Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Zillow forces McMansion Hell to delete posts

mcmansionhell.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

351–360 of 388 posts

Re: Zillow forces McMansion Hell to delete posts

#351

Post by platinumrad »

bchalala wrote: post #345
nickrivadeneira wrote: post #208

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Poorer people can still be elitist. Expressing cultural or artistic superiority is a form of elitism that doesn't require wealth.

Yeah, poorer people can be elitist, but that doesn't necessarily make what McMansionHell is doing some elitist sort of enterprise. It's a guy/girl pointing out architectural flaws in buildings and discussing why they are flaws. It's as elitist as movie critic talking about a new film, and in that sense it's ridiculous that the site is being pulled down over this. You aren't entitled to have somebody agree with your t…

I don't think very many (or any) people are defending Zillow's attempt to take down the site. Most of the critiques expressed in this thread specifically address the content of the site itself not whether it should stay up.

One big difference between McMansion Hell and media criticism in general is that the former relies much more on appeals to canon, e.g. "You should never put one of /these/ next to one of /these/."

Re: Zillow forces McMansion Hell to delete posts

#352

Post by sangnoir »

emodendroket wrote: post #200
toufka wrote: post #180

Earlier quoted context omitted.

All the more reason the blog is so useful. I'd hate to think with all the modern technology around us that the house I live in 'just doesn't feel right' because it was not built employing the past dozen millennia-worth of architectural knowledge at our social disposal. Just because I am not an architect doesn't mean I want to be swindled into an unknowingly unpleasant home. Just because I'm not an architect of CPUs d…

A lot of time on that blog was spent mocking purely aesthetic features of the homes and I feel like if you like the aesthetic then there is not much else to consider.

> A lot of time on that blog was spent mocking purely aesthetic features of the homes

A lot of time on HN is spent mocking "gamer aesthetic" on hardware the commenter would have otherwise actually liked to use. Garish LED-lighting, bulky-looks and oblique angles aren't my thing either, but HN loves to complain about McKeyboards, McHeadphones, McLaptops and McCases.

"Gamer aesthetic" and "McMansion aethetic" are valid phenomena and people have the right to critique those tastes without invoking classism, despite the sense of superiorioty occasionally found in the consumers of both.

Re: Zillow forces McMansion Hell to delete posts

#353

Post by dagw »

emodendroket wrote: post #349
ryandrake wrote: post #268

Earlier quoted context omitted.

While there may not be One True Definition, and there's room to agree and disagree, there are attributes people probably could agree are tasteless and help qualify a house as a McMansion: * No clear architectural style, or a haphazard/incoherent mix of styles * Brick or stone facades in front, and cheap siding on the (less visible) sides * Non-structural arches and columns * Oddly placed/sized windows * Multiple roof…

The first bullet point, anyway, is also typical of any house that's been around a while.

There is a fundamental difference between a 17th century house with wing added in the 19th century and garage added in the 20th century, and a 21st century house trying to mimic that look.

Re: Zillow forces McMansion Hell to delete posts

#354

Post by dagw »

blhack wrote: post #285
dgacmu wrote: post #269

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Trying to answer with the author of the mcmansion hell's viewpoint, the digrams on this post are helpful: http://mcmansionhell.tumblr.com/post/148605513816/mcmansions... In the one you pointed out, the question arises: "Which part is the actual house?" It has a feeling of "someone stuck on this extra part here, this stairwell here, ..." particularly with the mix of the stone and stucco'd/painted exterior, the multipl…

> It has a feeling of "someone stuck on this extra part here, this stairwell here, ..." Isn't that practically one of the defining characteristics of Frank Lloyd Wright's houses?

I wouldn't really say so:

https://s-media-cache-ak0.pinimg.com/736x/3a/44/84/3a4484bdb...

http://media.architecturaldigest.com/photos/56cb8425cd3bcb32...

http://historylists.org/images/nathan-g-moore-house.jpg

https://cdn.vox-cdn.com/uploads/chorus_asset/file/7024761/El...

https://cdn.vox-cdn.com/uploads/chorus_asset/file/7025319/Pe...

http://midcenturyhome.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/06/Frank-L...

Re: Zillow forces McMansion Hell to delete posts

#355

Post by forgotpwtomain »

Website administrators: Please do not disable everything except google bot in your robots.txt [0][1] - this is a terrible practice making our internet worse.

[0] https://web.archive.org/web/*/http://www.mcmansionhell.com/p...

[1] https://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:AXKs99...

Re: Zillow forces McMansion Hell to delete posts

#356

Post by sevensor »

rayiner wrote: post #106
uses wrote: post #69

I totally understand the whole "McMansions are bad architecture" thing... However, something about it really bothers me. There was an episode of 99% Invisible where the guest was talking about their McMansions blog and how it makes fun of these Horrid dwellings. The whole thing stank of classist elitism. The Wrong Type of people were getting the chance to design and build large houses, and of course they're applying…

I grew up in Northern Virginia among these McMansions, and frankly I don't buy the elitism angle. These folks have a lot of money (top 5% at least, if not even top 1%) and are among the best educated in the country. And these aren't dwellings driven by the need for functionality. It's not like people here have big families they need to house (empty nesters can afford them more readily than people with families!). The…

> They're designed, instead, to be conspicuous consumption

This is the key point in the thread. The legitimate criticism of McMansions isn't about their architecture per se, it's about the owners. I'd go so far as to say that the bad architecture is deliberate -- its senseless variation and useless ornaments call attention to the house. This is crass ostentation and nothing more. It says, "look at me, I can afford a big ugly house (and you can't)."

