This past week's bathroom contest--plus all the rain, which always puts me in a reflective mood--has got me thinking about what we mean when we talk about "good design." When we clicked for Enrique or Guido or any of the other entrants--and it was a great crop--what we were voting for (other than the triumph of distraction over work productivity)? Was our choice primarily aesthetic--did we select the person whose individual taste most matched our own? Or somehow ethical, rewarding the one who did the most with the least and de-valuing those spaces that already had "great bones" to their advantage? Did we favor iconoclasm, or reward with our vote(s?) those clearly familiar with the vocabulary of design? Professional or savant? Homey or hotel-y? Or, as some have commented, did we perhaps vote based on visible tallies, seeking to push one entrant over the top and refraining from a "throwaway vote"?
Forgive me if it's a little early in the day for philosophy, but that vessel sink may be deeper than you think: what we value has something to say about our values. As with any form of specialized knowlege, we can dive in to design as a way of increasing our pleasure and that of our guests, or we can use it as a wedge to separate ourselves from others--it's the difference between show-and-tell and showing off. What I loved about all the rooms we saw this week, even the ones I didn't like, was their owners' evident, infectious pleasure in both the process and the result.
How much of "goodness" is objective and how much subjective? Are you a believer in the Golden Mean, or do you prefer things a little jolie-laide? As for me, it's a mix: I love the proportions--and, yes, the pedigree--of my Eames chair, but I also love the horrifying lamp with the great story. And my diastematic partner, recalcitrant hair and all, is the most beautiful person in the world.
I don't know exactly where attractive sink fixtures fall on Maslow's hierarchy of needs, but I'm pretty sure they're on there somewhere. This week's contest was, for me, more evidence of the truth that design is never frivolous, even when--especially when--it's fun.
Image credit: Clint Sprott
(SGH)
Veronica & Keith's Handmade Chic 
Before & After: A Bathroom Goes From Pinky Peach to Sleek and Chic
Good Food to Share 
The Big Book of Small, Cool Spaces 
Apartment Therapy Presents 
The Eight-Step Home Cure 
Hunslet Dinner Plate
A Beginner's Guide to Superb Stir-Fry: Quick, Healthy Meals from a Wok
Easy Pitcher Cocktail Recipe: Strawberry Basil Margaritas
Comments (13)
Very good encapsulation of the issues that arise in this blog daily.
Wow. Nice little morsel of musing there, SGH. It's been said that fashion is sort of a zeitgeist thing, sort of a temperature of the current time. Style comes from stylus which is where we get our writing instruments, and has to do with one's own unique handwriting, or the imprimatur that one puts on something.
Fashion often is influenced by ethics and politics, etc. During WW II, women drew a vertical line on the back of each leg to make it appear as if they had stockings, which were rare, but the ones that existing had a seam! So, it was sort of like doing a faux painting effect to appear as if they had money without actually having to be selfish during a popular war.
I think that what people wear on their bodies and how they decorate their spaces has a lot to do with a tug-of-war between individuality and blending-in (there's a better word for it, but it escapes me).
If you feel as if you're just entirely too normal, you want to stand out; if you feel like you stick out too much, you want to recede a bit.
Teenagers want differentiate themselves from their parents, for instance, and yet they end up dressing very similarly to each other.
Depending on how you feel about the surroundings that you grew up in, you want your own place to feel similar or different.
I grew up in dwellings that my parents didn't own and didn't feel free to make their mark on, so painting walls as individually as possible is my idea of truly marking one's own territory. Yup! This is MY place. I picked out the color(s)! Partly because paint is a way that, once you leave, allows the next person to make their own mark.
So, people sometimes react to these contests based on whether what they see reminds them of what they dream of escaping to, or escaping from, whether that's conformity or individuality.
Or did people just delete cookies and re-vote?
I wonder if there's not a better way to cast ballots in the next contest.
Curtis--
How insightful! I agree completely.
Enough with the "delete and revote" already.
If people care that much, jeez, just let 'em.
As long as it's not the people entered in the contest themselves that are doing it.
This ain't no presidential race.
Wow, what a thoughtful piece on the subjectivity of "good"-ness... And thanks for introducing me to the concept of jolie-laide!
My post was wayyyyyyyyy longer than I realized.
(but nicely put!)
Seconded--and having seen what you do with paint, Curtis, I'm glad you grew up in a white-walled house: the rebellion is lovely.
"Lovely Rebellion" should be the name of Curtis' paint-finish business!
You're BOTH making me blush, but to the extent that it has a name, it's General Aesthetic, partly buhcuzz there's all kinds of arty stuff that I've been into over the years. Get it? Like General Electric? Like the OPPOSITE of "general anesthetic"? Kind of like Surgeon General?
Once I pay off some stuff, I'm going to invest in a decent web presence.
Curtis, you rock.
So perhaps "Lovely Rebellion" could be your stage name.