"Minimalism is a Bummer"
Jonathan Adler

for me - my environment really does effect my mood - when my home is less cluttered my mind is clearer, and I'm less stressed. For me less is definitely more - but then again, some people thrive on chaos.

I definately believe that less is more, but I am quite the pack rat! I have been slowly decluttering; sentimentality runs deep. But the more I clear out, the more refreshed I feel. In a nation with so many choices and distractions, there's this constant feeling of hyper-stimulation. Its nice to come home to a place where my eyes and brain can rest.

“Much ado about next to nothing”
Frank Lloyd Wright

bepsf - great adler quote.

After I visited the Farnsworth House, my life was changed. I am not a hardcore minimalist, per se.

Mies is my man.

I've been through many stages, MCM is me. I believe in the 6 month rule. If I haven't used it in 6 months, I didn't need it and out it goes.

It depends. Minimalism only really works when the architecture supports it. This isn't too say minimalism demands modern architecture, but, rather, good bones. My cinderblock studio almost demands silk floor-length curtains and other accoutrements.

Of the two pictures posted, I prefer the minimalist one because all the legs and cross-posts on the chairs are much too busy. OTOH, I don't see myself really relaxing and hanging out in the minimalist room.

It depends. I really only like Shaker type versions of "less is more"--clean, handcrafted details, warm natural textures, rich colors contrasted against clean white, everything is functional and purposeful. Otherwise, no--it's boring.

It's when minimalism meets sterility that it becomes deadly.

What home body said.

Regardless of style, I personally want a place that makes me feel safe, calm, and conducive to curling up and reading a book (or watching a movie).

ilima - right on. Some of us have to make do with less than perfect spaces.

I agree with the general concept of "less is more," but there's a point at which too much less looks like a waiting room. Taken further to the extreme of the Farnsworth House, "less" looks like the set of the Sartre play, No Exit.

If adding humans/pets/plants would ruin the aesthetic, it's all wrong.

If you threw some colored pillows on the upholstery, a few objects of interest, and some plants here and there, we probably wouldn't be having this discussion. It doesn't take much. Both spaces are gorgeous. Both spaces also need a bit more humanity.

I don't like clutter, but I do like my place to reflect who I am and I have a personality! Two chairs and a chaise is a drs office, not a home IMO.

Agree fully with "home body" and with the prerequisite of good architecture. Can't make a silk purse out of a sow's ear, etc…

(I have seen the opposite done, though: a way-way-over-decorated modernist model apartment, complete with flounced drapes, heavily upholstered, old-fashioned furniture, and too much furniture as well. I think the real estate agency was clueless, but it sure was FUNNY! This was over 10 years ago, or of course I'd have snuck a photo to share on AT!)

Another point: I don't think the Venturi interior shown is particularly overdone… I find it fairly restrained; hardly over the top…

Less is more for me, but not sterile. I like a bit of fun artwork, colourful bedding or pillows

Everything white or beige would make me sad.

Ilima et al are right. Architecture comes first in any decor scheme, especially minimalism. John Pawson works because the spaces are sumptuous in and of themselves - i.e., they need nothing else to be perfect. Good domestic architecture in the US is rather rare. When it's good, it is definitely more - unless you have truly aesthetic things.

This is one of the great things about design philosophy in my opinion.

There is no perfect answer. Good design is about adapting to the individual's personality, it's about the space and the locale. To me.

I won a set of boob mugs at a white elephant but if I had to live in a Jonathan Adler room I'd feel like I wanted to peel myself like an orange (bad acid trip urban legend). Jonathan Adler probably has a cow hide Mies' lounge chair but would feel like he was on antidepressants if he had to live in a Pawson house.

I love the idea of creating an identity and shaking things up a little bit with bits and pieces of other styles. I like to think that I've done that with my own current place which is a mostly concrete and steel loft. I'd say it's minimal and modern but at the same time a little tongue in cheek. Tongue in cheek is not a style, I know, but there are some elements that Jonathan Adler himself would appreciate. And there are elements which are warm and luxurious.

