Seven Ways Your House Can Be “Good” (vs. Bad): Part 7
This is the 7th of a 7-part series. Enjoy!
7. A “Good” house has style, but may not have a named “Style”. This non-style is derived from the essence of its relationship between its occupants and its context – and often by the personal vision of its designers. The “Bad” house has nothing other than Style to offer up to its occupants, a Style that has been time tested to attract potential buyers and “insure” resale value. The canard of safety in precedents for re-sale value is a preconceived assumption that begs the question of millions of newly personalized lifestyles and the explosion of irregular, “problematic” building sites over the last generation as the landscapes around our major urban centers become ever more developed.
A “Good” house reflects the values of its owners both in the way the house is used and the way it responds to their heartfelt dreams, and changes the entire design of the house to reflect those aspects. A “Bad” house thinks about the house much in the same way you think about the clothing at a big box department store – defined by Style and superficial appeal, not by the actual way it’s put together, or the way it looks on your body, or the way it will look in ten years. The joy of the “Bad” house is the instant gratification of its ownership, often creating a lifetime of regret from a few moments of empowering purchase.