apartment therapy changing the world, one room at a time

I read that article about "It's Not You..." and it seems to me that maybe it was them, too, after all.

I agree with Joan A. I believe it was both the apartment and them. And as for the 70 year old millionaire lawyer with the 22 year old Russian girlfriend I feel safe saying that her attraction to him probably has little to do with his NY living situation.

Dealbreakers:

Prints of well know paintings (why can't you just find something fun and original?).

Stoves that are never used.

People who keep no booze in the house. People who's only booze is flavored malt liquor beverages (while I was in college girls got a pass on this).

That god damned french black cat poster. I hate that thing.

Mess. Especially in the bedroom. If I'm seeing the bedroom I'd hope it would be clean.

Oh, it's definitely them.

The problem with these people is that they expect Sex and the City-style relationships (everyone they date must be model-pretty or a rising securities lawyer or a famous surgeon), but they're not staging their homes (or themselves) at the Sex and the City level of chic, so their target dating pool wants none of them.

Ok, then.....I dream of being as politically correct as Wende and Joan but I don't think I can be here:

It most certainly isn't the place, its them, yes! The guy with the stuffed baby seal who writes advice for match.com? the seal is the least of my concerns with him. Because of him, I would never EVER EVER list on match.com. Obviously, they cannot be trusted. Need I say more..

And the lawyer? Oh, please....give me a hot mechanic with a small fridge and a cold beer any day.

Wende is so right.

And...why do adult women have stuffed animals? What the hell is that?

Here's a poem by Philip Larkin that, read once a year, can keep one from slipping backwards down the ladder of civilization:

Mr. Bleaney
by Philip Larkin

'This was Mr Bleaney's room. He stayed
The whole time he was at the Bodies, till
They moved him.' Flowered curtains, thin & frayed,
Fall to within five inches of the sill,

Whose window shows a strip of building land,
Tussocky, littered. 'Mr Bleaney took
My bit of garden properly in hand.'
Bed, upright chair, sixty-watt bulb, no hook

Behind the door, no room for books or bags -
'I'll take it.' So it happens that I lie
Where Mr Bleaney lay, and stub my fags
On the same saucer-souvenir, and try

Stuffing my ears with cotton-wool, to drown
The jabbering set he egged her on to buy.
I know his habits - what time he came down,
His preference for sauce to gravy, why

He kept on plugging at the four aways -
Likewise their yearly frame: the Frinton folk
Who put him up for summer holidays,
And Christmas at his sister's house in Stoke.

But if he stood and watched the frigid wind
Tousling the clouds, lay on the fusty bed
Telling himself that this was home, and grinned,
And shivered, without shaking off the dread

That how we live measures our own nature,
And at his age having no more to show
Than one hired box should make him pretty sure
He warranted no better, I don't know.

Was I politically correct? I had no idea.

Hey, I have stuffed animals!

Ellie is my mother's childhood toy, which makes her acceptably mid-century modern (posed here on antique horseshoe chair in the bedroom).
http://www.flickr.com/photos/35684487@N00/438853580/

The husband brought home freebies from his last professional conference, and they were the right color for the guest room, so we kept them:
http://www.flickr.com/photos/35684487@N00/438853604/
http://www.flickr.com/photos/35684487@N00/438853604/

(And here's a bonus -- a cat that's only stuffed after she visits her food bowl):
http://www.flickr.com/photos/35684487@N00/438853608/

As you see, I'm not politically correct, just logical. Being quirky, I married someone with compatible quirks. If I'd gone a-lookin' for an investment banker with a low golf handicap, I'd be writing chick lit about what jerks men are.

Oops -- wrong link for Shamu:
http://www.flickr.com/photos/35684487@N00/438853604/

Joan A: Yup, I thought your comment was kind and yet made its statement. So that was a compliment.

I, on the other hand, nearly gagged when I read the article and simply couldn't contain my evil self. :)

Ah gees, Wende, I wouldn't knowingly offend you for the world. So sorry, didn't mean to lump everyone in one group. (and my husband had a cute stuffed cat that he went to chemo with).

I guess I was referring to adult women who have hordes of teddy bears and things in their bedrooms and that kind of thing, and can't live without every little pal they've ever had and don't have fully functioning brains.

I know you're brilliant and talented. I bow humbly.

"but as always in matters of romance, you must first ask yourself: Would James Bond do it?"........ every time I begin a non-wire story in the NYT, my intelligence is insulted. The notion of romance as a deal to have makers and breakers is... not very romantic, to say the least.

