apartment therapy changing the world, one room at a time

YAY!

Dude, GUINEA pig.

I love your book, I love your website, but most of all I love what you are promoting--doing more with less. It is refreshing and inspiring and has motivated me to make my house a home, despite its small size. That's what I got out of the Oprah show. I'm sorry that you (and your family) were attacked or maligned in any way on the message boards. Thank you, thank you, thank you for all that you've done. From Tara in San Francisco. :)

love your site and what you are doing, sorry that you are under attack. the same people that you are generously helping are acting a little too much like jealous brats....i hope you don't shy away from putting all this info out on the web, i look forward to everything that you post. thank you!

That, my friends, is what you call "class."

Thank you, Maxwell and Sara Kate.

Good for you, Maxwell. I don't live in a big city and I don't have an apartment, but I do like your message and general messages about living simpler lives in the pursuit of happiness.

Keep up the good work. Welcome to parenting from a new parent himself. Many are enjoying and benefiting from what you are doing.

--Jim

I think you have the right to run this site however you wish to. It is your site and you make the rules.

One thing I will say is that I had no idea you had a place to escape to from your small apartment until the flap that happened before this one a couple of months ago. Until then, I thought your family really did have to function full time in your tiny space.

Having even a weekend place to get away to absolves you from many decisions that most of us coping with small spaces full time have to make - like keeping or getting rid of a piece of furniture we like but don't have room for, storing out of season items, and just having room to strech out and breathe. In this regard, I do think you were being a little disingenuous.

Mia -- clearly not the point. Give the man a break.

as a daily reader, i somehow missed the abuse you are referring to, and i feel embarrassed for the readership that you would have to defend yourself in any way. i care only about the fact that I can come here every day and find inspiration to make the most of my means and of my space. i'm sure you will get many notes of support to this degree, and i humbly add my name to the list. thanks for the wonderful work.

It is unfortunate that you had to defend yourselves on your own turf (or in your tiny apartment, as it were), but well said. Salvador Dali once said "The thermometer of success is merely the jealousy of the malcontents". Based on that, congratulations on the Oprah appearance, the book, the successful website and best wishes on your future endeavors.

Dear Maxwell, Sara Kate, Oliver, and Ursula,

Thank you for your explanations, although I'm saddened that you've had to deal with so much snark. Since I discovered Apartment Therapy a few years ago, it has given me much-needed inspiration. I check in several (many) times a day because I almost always find something or someone interesting. For the most part the people who post here are amazing. I cannot number the times I have benefitted from their advice or suggestions. And my life is a lot better for it (complete closet reorganization anyone?).

Maybe I did "drink the koolaid" but I consider you friends whose lives and lifestyle make my world a more sane and comfortable place.

Thank you for everything.

Thank you both for all your hard work. This is a wonderful site and I appreciate what you do.

matilda,

exactly!

Maxwell, I don't believe an apology from you or your family should have been necessary, but it is very courteous and generous of you to offer this response to the Oprah thread negativity brought out by your greater visibility. Hope you're recovered from your illness soon and back to enjoy your lovely little home.

Maxwell,

The responses from you and you and Sara Kate are very gracious. Please keep up the good work, both on and off the Apartment Therapy site.

Hello,

First I want to say, TMI in your explanation. Second, I mentioned that Brooklyn would be a really nice place for your child to grow up. There are great communities there,in parkslope or fort green, clinton hill, or even bedstuy. Really I just wanted to let you know that you should really consider this for your baby. I think that you are going to be rich one day very soon, because of the success of this site. Good luck.

Fourth paragraph, don't forget, i before e except after c....

I'm sorry, Max and fam, that you had to go through this. The Oprah show is waiting for my on my DVR right now, as I've yet to watch it. I do feel it is unfair for people to critisize the way you live. You are a person. A human.

Maybe you guys should have mentioned the home in the Hamptons. Maybe not. If it was a mistake, you are allowed that. Just becuase you have a wildly (and fantastic) site, does not mean you can understand everything that readers might think or assume.

I beleive you are allowed some measure of privacy, and like someone said, it's your site, you make the rules.

Have some chicken soup and feel better.

