Link-Fu About Nothing
Oct. 8th, 2013 06:45 pm![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
walkitouthttp://tmagazine.blogs.nytimes.com/2013/10/07/sign-of-the-times-when-renovation-means-erasing-the-past/
I ran across this and was a little stunned. It's about home renovations that involve removing, with the goal of lots of white and empty, and a fair amount of glass, too. Much mockery.
I thought about that for a while, and went looking for something I read recently attacking minimalism. I didn't find it, but ran across this instead:
http://www.petershallard.com/why-minimalism-is-toxic-for-you-and-your-business/
"At its dark heart, minimalism is the hobby of disaffected wealthy people, playing at philosophy and hip counter-culture. It’s toxic because it encourages you to only focus on having what you need - which means rejecting any opportunities to help other people with their needs.
Ultimately, minimalism is the selfish squandering of opportunity."
I don't think I have an opinion about either of these authors' opinions (other than that they clearly intend to provoke), beyond noting that a lot of people intend their minimalism to give them the opportunity to be more productive/more generous/able to help more people, so the strongest forms of the second author's thesis are probably not actually correct.
As a design trend, the whole white-on-white thing is kind of pervasive, however, which is usually what happens before a trend heads downmarket and then dies.
Here's what I was looking for:
http://www.heroicdestiny.com/why-i-hate-minimalism/1498
This author notes that you can remain as obsessed with stuff through its absence as by with its presence. This author emphasizes what is "important", what you "love" -- but the comments thread heads straight to what do you "need". I suspect that the important/love lens is better than the "need" lens.
I ran across this and was a little stunned. It's about home renovations that involve removing, with the goal of lots of white and empty, and a fair amount of glass, too. Much mockery.
I thought about that for a while, and went looking for something I read recently attacking minimalism. I didn't find it, but ran across this instead:
http://www.petershallard.com/why-minimalism-is-toxic-for-you-and-your-business/
"At its dark heart, minimalism is the hobby of disaffected wealthy people, playing at philosophy and hip counter-culture. It’s toxic because it encourages you to only focus on having what you need - which means rejecting any opportunities to help other people with their needs.
Ultimately, minimalism is the selfish squandering of opportunity."
I don't think I have an opinion about either of these authors' opinions (other than that they clearly intend to provoke), beyond noting that a lot of people intend their minimalism to give them the opportunity to be more productive/more generous/able to help more people, so the strongest forms of the second author's thesis are probably not actually correct.
As a design trend, the whole white-on-white thing is kind of pervasive, however, which is usually what happens before a trend heads downmarket and then dies.
Here's what I was looking for:
http://www.heroicdestiny.com/why-i-hate-minimalism/1498
This author notes that you can remain as obsessed with stuff through its absence as by with its presence. This author emphasizes what is "important", what you "love" -- but the comments thread heads straight to what do you "need". I suspect that the important/love lens is better than the "need" lens.
![[identity profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/openid.png){kind=small}
no subject
Date: 2013-10-09 02:57 am (UTC)I feel confident that if you not correct, it is only because white-on-white is older
Date: 2013-10-09 01:52 pm (UTC)My point is not that white-on-white is going to _go away_, only that it has become an increasingly pervasive design trend. When I saw a Boston Globe piece about a white-on-white interior, I figured it must already be aging, and the links represent my sense that it is about to move downmarket, with the first effect being that it truly is _everywhere_, and then sometime after that it'll become So Last Something-or-Other.
This could be wishful thinking on my part. If this is the default design style of the cohorts after us -- which are _large_ -- then we'll be looking at this stuff until we die. *sigh*