Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Yeah, they also teach us to capitalize words at the beginning of sentences. It's all part of an arcane lexicon known only to initiates.
Do I think these houses will have character in eighty years?
No. I do not think they will be standing in eighty years.
im not asking if you think they will be standing in 80 years. regardless of your opinions, im sure some of them will be there and people like yourself will suggest they have character while newer ones dont. when the old houses you love so much were first built, you dont suppose there were people who said the same things you are saying now?
there are always people who like to pretend everything was better in the past. they exist now and they existed during any timeframe.
No. They do not have character.That is not my opinion that happens to be fact. They are large, clean, neat, efficient, built with 21st century living in mind.
Some may be attractive and tasteful. People who buy them put a premium on "new" "neat" "clean" "expensive" "up to date" and frequently "bling". I can totally do without that last feature. These homes may be pretty or may not.
But they do not have "character".
Get a dictionary.
That is akin to saying "My four month old daughter's face has so much character".
Wrong word.
Quote:
char·ac·ter
[kar-ik-ter] Show IPA
noun
1. the aggregate of features and traits that form the individual nature of some person or thing.
2.one such feature or trait; characteristic.
3.moral or ethical quality: a man of fine, honorable character.
4.qualities of honesty, courage, or the like; integrity: It takes character to face up to a bully.
5.reputation: a stain on one's character.
You really sure you want to open this can of worms as well? Do we really want to get into a conversation about Character?
im not asking if you think they will be standing in 80 years. regardless of your opinions, im sure some of them will be there and people like yourself will suggest they have character while newer ones dont. when the old houses you love so much were first built, you dont suppose there were people who said the same things you are saying now?
there are always people who like to pretend everything was better in the past. they exist now and they existed during any timeframe.
When it was built, in 1924, it was built very cheaply for the time. (i.e. all pine woodwork, pine floors with no subfloors) It was probably built for workers at the gravel quarry behind the house. The only luxuries it had were: plaster walls, and an oak front door. Because the bathroom was so large, I suspect it might have originally been a bedroom, and was converted soon after the house was built.
When Mom sold it, it still had (mostly) the original kitchen, that looked a lot like the example I posted earlier, but with a plastic laminate countertop and a stainless steel sink. It was the original kitchen that sold Mom on the house in the first place.
Compared to a modern house of equivalent grade today, Mom's old house had loads of character.
Yes, someone is suggesting that people should not be permitted to do what they wish with their own homes or not permitted to purchase an older home if they intend to remodel ..... you. It's the premise of your whole thread.
No, we cannot all agree. Some might wonder why someone does the remodeling they do, but saying there would be "public outrage" is absurd. Unless the person doing the remodeling becomes a news story because they don't own the home, the "public" would have no clue what they were doing nor have any reason for outrage if they did.
Yes, it would be too much to ask. If you don't own the home, you simply have no say. In many historic areas, homeowners have to get remodeling plans approved by a Historic Landmark committee or some other government body. They buy the home with the understanding that they will comply with the decisions of this body. Unless you are part of such a group, you have no standing and to expect others to obey your standards for their homes is far, far too much to ask.
Nowhere in this thread has anyone advocated that anyone should not be permitted to do anything. The OP asked why people do this horrible thing. Other people indicated people should not do this horrible thing, but no one said anything about making it illegal. It is like running over a stray dog with your car. It is not illegal, but it is horrible therefore people should not do it.
The premiss of the thread is that people should not buy an older home when they want a newer home. No indication it should be illegal, it just does not make sense. it is like saying someone should not got buy a pair of shoes and put them on their head when they need a hat. They should buy a hat. That does not mean the OP is trying to make wearing shoes on your head illegal, just commenting that it is silly to do so. However what we are talking about goes beyond silly, it is destructive. It takes away irreplaceable history from future generations that cannot be re-gained. Once they destroy it, it is gone. Lots of people think that is a horrible thing to do. Sure people can do it if they wish, and other people can think those people are doing a horrible thing. Most of the discussion has been about education. Many people do not realize what they are doing and what options they have. The suggestion was if people can be educated about the horrible thing they are doing, maybe they will not do it and choose a different option. I do not see how anyone can have a problem with that.
Nowhere in this thread has anyone advocated that anyone should not be permitted to do anything. The OP asked why people do this horrible thing. Other people indicated people should not do this horrible thing, but no one said anything about making it illegal. It is like running over a stray dog with your car. It is not illegal, but it is horrible therefore people should not do it.
The premiss of the thread is that people should not buy an older home when they want a newer home. No indication it should be illegal, it just does not make sense. it is like saying someone should not got buy a pair of shoes and put them on their head when they need a hat. They should buy a hat. That does not mean the OP is trying to make wearing shoes on your head illegal, just commenting that it is silly to do so. However what we are talking about goes beyond silly, it is destructive. It takes away irreplaceable history from future generations that cannot be re-gained. Once they destroy it, it is gone. Lots of people think that is a horrible thing to do. Sure people can do it if they wish, and other people can think those people are doing a horrible thing. Most of the discussion has been about education. Many people do not realize what they are doing and what options they have. The suggestion was if people can be educated about the horrible thing they are doing, maybe they will not do it and choose a different option. I do not see how anyone can have a problem with that.