I missed a lot of the drama, and I'm glad I did. It's evident to me that you have worked very hard for what you have, and I feel bad that that things got so out of hand that you had to defend your lifestyle and your work. People who pick at, attack, and spread gossip are typically jealous folks with low self-esteem.

I don't have an apartment, we own a house but I have learned a lot from you. I bought your book, I read the forum and I'm working on applying your techniques to our home. Please count me in with the group who wants to see you continue to succeed and wishes you and your family nothing but the best.

Frankly I don't care about the personal lives of who owns this site. I love coming here for the inspiring pictures, problem solving and sharing anything I find.

Although I admire M&SK for living a simply as they do, I hardly find it astonishing or a betrayal that they actually don't spend everyday of the year in their small space. Before I was married, I lived with my then fiance and his dog for only a month in his less than 400sqft converted garage apartment while in transition of moving to the house we have now. To me, there's no way 3 people could live in 250 every single day of the year and not go mad.

I didn't read the Oprah thread incident but what it sounds like is that M&SK's ethics were in question. Well what about the ethics of those who were doing the questioning when they posted the AT editors' personal info? Talk about hypocritical.

Thank you for this site. I visit almost daily.
And people, lighten up!

Thanks for taking the time to try to explain some things even though you never had to.

After this whole thing I feel I have more respect for this site and feel more a part of a community. It was good to see people really step up and defend what they think is good and right [both sides] with intelligence and passion.

But for the others.. well..apparently, the best way to destract the naysayers and the 'malcontents' is too give them some gramatical errurs so they have somethin else two complain about.

If you're going to have a public web site, write a book instructing people how to live, and go on Oprah, you really ought not be surprised when some of the public reacts in a manner that may be less than laudatory. The public arena is for dialogue, not monologue. At this point you've made yourself a public figure and the rest... well it comes with the territory. Celebrity, however fleeting, takes its toll. If you can't stand the heat... design a bigger kitchen.

i don't think the spelling snaps are necessary... the guy has the flu for crack's sake!

no explanation or apology necessary! your tiny apartment is lovely and inspiring, even if you aren't there a few days out of the year. as the earlier post said, how many of us are in our homes *365 days a year*? we all take breaks and vacations. i'm sorry the oprah post dissolved into madness (i stopped reading when people were getting mean), but i know that there are a ton of people who love the site, do not feel betrayed or misled, and support you!

Ralph - AWESOME idea!!!!!! sign me up for the Charter Subscription!

it's too bad the founders of this site have to defend themselves and their family when i see the site being about resources, creativity and having fun with small spaces no matter where they are. when it becomes a forum for judging people based upon some sort of ideology made up by self important, self-entitled small space expert philosophers than it becomes more of a "scene." do we read books and enjoy and learn from them for what they offer and then change our minds because we find out the author did something we do not approve of? not to say there is anything to disapprove of in this case but according to some people there are. "disengenious" because someone has a cottage in the woods and a small space in the city? maybe one day that person will learn to think outside of their own little small space too and be happy. but for now i'm sure they are happy in their little "scene" that judges others who don't fit into it. sounds like they need to get out a little bit more.

People were just being ridiculous. This is my favorite blog. You guys need to start a print magazine, though.

I do agree w/ Matilda's point - irregardless of who owns what - I think that someone who doesn't have access to a weekend retreat has more psychological and physical "baggage" to deal with. Its one thing to dash off to the local coffee shop or park to get away from the 4 walls that are closing in on you versus knowing that should the fancy strike, you could at the drop of a hat go to you second home (vacations don’t count).

Speaking for myself - having a second home in the country means that all the things we can't have in town, our extensive book collections, vegetable “patch”, a place for our daughter to run around outdoors - allows us to sacrifice having those amenities for a smaller space in town close to our jobs etc. We KNOW that we have room to stretch out and breathe and it does put us at a psychological advantage over someone who doesn’t and has to cope with permanently making those decisions.

The only gripe that I have with the site is that as it has grown and gotten more popular, it has become less personal. Oh, and Brooklyn is a great place to live!

Now I just need help finding cool rubber flooring in funky colours!

