Quote:
Originally Posted by
v0rtex 
All of those little offices are based on the design philosophies laid down by the modernist movement in the post-war decades, which in their day were quite ground breaking. This house is a first-generation example of that style by one of it's original innovators, so it's got historical and cultural value. Just like how you can buy a Photoshopped pop-art print of your own face at the flea market for $10, but it isn't ever going to be equivalent to a $5m Warhol. [b]I really like modernist architecture, the structures are designed for living in rather than showing off to the neighbours[\\b] - although a lot of the buildings can look like fortresses from the outside, inside they feel spacious and airy thanks to all the glass and clever use of materials. Unfortunately efficient spaces designed on a human scale are rather untrendy in the US at the moment (and why not - energy, drywall and subprime jumbo mortgages are so cheap...) Wonder if the seller would be willing to sell the structure to be moved elsewhere so she can build her huge, ugly McMansion? Or even if a structure with so much glass could be moved intact?
I think in a different way a lot of modern houses try to SHOW OFF too, and many do not look livable. A house made of glass on virtually all 4 walls looks cool in the mags, but I don`t think they are really livable. When the balance is right, and not just meant for showing off, they look really nice though. Oh and yes, the furniture in the OP is terrible.
