artphoto by splunge
artphoto by TheophileEscargot
artphoto by Kronos_to_Earth
artphoto by ethylene





Mecha Wiki

Metachat Eye


IRC Channels



Comment Feed:


20 April 2012

The Eames House Home of architects and designers Charles & Ray Eames, photographed in 1951 by Life Magazine.
Thanks for posting this BP, I had seen some of these photos, but not all of them.

I love those mid century moderns. When we were looking for a house I was hoping for something either Art Deco, mid century modern, or California contemporary. I ended up with a cottage that has been modernized inside, and I am quite happy, but then in our neighborhood are some beautiful deco and moderns, and think "ah well".
posted by eekacat 20 April | 07:54
I'm always fascinated at the failure of domestic modern architecture to take hold. Not to put this down, I love it but somehow the public never warmed to it. Sixty years later it still looks like something from the future, not the past.
posted by octothorpe 20 April | 08:58
I am surprised to say this - it doesn't appeal to me at all!

It is really cool that this was 1951 octo says, it still looks kinda futuristic!
posted by richat 20 April | 10:09
Too true octothorpe. Go to a furniture store some time if you want to see what the public wants. The mainstream places have all kinds of horrific, bland stuff. The Eames chairs are still considered modern. It's sad, very very sad if you want some nice, affordable modern furniture. But hey, overstuffed recliner sectionals with cup holders? A dime a dozen!
posted by eekacat 20 April | 10:10
Sixty years later it still looks like something from the future, not the past.

Do you really think so? I feel like it's quite dated. So over. Like, there was the original version, and that was over, and then there was the 90s/oughts revival of it, which sort of created the whole Crate & Barrel minimalist-simplicity-in-the-suburbs look, and that feels pretty over to me too. In one sense it had a good long run as the option of people who wanted to be seen as urbane and sophisticated and could afford the really good surfaces you need to pull it off, but I don't see it going a lot further. It had a lot going for it as a design style, but to me, it's as dated as deco and I'd rather live in deco. And I think the Helvetica type styling that often goes with modern design is looking pretty tired, too.
posted by Miko 20 April | 21:31
I've never understood the concept of "dated," but OMG would I live in the Eames house if given the chance. It's so beautiful. It would, however, be second choice after the house I'd MOST like to live in, the Farnsworth house.
posted by BoringPostcards 20 April | 21:56
Dated to me just means that it speaks so strongly of the expectations of a specific time that it has a hard time adapting to current lifestyles, habits and uses. It's not bad necessarily, just very specific and you have to be comfortable with the ways it dictates your living arrangements.

I enjoy modern design, don't get me wrong, it's just not something I want to live and not something I think looks cutting edge or anything any more. It looks either 60ish or oughts-ish to me.

And it's not that I mind things being dated, just that dated stuff has different aesthetics. Like I said, I like deco/moderne. But if I could live in any house, it would definitely be Mark Twain's stick style/Eastlake rambler, with a lazy breezy veranda, intriguing turrets, interconnecting warren of rooms, and beautiful, luxuriant, detailed woodwork everywhere.

posted by Miko 20 April | 22:05
Photo Friday: The Letter "G" || Happy Birthday ThePinkSuperhero!