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.
I'm from the land of 50s houses, and hardly any that I've been in have an open-plan if we're talking about what people today are wanting. My dad's house had every single room being its own room (no dining room since it's a small house...around 850 square feet with three bedrooms). The houses in my neighborhood, and many others I've been in, did combine a dining room with the living room (no one used it as anything other than a living room), but the kitchen was hardly even a part of the room. The kitchen may not have had four walls, but they usually had three with a very narrow opening through the fourth.
People a hundred plus years ago lived in one room because it's all they could afford. Those who could afford more most certainly had clear rooms for each activity.
How "open" do you want? No walls at all?
Take my parents starter house - a 1959 split level. The living room was open to the dining room. There was a small 1/2 wall that separated the foyer from the LR and dining room. The kitchen had a wall around 3/4 s of it separating it from the LR and DR and there was a pass through from the Kitch to DR. The kitchen had no doors, and the openings were pretty wide.
The ceiling to the up stairs reached the second floor. There were 5 or 6 steps upstairs and a wrought iron balcony - so the up stairs was open and in full view. About the only room one could not see, was the play room.
Oh, and all of the bathrooms had doors.
The play room in a split is not a basement - the windows are above grade. Added bonus - children could come in through the back door and have a separate place to play.
Take my parents starter house - a 1959 split level. The living room was open to the dining room. There was a small 1/2 wall that separated the foyer from the LR and dining room. The kitchen had a wall around 3/4 s of it separating it from the LR and DR and there was a pass through from the Kitch to DR. The kitchen had no doors, and the openings were pretty wide.
The ceiling to the up stairs reached the second floor. There were 5 or 6 steps upstairs and a wrought iron balcony - so the up stairs was open and in full view. About the only room one could not see, was the play room.
Oh, and all of the bathrooms had doors.
The play room in a split is not a basement - the windows are above grade. Added bonus - children could come in through the back door and have a separate place to play.
When people these days want "open", they want basically no walls between the living area, dining area, and the kitchen. That's not what most of the houses in 50s had.
Do people really congregate in the kitchen? I've never experienced that. At all gatherings I've been to, people have congregated outside or in the living/family room. (The "host" also doesn't cook while people are there. The food is already ready when we get there.)
... If you don't want your guests to see you making food, then cater or hire out that activity...
That's not very realistic for most of us.
Quote:
Originally Posted by TheOverdog
... Hiding the kitchen away so you can slave while your guests (who presumably came to your house to see you and not necessarily each other) converse amongst themselves makes no sense, neither from a hospitality or design standpoint....
We don't "hide" in the kitchen to "slave" while our guests are here because we prep our meal ahead of time. I do not think too highly of "hosts" who expect me to peel carrots or whatnot when I get there. Not my idea of a dinner party, and fortunately, not my friends' idea either. And, by the way, our guests do, in fact, come to see each other as well as to see us. It would be strange if they didn't, no?
Quote:
Originally Posted by TheOverdog
If your guests didn't come to your house to see you, then you had better be taking donations for the costs because you are being used.
Just because we'd rather not have our guests setting the table or mashing the potatoes, that does not make us bad hosts and and does not mean our guests are using us. I don't care to toss salad or set the table when I'm at your home for dinner and I don't expect you to do it at my home. You should be ready when I get there, just as I will be ready for you when you come.
We like to relax with our guests, not make sous chefs of them, thus we will step aside briefly to get the next course or pull something out of the oven, or grab another bottle of wine. Sadly, our kitchen is not separated in any way from the rest of the house, so this is in plain view of our dinner guests, but hopefully, the next house will allow for a more gracious set up.
Quote:
Originally Posted by TheOverdog
In any case, even if a 2 or 3-meals-a-year event calls for a formal kitchen, the meals the other 363 days a year should be considered as well, and being locked away in the kitchen while your kids, relatives, or more casual guests watch tv isn't good hospitality either.
Of course, all bets are off for spontaneous gatherings where we order pizza together or throw together some sandwiches or play "what can we come up with on the spur of the moment to feed extra mouths", but of course that would be equally true in open and closed floor plans. You see advocates of the closed floor plan describing gatherings in the kitchen as well.
I'd heard that parts of France used to tax its citizens on the basis of how many rooms their home had, the implication being that the wealthy would have many more rooms in their much-larger houses. (This also explained the mansard roof, since that space was called "attic space" by tax assessors and thus not taxed, but was turned into living space, but that's not relevant) So it became a status symbol to have a house with lots of rooms. It meant you had "made it" and was well-off. When people moved to America, they went nuts with multiple, tiny rooms for all sorts of things in their tiny homes because of this. The US obviously did not tax you by your rooms, so it was the best of both worlds--the feeling of being well-off without having to pay the tax man for that feeling. It took several generations for people to work that concept out of their minds, that lots of small rooms equaled prestige.
I posted near the beginning of this thread. Now it's nearly six years later and five-and-a-half into owning this house with its open concept. What do I think?
LOVE it. Living room / audio / video room is so comfy, desk is right there at the line of the kitchen / nook area, have a nice little four-person dining room table, have three nice swivel / back stools for the large island, have a very open, very functional kitchen, have the back doors right there when it's nice out, and have additional seating along the side wall. Humongous walk-in pantry at about 8x12 too.
It works so well. My girlfriend and I sleep in the master bedroom. The side bedroom is a guest room. The front bedroom is for storing media, guitars, motorcycle gear, art supplies, books, and the big beanbag chair. We spend most of our time (when we're home) in the main area of the house where all the action is and it's just really nice. Excellent for having another couple or two over, or for hanging out with my girlfriend's niece playing videogames, or for hosting an Oculus Rift party, or for a celebration. So versatile. It's so good for baking goodies or cooking dinner.
I wouldn't have it any other way. If we buy another house we may pay to have a custom design. I want to keep the same type of combined kitchen/island/office/breakfast and dining/hangout/living/den/audiophile/video room that we have now, and just change the rest of the house around somewhat (for instance the current master bathroom is not ideal).
You see advocates of the closed floor plan describing gatherings in the kitchen as well.
You do, and honestly, if kitchens were decently sized and had decent ingress points (doors) then it probably wouldn't be as big a deal. But I'd be willing to bet that in most houses, if the kitchen is closed off, it's as space-optomized a room as you will find in the house (probably second only to a laundry room- bathrooms get more free space), because it's considered a second-tier room (where women's work occurs).
If kitchens were built with entertaining in mind, then yeah, gatherings could happen there no matter the number of walls.
You do, and honestly, if kitchens were decently sized and had decent ingress points (doors) then it probably wouldn't be as big a deal.
Yup, many many many eat in kitchens are just right.
As in all my prior homes, the kitchen was plenty big enough to accommodate several people, plus the head cook or pizza orderer, and all had tables and chairs suitable for sharing meals either in the room or in the one immediately adjacent.
Sometimes I think people (maybe not you specifically, but a lot of people) assume all kitchens that are not in plain view of the rest of the house are automatically dinky little closets. Not so!
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.
