Somebody take all the people who "renovate" old homes by removing literally any and all charm and likability out of a home and shove them in the next rocket to the moon. It's grey, so their absolutely bland souls and static filled brains would have a blast there.
This is the same color as every single wall I've ever painted!!!!
Everyone loves the idea of living in an old house until they realize that there's only 3 electrical outlets in the whole place, everything is insulated with asbestos, and everything is painted with lead.
Either that or I live in a new house thats already subsiding, outer walls made of cardboard, drafty, and the roof is not aligned correctly.
I'd love a modern house, with the detailed craftsmanship of old. Who wants a bland white wall? Give me some fancy wood details and comfy furniture with a bit of character.
Best I can do is wood paneling and furniture with mystery stains.
As long as that furniture reeks of 50 years of cigarettes you've got a deal.
Heck, I'll take a non-stinky couch if you throw in a wood-grain CRT TV and an NES
Hmm, that's a hard bargain.
Are the mystery stains in funny shapes or are they just blobs?
Who wants a bland white wall?
Hang some shit on that wall. Paintings. Photographs. Random yard sale taxidermy.
Modern styles can still have plenty of personality. Yes, one of the modern trends is minimalism, but that's not the only modern trend, and there are plenty of ways to explore your own sense of style within a modern sensibility.
I like having a house with really, really good insulation, with good plumbing and electrical up to 21st century fire/safety standards. I like having ducts for my central heat pump and air conditioning.
I can fill in the appearance and style stuff after that on my own.
You make a fair point, but there's still sometime to be said about fancy parts that are a part of the house.
Instead of covering up the house with personality, I want the house itself to have personality.
(Of course, there'll be some empty walls for whatever, gotta leave enough space for the family photos, but conveniently nowhere to hang that ulgy 5ft painting your great-aunt-in-law insited you take (she'll admit, but she didn't want it either))
I want a picture rail so it's easy to hang all them things.
I stayed in an old house in the UK where the owner had to get the windows and doors adjusted every year because the house was moving so much all the opening size would change.
What
Upgrading an old house isn't much more difficult or expensive compared to doing a full renovation, the problem is that the two groups that tend to do these kinds of renovations - flippers and real estate corporations - are incentivized to target the "lowest common denominator" which means boring modernist minimalism.
But on the plus side, free ghosts!
Great roommates, also make sure you get an ouija board and remind them to pay rent every month.
I live in an opulent old Victorian with all the associated trappings you’d expect from the era
It’s glorious
covering the fireplace with drywall
I hate those two more than words can describe.
Average shitty house-flippers who lack appreciation for the beauty in older homes.
You missed all the walls they tore down because "open concept".
It's a shame too, because fewer walls means fewer places to hang creepy portraits whose eyes follow you around the room.
... without consulting a structural engineer and one of those walls was supporting.
I had a coworker who joked that you could tell if a post is load bearing because the saw gets stuck when you are cutting through it.
Oh yea. I just LOVE being able to hear EVERYTHING going on in the house. All the different TVs people are watching.
Everyone says this house is haunted but I live here for 300 years and never saw a ghost
wait but genuine question why dont people make houses like they did in victorian times?
They use cheaper materials and pass they savings onto themselves!
in fairness, the materials were cheaper then compared to now only because they were practically raw materials.
if you look at 17th century European construction and compare domiciles constructed for nobles vs commoners the only difference other than scale, is the quality of the post processing.
example; walls in a manor were stone bricks and plasterwork. commoners used the stone laying around(free) and had no plaster. lords had slate roofs, commoners had thatched (free).
as time marched on, the consumer market grew throughout the 19th and 20th century where homes were developed with manufactured/engineered materials. the cost of materials dropped due to supply and demand. lowest home development peaked in the 1990s.
after 2008 and then 2020, building a new home is far out of reach of most due to costs of materials and land.
one could say our ancestors had cheaper homes, but our ancestors would think we're royalty if they saw the amenities we live with inside out homes today.
either way, we peaked in the 90s and will never be as prosperous in our lives again.
Totally agree on the cheaper materials. There are newly built "luxury" homes near me that bend so much in the wind the windows crack.
But Victorian homes also had weird layouts because they didn't live like us. I don't need a parlor and a sitting room and a living room. Today we prefer larger multi-functional spaces. Those luxury homes I mentioned before basically have one huge room at the back of the house with the kitchen in one corner, a small eating area, and a massive space for couches and a TV. As someone whose kitchen is totally cut off from the rest of the house I know I'd prefer that open floor plan.
Huh I prefer my kitchen being cut off from the rest of my house.
Because I don't have a full time cleaner to keep the dust off everything.
Expensive wood and fixtures. In a nice home there was lots of varnished wood, there were nice castings for hardware on cabinets and doors, lots of carved wood accents, and plenty of stone and tile. Varnished wood has to be high quality, sanded smooth, and takes a lot of wood to remove material for carving to make it look nice when varnished. Materials were heavier then, too. A 2x4 really was 2x4 and not “mill” like today, moldings, planks, decorations, trim…it was all heavier and wider. Back then you’d still need to be better off to have the nice stuff. I lived in a “normal” Victorian and I can assure you that “old world craftsmanship” was just as slapdash and unexciting as your normal home today. Hardly a straight wall or anything finer than a pine wood floor in the whole place. The old equivalent of “contractor grade” Home Cheapo finishing.
Today things can be plywood, MDF, poor-quality stitched together scraps to make trim and moldings. It’s just going to get painted, so it doesn’t matter. Way more plastic, way less metal, almost no ornamentation at all. Ply or OSB flooring with carpet or “engineered” flooring, which is often just plasticized and decal’d or veneered sawdust.
There was also no employer health care, no social security, no retirement funding or anything like that. Cost of living was cheaper. So employees and the entire production chain were cheaper. Good quality wood was far, far more abundant.
To sum up - materials and labor costs. Especially the materials. Good quality costs way more today, and then add contractor and labor costs on top of that.
related to another comment I made, the materials they used just don't exist.
the wood they used to build a house in 1900 were from trees that were at or over 100 years old much of that time was never around humans or pollution. this means the growth rings were tight and dense. very sturdy. in California they were cutting down the great Sequoia red woods to build homes. much of San Fransisco still has redwood framing to this day. those trees are multiple hundreds of years old.
compared to the white pine we used in framing today, the tree is anywhere from 5-7 years old and are bred to grow tall, and fast. this makes the growth rings loose and soft. sturdy enough.
Literally the plot of Beetlejuice
Beetleuice
Just saw this. I was surprised I really liked it. Story was more interesting than I imagined. I figured it was just another cash grab.
Michael Keaton is 73 and he fucking killed it.
Nope, not gonna do it - I'm not going to say it the third time to summon him, not again!
but...
he will!
The Canterville Ghost, by Oscar Wilde.
Isn't this the plot of beetle juice?
Deeeeeeee-oh. Deee-eee-eee-oh. Daylight come and me wanna go home
Come mister tally-man and tally me bananas...
Are a lot of ghosts just hanging underground given how man made structures tend to sink over time?
It is widely believed that ghosts follows the paths they were taking when they were alive. So if someone sees a ghost walking thru a wall, chances are the wall wasn't there when that person was still alive.
brb, digging for ghosts.
Enshittification of aesthetics
Ghost story anyone?
Comic Strips is a community for those who love comic stories.
The rules are simple:
Web of links
