apartment therapy changing the world, one room at a time

The picture is crooked.

indoctrinated is the right word

Ideally, I'd go for white box modernism. But high modernism isn't forgiving. Space has to have great bones for it to work.

The recent curlicue modernism is attainable and easy to live in.

I picked Patterns & Wallpaper, believe it or don't -- heh heh heh -- but basically, I like for things to make as much visual sense in as many ways as possible. Curliques, etc., must be tamed, however.

When I was looking at apartments, I basically was asked myself, "Which wall will the mural go on?" and basically imagined ways to reconcile the time period of the interior architecture with stuff that was available.

Perhaps if I was made of money, I might have just insisted on a place with such huge windows and amazing view that a mural (for instance) would be redundant.

If you're going to use wallpaper, you'll simply have to realize that when it's new, it's lovely and fresh, but you simply must realize at the outset that you'll have to eventually change it.

Le Corbusier designed beautiful wallpaper for Salubra.

http://www.amazon.com/Corbusier-Polychromie-architecturale-Farbenklaviaturen-Keyboards/dp/3764374756

My absolute preference is for neutral, painted walls with lots of lovely deep historic trim (also neutral and painted) to make interesting shadows as the light moves across the room. The pattern is there, but it's organic to the room's setting.

That version of modernism sounds fairly antithetical to the concept of art, and IMHO, art is the one truly beautiful contribution that humanity makes as part of our existence on this planet.

I answered "White Box Moderism," but I could never live in a DWR catalog-like space. I believe my aesthetic lies somewhere in between. Although I like the clean lines of Modernist furniture in my living space, I tend to add the foil of something patterned and textured alongside it.

i HATE wall paper. the only time i think it's ok is if it's used unconventionally.

i prefer modern organic. i think a open space free of clutter (even visual) is very peaceful. to keep it from feeling too clinical or cold, i like the addition of natural things (a nice wood floor, plants, a line of stones on the mantle). i'm a big fan of traditional japanese homes. when i say i like asian design, i think people confuse it for pier 1 or something. what i like is the open space, clean lines of shoji, the functional yet beautiful sliding walls, & mats that make for a living space that is functional & convertible.

when i think of the patterns & wallpaper style, i think of grandma or bob evans. there's lots of stuff, lots of clutter, stuff to dust, & i tend to feel cramped in those types of rooms. it's like, there's so much pattern that there's no room for me.

maybe it's b/c i'm an artist. maybe a clear space is like a clean slate, a blank canvas. it inspires me. maybe that's why most artist studios are fairly bare.

i'd be interested in seeing the relation for style prefs & personalities (creative, hosts, never home, multitasker, et al)

I find myself drawn to the current trend of modern with a bit of historic reference. I love the juxtaposition of stark modern with a bit of damask or brocade thrown in to mix it up. By using traditional in unusual or unexpected ways, you can retain the warmth of the familiar with the excitement of newness.

For me, it is happy medium between the two. Only time will tell how long this trend will hold on.

I voted patterns and whatnot, but I'm really more in the middle. I certainly don't want any doilies or curlicues, but I couldn't deal with the full-on white-box.

MrGreen: Thanks a lot, now I really, really want that book...

Ornament is easier to accomplish, more placating to the eye, and less challenging to the mind. Because it is subject to much more variation, it is ultimately preferred by the home decor industries as trend-friendly. It is common.

True modernism celebrates the marriage of form and content. This is not at all without narrative, but it is exceedingly difficult to do well. That's why there are relatively few supremely successful examples, all of which have become so utterly iconic.

The reason most people can't do true modernism is because they're not willing to resist their baser instincts. Modernism is a discipline, not unlike buddhist meditation that emphasizes the higher chakras. There's nothing wrong with Patterns and Wallpaper, just as there is nothing wrong with the lower chakras. It just depends on where you choose to live.

I believe only those who have a true calling can give themselves over fully to the rigerous life of a modernist- like the brave monks who toil daily to uphold the virtues of religeous belief!! Having said that most of us are NOT Monks and although we may be virtuose and faithful to the cause,studying the sacred writing of LeCorbusier Gropius and Van Der Rohe ( The three apostles)- we often give over to the vices of 'decoration'; a toss cushion here, some nick-nack or wanton piece of memorabelia there...we must not chastise ourselves too harshly though for the human flesh is weak and the Farrow and Ball 'Vermicelli' wallpaper in blue oh so tempting!!!!.....