It would be nice to have an old farmhouse in the country. If I did, it could be very rustic with some modern embellishments thrown in. I've discovered that I really like the skill and adornment of modern craftsman and if I bought a craftsman style house, this is probably how I'd I roll.

Overall though, the underlying ideology of less is more would be threaded throughout all of these styles. Jonathan Adler must push his less is a bore mantra because he has to sell more to score. Minimal style furnishings are typically more expensive per piece.

I have books. I have beautiful old tchochkes that belonged to my late grandmother. I have a record collection that belonged to my parents, and a number of small jewelry boxes that I love, even when there's no jewelry inside them. I have two of the roses my boyfriend gave me for our first anniversary. I love all these things, they remind me of good times in my life--the idea that I should through them out because they're not functional, they're "sentimental," and they don't fit the "less is more" mantra is insulting.

Sure, I live in a wasteful society. Sure, I don't -need- these things. But "minimalists" don't -need- thousand-dollar chairs and flawless architecture either, now do they?

I'm sorry, I can't not comment on the common error you've made! Mies Van der Rohe is Ludwig Mies Van der Rohe's full surname. It is not first name-Mies, last name- Van der Rohe.

'Less is More' to me, is taking care not to have a space that is overrun with too much 'stuff'.

That said, too much brevity makes for a space that is too antiseptic, and too devoid of any trace of the owner's personality.

Who on earth, would like to 'live' in a Room & Board catalog? The gorgeous furnishings they offer are best paired with unique, 'vintage', and or luminous found objects.

(in other words, 'fine tuned, edited personality')

Less is more, at least in my home (to some extent).

My taste is definitely reflected in the first photo above. I think the architectural details, which includes the window and the wood paneling, make the room warm and inviting, despite the fact that it only has 3 pieces of furniture in it.

Less is more, but nothing is still nothing.

To me, minimalism works only when everything in the room is perfect. A pared down space shines light on everything that remains; if those objects have no gravitas, the space will feel sterile.

My personal pet peeve is people who think that everything minimal must be white. A single color is still "less!"

And I think the Farnsworth House room would be gorgeous except that I *know* all the furniture is hideously uncomfortable!

less in a well planned use is not boring. less in a very open space room that doesn't have a distinction of division is boring. depends on how efficient less is used.

I go for Less is more!

http://brownbunnybyiris.blogspot.com

A huge challenge is to design a minimalist interior with comfort.

Very rare indeed.

My strategy: keep the geometry of the space clean and linear, but introduce natural materials and soft textures.

The Victorians were some of the most creative people who ever lived--and they had tons of stuff! I like to look at things.

Verve and charm in a space is fun- clutter isn't. It's a fine line. Im a reformed clutterer but I like things better clean. even uncluttered by my standards is plenty warm by many others'. Te only exception is my desk, where I found I need a bit of visual clutter and warmth to feel comfy as I work. And when I do oil paintings, that workspace naturally turns positively animal den like..

For me, less is more, and minimalism isn't about thousand-dollar chairs and flawless architecture. I think it is about having what you need, using what you have, and letting the rest go.

I like my half-empty rooms and blank white walls. Other people probably think I it looks like I just moved in. To each his own. Do what makes you happy in your own space.

This picture leaves out the most important part of that room--the huge wall of glass and the view. Minimalism works for this house because the setting is stunning and so absolutely NOT minimal.

It's all about the bones of the room, and then you can fill it with things or with color or texture or all three. I believe that clutter, i.e., too many things in a space, prevents you from enjoying any particular item, no matter how nice everything is. The areas in a room where there is emptiness frame the things that are in the room.

I'm with Ilima et alia. When the space is fantastic, it IS the decoration. When the space is not fantastic we have to look elsewhere for charm.

Growing up my parents traveled a lot and so our house was full of exotic things, you know, Chinese screens and peacock chairs, that kind of thing. My mom would "showcase" the elaborate stuff with spotlights and whathaveyou, and my dad would shuffle things up and opine that he thought it was much cooler to allow your guests to 'discover' your interesting pieces for themselves.

I guess this is a tangent to the original question. Maybe I was trying to say that my parents' stuff expressed something about them. But a person with amazing architecture, that choice would express something about them, too. It just depends who you are.