to wear black, all the landscape architects in my school tended towards wearing pale green.

2) something having to do with modernism being the last great hope of architects in terms of having authority, and also the fact that postmodernism (the philosophy) was translated in a really superficial and ultimately bad way into architecture, and also that postmodernism = loss of authority, turning the archs back to modernism, and also something about the fact that the field is male-dominated and decoration has always been seen as feminine, also something about the way architects privilege the visual over the experiential, and also something about the scale at which we are drawing, which is rarely at a human scale, which, if you did draw something minimalist at that scale it would be incredibly BORING.... blah-de-blah-de-blah. i could go on with this sort of stuff.

i had a classmate tell me that she likes minimalist architecture (when she designs), but that when it comes to what she would actually want to LIVE in, she has always wanted a old stone cottage... ??? this to me is dishonesty, pure and simple. how can you design things you wouldn't want to inhabit? i don't know...