Scan barcode
A review by jlmb
Life at Home in the Twenty-First Century: 32 Families Open Their Doors by Jeanne E. Arnold
2.0
I checked out both this book and it's companion book from the library - both about the same study. I was thinking this book would just be the accompanying photography book to the main book that goes into detail about the study results. Instead, the authors/editors attempted to just re-write the first book, using more photos and less words. Why, I have no idea. There is no point to it.
What they should have done is this. Instead of publishing a few of the floor plans, print all 32 of them. Instead of showing a variety of photo sizes (mainly smaller photos) they should have put one photo per page - especially of the cluttered houses so we could see the images in more detail. Of course, sometimes it would have made more sense to print smaller images. Like why not post an image of each of the 32 fridges? You could fit all of them onto 4 pages. Then show the most messy, least messy and average fridges juxtaposed with their living/family room. The authors tell of a link between a cluttered fridge door and cluttered house. Why not show the reader instead?
Another bone of contention was that the photography book had no images of the few minimalist houses the study viewed. Why not? What exactly do the authors mean by minimal? Why not show us the rooms so we can decide for ourselves? Why not compare and contrast rooms and houses more? During the section on outdoor use, the authors mention only one house used their backyard for more than an hour at a time. I'd like to see their backyard in order to see if the layout or design facilitates that behavior.
Finally, I didn't care for the images of the owners in their houses.I was distracted by them. It made me focus more on the people and less on the surroundings, which is what the photos were meant to show us. That one photo of the mom sitting at a desk with her dirty bare feet propped up, gross. Why show that image? How embarrassing for that woman.
What I mainly got out of this book was that a lot of people have cluttered unappealing houses and no taste. Not bad taste, but the absence of it. I can appreciate someone decorating in a style I don't care for. They own their style, they enjoy it. Maybe art nouveau or southwestern are not styles I like, but I can respect someone who decorates their house in that style. Most people in this book looked like they lived in a thrift store, with no rhyme or reason. Just a bunch of crap that didn't go together. I can recall two images of rooms that looked nice - not my taste but put together. The rest - Lord! It's like the before houses in Clean House with Niecy Nash.
The nosy neighbor in me enjoyed flipping through the book, but it could have been much much better.
What they should have done is this. Instead of publishing a few of the floor plans, print all 32 of them. Instead of showing a variety of photo sizes (mainly smaller photos) they should have put one photo per page - especially of the cluttered houses so we could see the images in more detail. Of course, sometimes it would have made more sense to print smaller images. Like why not post an image of each of the 32 fridges? You could fit all of them onto 4 pages. Then show the most messy, least messy and average fridges juxtaposed with their living/family room. The authors tell of a link between a cluttered fridge door and cluttered house. Why not show the reader instead?
Another bone of contention was that the photography book had no images of the few minimalist houses the study viewed. Why not? What exactly do the authors mean by minimal? Why not show us the rooms so we can decide for ourselves? Why not compare and contrast rooms and houses more? During the section on outdoor use, the authors mention only one house used their backyard for more than an hour at a time. I'd like to see their backyard in order to see if the layout or design facilitates that behavior.
Finally, I didn't care for the images of the owners in their houses.I was distracted by them. It made me focus more on the people and less on the surroundings, which is what the photos were meant to show us. That one photo of the mom sitting at a desk with her dirty bare feet propped up, gross. Why show that image? How embarrassing for that woman.
What I mainly got out of this book was that a lot of people have cluttered unappealing houses and no taste. Not bad taste, but the absence of it. I can appreciate someone decorating in a style I don't care for. They own their style, they enjoy it. Maybe art nouveau or southwestern are not styles I like, but I can respect someone who decorates their house in that style. Most people in this book looked like they lived in a thrift store, with no rhyme or reason. Just a bunch of crap that didn't go together. I can recall two images of rooms that looked nice - not my taste but put together. The rest - Lord! It's like the before houses in Clean House with Niecy Nash.
The nosy neighbor in me enjoyed flipping through the book, but it could have been much much better.