I don't like all the fuss of having to deal with lots of culrlicues and lots of pattern - it limits what you can add to a room and what you can't. I like clean lines and versatility. However, if patterns and curlicues are used as an aesthetic pop, it's well appreciated and often envied on my part. I like the bohemian look, but when I do it, it tends to clash and create discordance, which will undoubtedly cause me to lose my mind. so i tend to stick to modern organic, although i use what i have, which is often not what i want.

jennifer in sf, I have the 1997 edition. It IS wonderful. It is a boxed set with "Polychromie Architecturale" included with the two sample books. "Polychromie" explores his use of color.

In the last customer-submitted photo on Amazon, you can see the "screens" and keyboards" Le Corbusier designed that allow you to choose a group of two or three colors from a page that includes two background colors.

Le Corbusier almost always (perhaps always, I know of no exceptions) included strong color in his work but many of the photographs we see are black-and-white. He was a master not only in painting, sculpture, furniture design, architecture, city planning, etc., but also in the use of color.

The wallpaper he considered to be convenient and hygienic "oil paint sold in rolls". He said:

"All of us, according to our tast and reactions, favour one or more dominating schemes of colour. Each individual is drawn towards some particular harmony which seems to accord with his inner feelings. The practical difficulty is to show colours in such a way that the individual can detect his own 'affinity'."

The keyboards were his solution to this problem. I urge you to purchase the set. You will spend many a happy hour "playing" with it.

A lot of people here no doubt dismiss wallpaper because it is so bourgeois. Certainly it can be, but Le Corbusier proved that it doesn't HAVE to be.

Incidentally, Le Corbusier was "green" decades before the concept was invented.

It's precisely this kind of senseless conflict that leads postmodernism to say "the hell with you lot". Of course postmodernism is only just starting to make inroads with interior decorating, so you're probably stuck with the false dichotomy for a while yet...

postmodernism is now retro, it's on it's second spin at the wheel!!there's nothing new only re-invented!!

re: "Modernist philosophy allows no room for 'theatre,' "

Tell that to John Pawson or Donald Judd.

Is it Ben Marcus the writer you refer to? Very small world we live in. I once had one of his apple tarts, and my, was it decadent, born utterly of the subset between white-box modernism and patterns & wallpaper

Mark Wigley takes the white wall discussion to a whole other level in 'White Walls, Designer Dresses: The Fashioning of Modern Architecture' critiquing the white wall itself as a kind of suppressive dressing rather than a neutral expression of form. There is a much better summary if you take a look inside the book on amazon, here's the link: http://tinyurl.com/2wlpr7

I hate doilies, curicues and wallpaper (which would drive me nuts), but I'm also not a fan of white box modernism (which I could never keep up). Is there a middle ground?

I have a very particular eye - everything has to please my gaze and still be unique - and it also has to stay organized and clutter-free....and then secondarily, it all has to keep my guests' visual senses entertained as well. So I like to go kind of wild, but not a fussy way. I like colour! And lots of art, including a mural. And lots of plants. (Always the plants, ruining the minimalist intentions. The effect is more one of an ecclectic garden that one day started to take over the apartment.)

I like both. Who is going to yell at me first?

I will. But because of your screenname.

I like both too - I would never limit myself to only one line of thinking...

Your friend, for the record, was not indoctrinated, either into a High Mondernist, or any other paradigms. He was treated to an extremely broad and liberally informed education which drew on the lessons from Imperial Roman Urbanism through Machine Age utopianism to post-Post Modernism and Deconstruction. And chief among the lessons was that all those terms aren't worth a damn. Robert Venturi cleared things up considerably with his admonition to appreciate "Both/And" rather than "Either/Or" when it comes to ideas, though I wouldn't want to shape my space with his ironic gestures. And while the Open Plan may have been a response to narrow 19th century narrative space, your friend has no particular "philosophy", Modernist or otherwise, so circumscribed as to exclude Theatre itself! As for that wallpaper, you may recall your friend describing how cleverly an application as old as wall covering could be so contemporarily inspired, with its cool clean colors and computer-generated motifs. Your friend takes exception but he still loves you.

Basically, spaces have to be comfortable, practical, and some version of visually pleasing, which tends to have a certain amount of harmony, a certain amount of contrast, at least SOME humor and a certain amount of visual poetry. And you really just have to do whatever it takes to make that happen. And as they say in the old show tune What's the Use in Wond'rin', "that's all there is to that".

what is the resource for that wallpaper?

really "the other one"? I can recommend a good therapist if you like.

I thought we were talking about design. ahem. Imho any design that belabors a genre to an extreme ends up looking like a theme restaurant... or perhaps a better example is it reminds me of a pavilion at epcot center. Fun for a visit but I wouldn't want to live there. I like the words "visual poetry" that Curtis used, and to me the best poetry has the element of transcendent surprise. Pick pieces for your home not based on some abstract idea, but based on a connection to them, a visceral reaction, a kinship. Put them all together and see what happens!