Re: Zillow forces McMansion Hell to delete posts

#357

Post by zip1234 »

pwthornton wrote: post #132
uses wrote: post #69

I totally understand the whole "McMansions are bad architecture" thing... However, something about it really bothers me. There was an episode of 99% Invisible where the guest was talking about their McMansions blog and how it makes fun of these Horrid dwellings. The whole thing stank of classist elitism. The Wrong Type of people were getting the chance to design and build large houses, and of course they're applying…

As engineers and designers, we should side with her on this one. The core conceit of McMansion Hell is that these are this homes built without experts, particularly architects (but any kind of designer is absent from them). These are often big, expensive homes, where the builder and the buyer thought they didn't need the help of an actual professional. This isn't just an American thing, but it seems particularly bad…

A lot of times such houses are built by large homebuilder companies. They employ architects and landscape designers. Why does it still seem like things are in such poor taste? Maybe it's because that's not what people want to buy.

Re: Zillow forces McMansion Hell to delete posts

#358

Post by aninhumer »

blhack wrote: post #239
uses wrote: post #69

I totally understand the whole "McMansions are bad architecture" thing... However, something about it really bothers me. There was an episode of 99% Invisible where the guest was talking about their McMansions blog and how it makes fun of these Horrid dwellings. The whole thing stank of classist elitism. The Wrong Type of people were getting the chance to design and build large houses, and of course they're applying…

The only relevant question is: do the people living in these houses enjoy them? Because if they do, then who cares? I look at some of the houses on the blog and think they're really pretty. Sorry I don't have the correct sort of taste in windows or whatever. Maybe it's because I'm one of those dumb idiots that grew up in a flyover state (Iowa). This house: http://99percentinvisible.org/app/uploads/2016/10/12-hate-pe.…

So, I tend to agree that this house does not immediately jump out as ugly, and the suggestion that it is obviously flawed does come over as snobbish.

I'm not sure I mind the mixed stone and stucco that another comment mentions. It seems like a valid aesthetic style, especially with the chosen colours.

However, there are a few weird things I do notice. The double roof gable on the right seems unnecessary and unbalanced. And there are also many random windows in different styles, and in strange places. The ones below the double roof seem particularly obviously mismatched, and the window on the diagonal portion above the main door really looks out of position.

Re: Zillow forces McMansion Hell to delete posts

#359

Post by criddell »

randcraw wrote: post #328
chadgeidel wrote: post #155

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's a good question. I'm not well-versed enough in design theory to answer, but I'll offer my opinion anyway. :-) The fins on a 1959 Cadillac are well-integrated (design-wise) on the car. It's a theme of the era and the car was designed from the ground up to look like a jet or a rocket. The design elements in a McMansion are not well integrated (see the posts on the site) - they are added on as an afterthought becau…

I'm no designer either, but I think Caddy fins were great examples of baroque flourishes -- excessive extensions to past design motifs that give a heightened sense of motion or flow or accent. Future designs can't build on such flourishes. They were stylistic endpoints, like the accents in Art Deco, but often use a coherent set of design principles within a time period and thus create a harmony of their own. But McMa…

I'm in the Stewart Brand camp that is pretty much built on the taste be damned ethos. The idea of a McMansion appeals to me because I'm not afraid to move walls and plumbing to make the space exactly what I want.

Re: Zillow forces McMansion Hell to delete posts

#360

Post by mschaef »

dagw wrote: post #335
mschaef wrote: post #209

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Why is this so different Benchmarks are at least attempting to be objective. Also, there's a difference between mocking a company's product and mocking a house that is 1) an individual's home 2) their largest investment and 3) is likely, these days, to represent a significant financial liability. I don't like McMansions much myself, but I can absolutely sympathize with people that want an affordable way to get more…

I can absolutely sympathize with people that want an affordable way to get more space for their family But a McMansion will almost always cost you more than a more 'modest' house offering the same amount of space. Also that house will almost certainly be better constructed.

> But a McMansion will almost always cost you more than a more 'modest' house offering the same amount of space.

Lots of variables there. Construction is usually estimated in terms of price per square feet, and property values can represent a substantial fraction of the total price of the house. A 'modest', 'old' house in a good location can be vastly more expensive than a 'McMansion' built out in the suburbs or something. Also McMansions are usually built where land is cheaper, so more space.

For families with children, there is also the cost of education to consider. There are scenarios where avoiding the need to use a private school to educate your children can completely pay the cost of a home in the suburbs. (Even considering property taxes). The house can effectively burn to the ground when you're done educating your kids and you'd wind up net money ahead compared to where you might have been with a more modest house and private schooling.

Post reply on HN