Inspired by the recent threads in architecture, I offer this up for discussion. I will remain neutral at first in order to not taint the thread.
“cookie cutter” homes are a slang term for row after row of houses that are identical or rather similar. these are homes typically found in developements founded by one developer. For example,here is a cookie cutter builder in my neighbrhood
These homes are often viewed, particularly by those in the arts and architecture, as bad architecture.
so here are some questions. If you live in a ‘cookie cutter home’ I have put an * by questions directed at you.
why are cookie cutter homes bad?
-
Are they bad because of the simularity in design? if so, then why are typical homes in Italy (or Europe)not considered bad? or are they? Why are the houses in San Francisco considered quaint, then?
-
Is it because they are cheaply built? (*does this bother you? Would you have paid extra to use stronger/better materials? Did you prefer to spend money on the home’s interior rather than exterior? Do you consider this house, in the grand scheme of thing, temporary? Do you see yourself groing old in it?) Is it because they look run down in a few years? (*how old is your house? does your neighborhood look unkept?)
-
Is it because they have the “unAmerican” stigma of unoriginality? (*does it bother you that a person down the street has a house similar to yours?) Should all houses be unique? Does urban planning not matter then? Architects such as Le Corbusier often designed mass housing. Was theirs ok because a) it was a famous architect or b) it was typically a high rise?
-
is it because they are not well designed? Who then, defines “well designed”? How is “well designed” defined?
Would row after row of house designed by Tadao Ando be ok? -
What about the cost?
-
If you are not American, what is your perspective on this?
This is all I can think about for now.
Please feel free to add to the topic.