"That how we live measures our own nature" and Xanthippe the cat -- Apartment Therapy commenters is the antidote to the NYT Home section.

it's amusing that the match.com says in his defense that he doesn't want to be "bland" by removing his stuffed, dead baby animal.

i have no issue with lego collections, crazy childlike bed sheets, etc. these are outgrowths of personalities, and as long as i like the personality of the person, i have no issue with their possessions that are theirs and are meaningful, especially if i wasn't cohabitating.

but someone who has on display a dead animal has a personality i would want nothing to do with. as a vegetarian and lover of animals, i would take great offense to that, not because i'm not open-minded and have no freedom to my decorating sensibilities, but because i simply find that revolting and distressing.

it's not the items, to me, it's how the items connect to the individual's sensibility.

JacksonMarie -- I wasn't offended! I was amused and wanted to provide a literal answer to "why would a grown woman have stuffed animals?"

If I sounded short, it's from guilt that I was reading AT when I need to have well-documented conclusions related to the commodity crop industry established by the end of the day. A 10-K doesn't analyze itself.

Xanthippe is beautiful......here's my Iressa...

http://www.flickr.com/photos/7583288@N06/438885867/in/photostream/

I wouldn't write someone off for "bad" taste in art; we all fall short somewhere.

It does seem to me that these "quirkier" men are not looking for a traditional relationship, so I'm puzzled as to why they date women who seem to want a traditional relationship?. They should look for women who are OK with spanning time and not sharing space. The lawyer seems to have solved his problem.

:)

At least we can discuss your collections.....mine...I'm not so sure.

Anyway, the cats are awesome and shamu - ok, you can keep shamu - very cute.

Hey, it forced me to set up a flicker account!

Oh, what a pretty tux cat!

I lust after your throw pillow, too.

Yeah, I'm blessed with the cat.

I'd actually mail you the two pillows I have. They go with nothing I have and I was actually thinking of giving them away.

Want them, reallly? I have your email. It would be no problem to send them. Let me know.

I loved the guy who married the Sesame Letterpress girl. "And she baked, obviously." He seems like a sweetie.

The rest of these people are just sad. Like rasil, I don't understand the notion of "dealbreakers" in relationships, especially when the dealbreakers are things like prints, type of beverages, or overhead lighting. You're looking for the person who is going to stay up all night with you in your hospital room after your cancer surgery, holding the little tray for you to vomit into. Do you seriously give a crap if they have that black cat poster? Couldn't you help them learn to enjoy different types of art/beverages/lighting schemes?

JacksonMarie - :)

JacksonMarie -- You wouldn't! You would? I'd happily pay the shipping-related charges. Do email me.

I think that when people reject a romantic interest because of his/her apartment it's generally because they are drawing some conclusions about the person based on what they see ("it's not you, it's what your apartment is saying about you"...)

It would have been nice if the Times article had gone into more depth about what judgments were being drawn from what material offenses (e.g., print of famous art = lack of originality, or taxidermied seal = not a peta member), and about the pitfalls of making such judgments early on in getting to know someone. After all, the stuff in our apartments is just stuff that we may or may not have selected carefully, and different people see different meanings in the same items.

Wende. I absolutely will. I will pay the shipping. I've been blessed big time and would enjoy sharing it. It keeps the world nice.

I'll email you over the weekend. I hope you love the pillows when you get them. They're not new, but they are lovely, and in Phoenix! Oh, yup, that's where they belong. :)

Palousian:

Ditto DITTO

Been there. This is true.

Careless decor decisions (i.e. bad lighting, cat/Klimt posters) makes me sort of happy: When I fantasize about happily-ever-aftering with the date, all the stuff in the house is mine! No compromising! Some people just aren't aesthetes, and I have enough opinions for two.

But there are warning signs. Here's an example ... I once went home with a cute, smart-ish, Ivy League, Wall Streeter and the only books he had were 1. a copy of the Kama Sutra and 2. a beat-up textbook from B-school. No sign of interior life in that interior.

Commentator, books are so last century. All one really needs to be well-informed these days is an internet connection.

In regards to the attic article...

My eyeballs exploded out of my head and I spat my tea out when I read that the one family spent $500,000 on the attic renovation for their 2 kids. That's 500 THOUSAND! I can't even imagine that sort of money spent on just an attic. Most people are lucky if they ever make enough to afford a whole house for $500K. Sheesh.

I just read the article on the $500,000 attic renovation prompted by Monica's comment.


O H M Y G O D

I'm rendered speechless.....

I would like to second Monica and JacksonMarie's disgust about the half-million dollar attic renovation. To make it even worse, it's in Austin, where you can get an entire house -- a nice big one -- for about half that amount.