I think it makes a lot of sense to buy an older home and remodel it to what you want, if the home is in the location that you want to be in. Some people want to be in a very specific radius (maybe school district, proximity to something, "status"...) and remodeling makes perfect sense. That's why people buy older homes and remodel them.
Now, if you are calling a modern interior in an older home ugly, that's fine and an opinion as everybody has different tastes. Personally, I don't think it's ugly as a rule and depends on how the job was done.
Nowhere in this thread has anyone advocated that anyone should not be permitted to do anything. The OP asked why people do this horrible thing. Other people indicated people should not do this horrible thing, but no one said anything about making it illegal. It is like running over a stray dog with your car. It is not illegal, but it is horrible therefore people should not do it.
The premiss of the thread is that people should not buy an older home when they want a newer home. No indication it should be illegal, it just does not make sense. it is like saying someone should not got buy a pair of shoes and put them on their head when they need a hat. They should buy a hat. That does not mean the OP is trying to make wearing shoes on your head illegal, just commenting that it is silly to do so. However what we are talking about goes beyond silly, it is destructive. It takes away irreplaceable history from future generations that cannot be re-gained. Once they destroy it, it is gone. Lots of people think that is a horrible thing to do. Sure people can do it if they wish, and other people can think those people are doing a horrible thing. Most of the discussion has been about education. Many people do not realize what they are doing and what options they have. The suggestion was if people can be educated about the horrible thing they are doing, maybe they will not do it and choose a different option. I do not see how anyone can have a problem with that.
Sure it makes sense. Some people want to live in an older (and typically closer to downtown) neighborhood, but do not want to live with only the amenities available 100 years ago. Nothing is wrong with that. Other people instead of modernizing an older home just bulldoze the whole thing and build a brand new home. There are plenty of "tear downs" in cities whose value is based on location and lot only. Many old homes have not been maintained and are falling down or are not suited for remodeling. Few would spend the time or the money to restore them when they won't meet the criteria they need. Would you rather see an older home torn down instead of remodeled?
The premise of this thread (if not to make such behavior illegal) then must be to attempt to shame people for remodeling older homes. According to you, they should feel guilty and are horrible people. Education has nothing to do with it at all. There is no amount of hand wringing or old house cheer leading that will make the majority of people willing to not purchase or remodel an older home if that's what they'd like to do. This is just another thread where some people are outraged that other people make choices with which they do not agree.
Sorry to keep bringing up examples, but here is a picture of the interior of my project house:
Now, if I were to sell this house, and the buyer decided to rip out all of the woodwork, pocket doors, walls, etc. so they could have a modern, open-concept plan, I think they should be ashamed of doing something like that, even if it's not illegal.
Now, having said that, I have a different opinion of the kitchen. The original kitchen was already ripped out in the early 50s. Now, the 1950s kitchen is worn out and starting to fall apart. So, I won't feel so bad when I get around to remodeling it.
So, by extension, it's my opinion that, if someone buys an old house just for location, they should look for one that has already been remuddled, instead of ruining another one. (but again, that's just my opinion)
Sorry to keep bringing up examples, but here is a picture of the interior of my project house:
Now, if I were to sell this house, and the buyer decided to rip out all of the woodwork, pocket doors, walls, etc. so they could have a modern, open-concept plan, I think they should be ashamed of doing something like that, even if it's not illegal.
So, by extension, it's my opinion that, if someone buys an old house just for location, they should look for one that has already been remuddled, instead of ruining another one. (but again, that's just my opinion)
It would be tragic if someone removed this character. That is the point....character. A great example
is on another thread about a Frank LLoyd Wright home near Phoenix, Az where a developer was going
to tear down this home to put 2 McMansions on it. Luckily, someone else bought the house & prevented
the nut who thought of tearing it down.
The suggestion that we preserve old homes as a "time capsule" is extreme. Sure if you have to update
heating, electrical etc.. fine but why keep duplicating the current trend (open concept, granite, stainless
formula)? It's so boring and there is little creativity left in it. People do not need to keep following like
sheep.
Someone wanted a definition of character - there it is.
If you want to get really purist, you could make the kitchen back to what it once was.
Easy choice for me.
Thanks!
I have a 1930's Jewel stove sitting in the garage, waiting for restoration someday. (It may be too far gone, as it was sitting in a damp basement for decades before I got it) And, I know that the original oak wainscoting is under the paneling (that was added as part of the 50s remodel) in the kitchen. I plan to remove that paneling, but I don't know what kind of shape the wainscoting is in, underneath.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
