Today I drove down Georgetown Pike in Northern VA. If you ever need evidence that as a class, the rich have no taste, just take a ride down that road. Gag-inducing, tasteless, and monstrous monuments to conspicuous consumption line both sides of the road, being sold for millions of dollars, mostly new construction that has gone up within the last 10-15 years to “suit” the “needs” of terrible people. Exactly the kind of house that beautiful, human-scale mid-century homes are being demolished for. It saddens me every time I have to drive that way.
9 Likes
Speculation from the Robb Report, no traiter to its imagined class
It’s probably little wonder that Pratt and Schwarzenegger selected the Zimmerman house as the lot they wanted, because the tree-shaded property happens to sit almost directly across the street from a two-house compound owned by Schwarzenegger’s mother Maria Shriver. Other nearby neighbors include Arianna Huffington and Sofia Richie.
that may explain the choice of lot, and well, this piece of architecture was simply standing in the way. what value can the intangible possibly have next to the desire of someone with tangible cash?
4 Likes
This house was chosen specifically because Maria Shriver lives across the street. (I wish I was joking.)
Oof. I use this quote too often:
“You maniacs! You blew it up! Damn you! Goddamn you all to hell!”
2 Likes
Ours was built for life in the 1910s, and we’re very happy (other than the kitchen, which seems to have been designed by someone who never boiled an egg).
14 Likes
I mean, even Windsor Castle has electricity; there was no need to tear the house down.
As for the car analogy, it’s possible to “resto-mod” that Smoky & the Bandit Trans Am you just bought to bring the mechanicals up to modern standards; it can even be electrified if one wishes. It’ll still be a Trans Am.
6 Likes
Tis very on brand for Chris, for he is still the worst Chris…
I’m not a psychologist but it seems there might be something else going on here.
Edited for bad grammar
4 Likes
I wanted to join the chorus of “what a pity”, i saw the discussion and… here’s my rant (TLDR at the bottom)
In Barcelona, the 1960-1970’s were caracterized by a rapid expansion, the city area doubling population every 4 years. Big construction firm Nuñez y Navarro, who was in cahoots with then-city-major José Mª de Porcioles (which helped by changing zoning laws, removing building protection, height regulations and other similar things) went on a demolition spree, removing most of Modernist palaces, and replacing them with ugly but “capable of holding 14 families” buildings.
A classic example was “la casa Trinxet”. Designed by Puig i Cadafalch, it was built in a then almost unpopulated eixample as the residence for a local landlord. The interiors were custom made by local famous artists and it won several prices and was featured on several architectural magazines.
It was torn down in the 60’s to the protest of artists, historians (who wanted the building, then property of the city council, repurposed as a museum of modernist art).
It was replaced by this:
And the arguments are a rehash of what i’ve seen above of the defenders. Modernist buildings were at the sweet point (for especulators) that they old enough but not historical enough. Most of these buildings lack amenities we now take for granted. Plumbing was optional and so many buildings lack bathrooms (they could have a WC, and sometimes bath, but definitely no shower), central heating, fittings for a washing machine or gas oven (many had brick built ovens). Cabinets usually were built inside the walls so it was difficult to replace them, etc etc…
Of course nowadays we lament the loss of so many buildings to especulation… while we happily start to torn down the iconic buildings built over this era, which happens to be now in the same sweet spot as modernist palaces used to.
We almost lost (and we may still do, time will tell) the Mercury Building
This building was built by Josep Mir, and the most notorious features probably are the foyer interior, that was decorated with ceramics by famous sculptor Subirachs, and the sculpture that sits on the entrance, “Mesura de l’espai-temps”
Someone bought the building and started tearing down everything, including the ceramics and sculptures, and we managed to throw a fit so big the city council intervened to replace the sculpture and ensure the ceramics don’t go anywhere. But this is not the first building that misteriously “misplaces” the ceramics, and is a pity, because this is one of the distinctive traits of our 60’s buildings, and is something we are going to miss in the next decades as we miss now some of these palaces.
So, in short, it does not matter if you think is ugly. Iconic and representative buildings should be cherished and preserved. Even the ugly ones.
19 Likes
This!
Buildings that are between 40-60 years are often the ones in most danger!
6 Likes
Especially the “ugly ones”.
3 Likes
All the split-levels in my neighborhood are mid-century.
6 Likes
Referring to them as ‘pinheads’ would be a disservice to other pinheads; and so Pratt playing the fool isn’t really acting then, is it? Anna Faris dodged a bullet, so to speak
And just because a house is newly built doesn’t mean it’s automatically “better” or “more livable” than an old one.
10 Likes
THIS. In the ten years I’ve owned my '61 home (mostly ranch style), I’ve had to bring several chunks of the infrastructure up to date because after 60+ years, even cast iron will rust away, and replacing drain lines is expensive.
Yup. Even if the bones if the historic house are faltering, it can be rebuilt to look like it used to, only up to current code standards, safer, and more suited to how the owner wants it. If I have “fuck you” levels of money, I’d gut the house I currently have and have it re-done to correct and modernize ALL of it, except I’d leave the living room ceiling intact, or have the replacement textured to what it currently has.
Same. Mine has good bones, but there’s a few decades of deferred maintenance and replacement work that still need to be done on my old house. I have days I regret buying it, but on the average, I’d do it all over again.
… and often times featured on McMansion Hell. 
… If only as a warning of what not to do. 
3 Likes
I was under the impression that this was seasoning?
17 Likes
They were obviously cleaning it incorrectly.
15 Likes
Well, not when it’s used as a sewer drain and forced to deal with 60 odd years of grey and black water, and the occasional idiot dumping drain cleaner down it before giving up and calling in a plumber to snake the line out…
4 Likes
It may surprise to you that some people contemporary to the building used to consider the Casa Batlló an unsightly place, with unrational proportions and lacking the grandeur and monumentality neoclassic and monumentalist buildings had.
(This Casa Batlló, to be precise)
(And if you’re wondering what they though it was better… this is barcelonian monumentalism at its peak)
We may now lack appreciation for brutalism (well, except some people like me, whose heart is broken everytime an iconic ̶m̶o̶n̶s̶t̶e̶r̶ masterpiece like the Pirelli Tire Building is barely saved from destruction), but our future generations may think different. And is our job to ensure these buldings survive the critical period between “old” and “historic” so it can be judged properly
11 Likes
Your Casa Botlló is beautiful in its way. It’s like finding out what hobbits would do if they had access to concrete and limitless stained glass supplies. 
11 Likes
