Tag Archives: anachronism

Americans want the “New Old House,” an older-looking home with McMansion amenities

Posted on by

The Wall Street Journal describes the trend of architects and builders putting together homes that look old and have character but have all the latest features:

“The first words that come out my clients’ mouths are, ‘We’d love to have a real old house. We just can’t find one,’ ” said architect Russell Versaci, who runs a Middleburg, Va.-based practice. “And the second thing they say is, ‘We are so sick of McMansions. We just want to get out and get back to reality.’ ”

What architects like Mr. Versaci—along with certain discriminating prefab builders and house-plan companies—offer instead is known as the New Old House: a sanely proportioned residence that’s historically accurate on the outside, but conceived for the needs of modern Americans on the inside. Austere Greek Revival farmhouses with roomy island kitchens. Time-travelesque Craftsman bungalows with startlingly open floor plans. Walk-in closets designed to hold more than a few Civil War-era muslin petticoats…

The exhibition is timely. According to Amy Albert, editor of Custom Home—a Washington, D.C.-based magazine that caters to architects, designers and high-end builders—a hankering for authentic traditional residential design is one of 2014’s big trends. That said, “People aren’t seeking exact replicas of historical houses,” she added. “They want architectural purity in the elevations and the details, but inside they want connectivity and open floor plans.” Discerning homeowners, she said, are demanding that custom builders bone up: “Mixing a Palladian window with a Craftsman column is not going to cut it. Even if people don’t have the vocabulary to articulate why it’s wrong, they instinctually know it is.”…

Both Mr. Versaci and Mr. Schafer acknowledged there’s something potentially inauthentic about recreating oldness, especially if you go to the extent of simulating patinas on stone (using coffee) or, as Mr. Schafer mentioned, importing $50,000 mature beech trees so your New Old House’s landscaping doesn’t look too new. “Making a mirage is an issue,” said Mr. Versaci. “My personal preference is to let a house age through natural processes. If you choose quality, natural materials like unlacquered brass, they will eventually age. But some 21st-century Americans, who are used to ‘add water and serve,’ just don’t want to wait.”

One of the more interesting parts of the new second edition of A Field Guide to American Houses is the last section on newer houses, dubbed Millennial Mansions, which discusses the differences between an authentic looking older home and a fake looking older home. For example, a new home in a Craftsman style might not have the correctly proportioned pillars on the porch or might be built on a slab when such older homes in this style usually had a basement.

Yet, the problem with historicity is not just about recreating the past. There is also an odd lack of interest in a historic interior as it is all about the exterior. If anything, this just reinforces the same mindset these people criticize about McMansions: it is all about making an impression with the exterior and then having a flashy interior. Would the people who complain McMansions don’t provide a good psychological fit make the same complaint about these new old houses?

Also, are these New Old Houses much smaller than the average McMansion?

Can you have a “Colonial version of a McMansion”?

Posted on by

An article about a notable 18th century property in Boston suggests the main house was a McMansion of its time:

The Royall House takes its name from the ostentatiously wealthy Isaac Royall Sr., who grew up in Dorchester then went to Antigua where he established a sugar cane plantation and traded in sugar, rum, and slaves.

He came back to New England in 1737 with more than two dozen slaves, and trumpeted his nouveau riche status by purchasing a 500-acre estate in Medford with impressive lineage: The property had once been owned by Governor John Winthrop. Here, on the banks of the Mystic River, he built the Colonial version of a McMansion.

It’s an immense three-story Georgian residence with two completely different facades. One, mimicking English architecture, was meant to be appreciated by visitors approaching by river; the other was apparently designed to impress those entering the estate by carriage. (It had a more modern look, fabricated of wood that was carved and rusticated to look like stone.)

The lavish interior of the house was adorned with intricate wood carving; the so-called “Marble Chamber” has wooden pilasters “pretending to be something else, in this case marble,” said Gracelaw Simmons, a board member and tour guide.

The description hits some of the main features of McMansions today: its owner wanted to show off his money; it is a big house; it presented multiple architectural looks intended to impress visitors; the inside had nice features. The article also takes the common tack today of suggesting McMansion owners are bad people; the nice house is contrasted with the nearby slave quarters.

But, I wonder at the usefulness of retroactively applying this term. This isn’t the first time I’ve seen this and it strikes me as odd every time. One of the key features of McMansions today is missing in older homes: until the early 20th century, homes were not mass produced. Additionally, McMansions today are often assumed to be in the suburbs and suffer from the suburban problem of not having authentic community life.

All together, life was quite different centuries ago and claiming an older home was a McMansion is anachronistic. While it might help current readers and people understand what the author is trying to say, it ends up distorting the social conditions at the time the older house was built and also ignoring the particular social conditions in which the term McMansion emerged in the late 1990s.

 

Can you get a “whiff of McMansion” from a 1929 house?

Posted on by

Occasionally, the term McMansion is applied anachronistically to older homes. See this example of a 1929 home in Oregon:

On Sunday, the Wayne Morse Historical Park Corp. invited the public to come out to the ranch and enjoy its annual open house, throwing open the doors of the home that Morse and his wife built shortly after moving to Oregon from Wisconsin in 1929 so he could take a job at the University of Oregon School of Law…

Designed by UO architecture professor Wallace Hayden, the colonial revival house, listed on the National Register of Historic Places since 1999, is modest beyond imagination for a man known as the Tiger of the Senate.

The living room is scaled to fit a family, not to hold a state reception. There is no “McMansion” whiff here; instead, the house looks as if it was comfortable for Morse, his wife, Mildred, and their three daughters.

I think I know what the journalist is getting at: the home is not pretentious or does not betray who lived there. Indeed, the long-term owner of the house was a 24-year member of the US Senate who was elected as a Republican, Independent, and Democrat and also “set a record for performing the longest one-person filibuster in the history of the Senate” at 22 hours and 26 minutes (later broken by Strom Thurmond). At the same time, the home, can’t really be considered a McMansion because of when it was built. The term McMansion didn’t arise until the late 1980s and retroactive applications of the term don’t account for the context in which it arose of sprawl, larger homes, and new ways of displaying wealth. Additionally, this article suggests the home is a colonial revival home, a style that may indeed be found in McMansions of today but it also a coherent style that doesn’t fit with the mish-mash style of some McMansions. Finally, the house is on the National Register of Historic Places, an honor that I suspect will not be applied to many McMansions.

Also, I amused by this idea: “whiff of McMansion.” Perhaps it could apply to a garish perfume or wine?