6 Likes
I could only call it an extremist McMansion, loyal only to the principle of flaunting wealth aggressively. In every other respect it’s more like all the venues that missed the mark for Atlas Obscura got together and started a circus.
2 Likes
Re: Kelburn Castle … I sooo want to live there!
Oh hellz yeah!
(Turn it into a wedding venue. Make barrels of money!)
2 Likes
Good question… can we get a ruling from @NukeML
5 Likes
2 Likes
7 Likes
Only with a continuous Enterprise D ambiance loop playing.
3 Likes
Maybe the interior falls toward McMansion, certainly more than a sprinkling of dull, mismatch, and oft used cookie cutter design tricks in the aesthetic. But architecturally…not at all McMansion. The only commonality between the exterior architecture and a McMansion is its failure to come together to be something that makes any sort of cohesive sense. That’s where the similarity ends. To its credit, every weird incongruent choice is pretty darn unique, an intentional decision purposely standing out. Not just “bay window…BUT MORE!”. And no attempt to pretend that it makes architectural sense. Raw eclecticism.
Do I like the end result…no. Would I take it over a truly bland blob of a McMansion whose only design direction is “MORE AND BIGGER!”? In a hearbeat.
1 Like
Yeah, to me McMansion implies not just a disrespect for the traditional rules of proportion, but the same sort of uninspiring sameness, lack of imagination and mediocrity that characterizes fast food. This is more like the food at a pretentious “fusion” restaurant that manages to be nigh-inedible despite high prices. People go there to see and be seen, but pick up some Wendy’s on the way home.
2 Likes
If the ‘No True Scotsman reference’ was meant for me, then I assure you that it was quite unnecessary.
I am familiar with it; as well as many other logical fallacies, thanks.
(I see them bandied about the BB threads fairly often.)
6 Likes
Well, @KathyPartdeux had put the Mc into McMansion…
Then maybe direct your comment at her, and not me?
Anyhoos, back on topic:
Whether it meets the experts’ ‘high criteria’ for what constitutes a McMansion or not, that building sure is ugly.
6 Likes
It is now!
12 Likes
Roger that; we’re arguing right now!
7 Likes
It’s ugly and it has a lot of missed opportunities and wasted space, which, to dive into the pedantry, is part of the definition of a McMansion for me.
Take that wacky two-story stone foundation. That should be climbing walls. I can’t believe it’s not.
On the other end, the master bedroom (I’m assuming the one with the lacy dressing is the master) has that classic error of poorly designed homes: the bedroom is open to the area below via an atrium or balcony that you can’t close off. Just horrible.
So, yeah, this joint has more creativity than most McMansions, but about the same level of thoughtfulness, which is very little.
6 Likes
IMPO, that term applies to any needlessly ostentatious abode where it’s abundantly clear that the owner has more money than common sense and/or decent taste.
Something-something; names, roses, Shakespeare.
12 Likes
Yeah. You covered it with the “common sense” comment, but I also note the lack of any attention to energy efficiency when deciding if something is elevated to the level of mockery, like this not so humble abode is.
9 Likes
And the front - and many of the individual elements are consistent with McMansions, albeit put together in an eccentric way. It feels like there could have been, at some point, a design that wasn’t at all McMansion-y, just those weird, incongruous choices, but in the execution ended up getting assembled out of McMansion pieces. (I don’t know how likely that is…)
6 Likes
Ah, that makes more sense. I saw the AC unit at the top of the wall and I didn’t connect it to buildings located at the end of the dock.
I know less than zero about fishing. 
8 Likes
Excellent point.
7 Likes
