[Moderating]
Alessan, there’s no need to be rude, especially not in the first reply before any serious answers have come in. And serious answers are clearly possible, as evidenced by all the other folks making sincere attempts at the question. Don’t do this again.
There are so many things that don’t add up in this image, one could go on and on about the incongruous aspects. One WAG: The image is an Architect’s photoshop of a collage of different styles.
On the assumption the image has not been altered, another WAG: It’s a well executed reconstruction of various components salvaged from multiple demolished buildings or, the utilization of new unclaimed/un-paid for materials left over from other projects.
Clampettesque
Yeah, I’d go with Folk Victorian. Probably a kit house from a catalog intended for southern use.
The lack of chimney isn’t a big deal if it’s in the south. There’s likely a stove chimney toward the back where the kitchen would be. It looks like the kitchen was added on in the back though that may be room for an extra smallish bedroom.
Note, also, that it’s up on brick stilts to deal with occasional high water/flooding. My great aunt Mutt lived in a similar house in rural Louisiana - go DeRidder! - for approximately 900 years before she died. My dad was raised in it for the most part.
Nicely done.
Yeah, obviously it’s in terrible disrepair now but the attention to detail suggests it’s more than a thrown together shack.
I also considered a kit house (like Sears, for example) maybe I’ll try to research that.
I perused several websites on Folk Victorian and it doesn’t quite seem to fit. They all seem to be a bit more gingerbread-y.
The trim over the door door seems to indicate that there was not an original cover over the porch. A strange element to my mind.
Mmm. Not Sears. Those generally had pretty distinctive columns holding up the porch. Those may have been there but I doubt it.
Variation on a Bennett home, maybe?
Maybe it was originally a carriage house, cobbled together and turned into a house for people. They often had weird gables and shapes.
Op, where did you find the image? Maybe there’s some clues if we know where this house sits.
It’s raised off the ground.
Those brick piers look like they could’ve been a second thought… I don’t know just WAG.
In California, wood framed houses are generally preferable to brick ones. A wood-framed house will easily survive an earthquake that would reduce a brick house to rubble. Unfortunately you’ll see this when the next big earthquake hits the Midwest where brick houses are common.
On the other hand, I’d rather have brick in a tornado, which is the more common disaster in the Midwest.
Looking more closely, you may be right. The returns on the eaves is a clue. It also looks to me like the dormers were a later addition, as the roof shingles around them look newer than the others. Shutters are also common for Victorians.
Yes, I should add that I’m completely ignorant about the actual strength of these wood-framed houses, and I’m not disputing that you guys know better, notwithstanding jokes about flattened pine forests in the Tunguska event. I was just surprised to see it used even for large high-end mansions when I came over to the U.S., since houses aren’t typically built that way in the U.K., and the wood frames look flimsy to an inexpert eye.
I don’t think it fits any formal architectural genre, it’s just “1850 farmhouse”. But I tell you, I have looked at thousands of aerial photos of old farms as I identify their location in counties around me, and this one leaps off the page. Whoever built it used elements of more formal houses in town but on such a small house they have an almost cartoon effect.
The formal entry that is way out of proportion to the width of the house. The (too large) boxed soffit returns on the gable ends. The tall, narrow (and unequal width!) dormers with the heavy handed roof treatment.
The builder knew what he liked and built his house to reflect his tastes. It’s glorious in it’s awkwardness. One of the more photogenic old houses I have ever seen.
Dennis
They are flimsy if you’re looking at just the frames. What makes them strong is the sheathing. That’s when you tie all of the framing material together with nailed boards to make the structure nice and stiff. In olden tymes the sheathing would just be solid wood planks; now engineered products like plywood or OSB are used. Once the sheathing goes up you have a very sturdy structure that is also very good at withstanding dynamic loads like wind and earthquakes.
After passing through each room in the house. The OP photo looks as is there aren’t may rooms at all, and I think an upstairs BR would disqualify it as well.
It’s got rooms! The doorway on the right leads to a bedroom, I think, as there is a dresser inside. Table and chairs right inside the front door suggests a front dining area, kinda odd. There is even art on the interior wall.
One think I immediately thought about was privacy. Who would put a glass surround on their front door if it lead to the main living area in a tiny house and not a formal entry?
Dennis
Reading the comments I’m starting to believe the porch was a later addition. Almost as if the house has been moved and put on the brick posts afterwards, and the porch then added. The original construction seems to be of a higher caliber than the junky brick foundations.
I note that there is a ‘sill’ under the door and the door side windows as well so apparently that’s an original design feature.
Thank you! That’s what attracted me to it.
From the coloration of the front, it looks like there may have been a (partial) roof over the porch.