Yeah it looks great, but does your 9-year-old need to live in a modern art museum?

I think this kind of celebration of obscene wealth is immoral. I realize people spend like this (while others have no place to live and not enough to eat) but why the hell is the NYTimes always writing these gushing, breathless puff pieces about off-the-charts spending? At the very least the article's writer could examine the obvious questions: Is this right? Is this fair? Is this the kind of society we want to live in?

The Times does this all the time. Two Sundays ago there was a breezy story about a 24 year-old girl whose daddy was buying her a $900,000 condo in Williamsburg, Brooklyn. And he demanded veto power over the furniture and told her she could never have a boyfriend over. How sick is this?

A week or so earlier there was a gushing interview with a 28-year-old twirp, still in grad school, whose daddy bought him the New York Observer (for several million dollars) because Junior thought it would be fun to run a newspaper. This kid looks like he's about 15, had no experience in journalism, and suddenly he's the boss of lifetime journalists in their 40s and 50s who actually got degrees, worked for a living and spent decades learning their craft.

What bugs me most is the Times editorial tone acts like this is normal. As the rich get even richer and everyone else gets poorer, I would say this is neither normal nor sustainable.

BrooklynRob,

I completely agree that the Times does this all the time, and that they act like this kind of obscene wealth is normal. I have often wondered what the reason could be. Are writers at the Times predominantly children of privelege who naturally move in circles comprised of other children of privilege, and that's where they get their story ideas?

Those sheets are the exact same sheet that in 1977 my mother cut up and created a crib bumper, canopy, valence, etc for a rather nice jungle themes nursery for myself. As it was unisex in nature, it worked well for my brother several years later. I seemed vaguely to recall that my parents also had it covering there bed, though fortunately, they have since updated their bedding.

Nobody's mentioned yet the live/work space in San Fransisco--I found that inspiring. I love stories with morals about how design really makes the world better. Plus, it didn't seem like he was trying to gentrify the n'hood for new pple so much as improve it for those who lived there.

Wow, shocking attic expenditure. I always wonder when I see childrens' spaces that elaborate - what they're going to think of college life if they have to share space. What if they fall in love with someone who can't keep them in the manner to which they've become accustomed? Guess that ain't likely.

I have a framed print of a well-known painting. But I like it. My husband likes collecting guitars and propping them everywhere. Partnership is about compromise.

However, a dealbreaker I remember from my single days was an apartment which was pretty much ok... plenty of books, furniture was nondescript but not appalling... but the bathtub was BAD. It had rings on the rings. And you couldn't miss this because the shower curtain was open. This was a guy who was clean in appearance and the rest of his place was okay, but the BATHTUB!

The dealbreakers piece - I laughed so hard!!

and for the record stuffed animals are not the same thing as SOFT TOYS - stuffed animals are taxidermy like that seal the guy has got (which I think is cute!) - the things in (mostly) womens bedrooms are soft toys - note the word "toys" as in for children - if you want to have sex get rid of the soft toys in the bedroom (there are of course other toys that grown-ups like to have in their bedrooms...)

My admission is that I totally want that little mermaid bedding that Ugly Betty has in her bedroom - its gorgeous!

I think that if you have money, you can spend it any way you want. It's really no one's business; what got to me about the children's attic was that after spending the $500,000, it was stark looking (some call this modern) and not condusive to play or learning by any child I've ever known.

To me, the design was more about what the parents wanted their kids to have than what the kids really wanted or needed. Kids need to be kids and in addition to love and learning, they need to flop around and play. No child I know could ever flop around and play in that space, not even teenagers. And in a few years they'll be into something new, so I highly doubt the design was for or about them.

I try to have few dealbreakers at all, but certainly none that have to do with material things. People's taste change with relationships sometimes. But a tub that has rings on the rings? Ok, that would do it for me. Any filth would do it for me.

(I have nothing to do for 30 minutes...) Then, I looked at the chairs in the above thread. Ok, back to gross displays of wealth and I'm going to contradict myself about spending one's fortune. Who needs a chair that costs $2,200 and is made out of clay, or a sofa that costs $23,000? Now, I ask you, do you think they are reading AT? No. I think they are buying airports and countries.

With these NYT Features of Excess, what I really want to know is whether the owner puts the house/apt up for sale relatively soon after the feature runs.

I thought the personalities of some of the people in the dealbreakers article sounded gross - the writer presented them that way (you always have to watch for writer manipulation, intentional or not) - and the things in their places just reflected that.

Hmmm...the 70 year old lawyer with the 22 year old Russian gal...hmmm...