Maxwell:

I've been very much inspired by your design and living style since I first saw your designs/organization style on Mission Organization years ago. I am saddened that you had to give a long explanation about your "simple living" philosophy and give more private details than we deserve to know. I loved the Oprah episode. It inspired me to find joy and comfort from the things we own and to get rid of the excess that we don't need. I am planning to pass along all the things in storage to others that can use them, so I can live in peace with the space that I have. I wish you three much happiness in your "home" and enjoy the time that Ursula is herself small. Good luck.

Maxwell: I would like to know if AT intends to repost the Oprah thread (even redacted to take out whatever, if anything, was "outside the rules," as you suggest). You (or SaraKate) have twice stated that the taking down of the thread was "temporary." If you will not be reposting even an edited thread, would you mind sharing your thoughts as to why not? Thanks.

I did read most of the above mentioned thread and I fount the attempts at lashing out at someone advocating living simply and happily within one's means utterly shocking. I am from Birmingham, Alabama and a 21 year old college student who cannot afford the outlandish tuition prices as well as a tiny apartment that is overly priced (which is finally about to change!!). I am a design student at heart and come here for inspiration on how to make my apartment a place for me and an escape from the world; to surround myself with beautiful things that don't cost me an arm and a leg. It inspires me to create more artwork and to maybe be able to use it for my income. I look at this site many many times a day and am filled with enoyment and excitement that someone out there is helping communities pool their resources and make everyone's life a tad easier - be it by posting where you can purchase something, or wonderful DIY projects. I commend you on your efforts thus far and support you in future endeavors. Thank you for being such an important part in my life and inspiring me to creatively express myself more in life.
P.S. I watched my Oprah show on a VHS and taped over Picket Fences for it. ;-)

I was kind of scratching my head about why our hosts hadn't weighed in on the hoopla; now it makes sense -- being sick and being away.

Anyway... that's kind of the way life is in a fishbowl, and although they're not filthy rich yet, it sounds like this was good practice for when they absolutely will be.

And on the off-chance they don't ever get rich, it sounds like they will always be at least relatively happy and well-adjusted.

Neal--irregardless will never ever ever be a word.

Neal,

I saw them use this coin pattern rubber garage flooring on a decorating show where they redid a kids room. They used yellow, and it looked pretty cool.

http://www.floorjunkies.com/

oh - and irregardless isn't a word - its regardless

It isn't a good statement of our social etiquette that someone can be doing a wonderful job and we are all reaping the rewards of that work, but what is given back is negativity. Why does anyone think he has the right to form opinions or have expectations of people because they do him a service which, by the way, is offered without payment?

I wish you and your family the best. And, as a mother of a toddler, I'm relieved to hear you have somewhere else (even for a weekend) to go because you will need that space sooner than you think.

i shouldn't be one to correct someone - i just saw i misspelled found!

Missed the whole thread, up all night (now in my 30th hour) working on transcripts and the web was off limits.
Hey man, you don't owe us your life story. i honestly hope you make your home life a little more scarce on these pages. You're a nice family and all, but i would be much more guarded about putting so much of myself out there, to the point where some cretins actually do think they "know you" and want to challenge you to "come clean" about your private life.

This site is much bigger than Maxwell. Even if he has the advantage of a big Hamptons home, most people who post/share photos of their homes do not. I don't much care if Maxwell is fudging or not, because I get so many good ideas and inspiration from AT. Those who attacked him would do well to stop reading the site if they find it so offensive.

First of all, I am so grateful that you created AT, and thankful for all that you and the other contributors give to us. It’s something I eagerly look forward to every day.

And it was very generous of you to share your story with us. You don’t have to justify your means (however big or small) to any of us. That said, I did find your story very interesting and inspiring. So thanks. And I really appreciate the positive tone you set throughout the site. It’s rather remarkable and does not go unnoticed. A good example for all of us.

Wishing you, Sara Kate and Ursula boundless abundance! You deserve it!

I'm responding here to the family message and to Maxwell's. You are all showing tremendous grace under pressure. I applaud you for that.

I must say in all honesty, though, that the primary concerns I expressed on the Oprah thread still remain:

1)There's a fundamental contradiction between claiming small living, yet living off the large resources that you have access to. I know that you are not rolling in money, and never thought that you were, but you do have resources that many people don't. Having resources is not, of course, by itself a problem -- I come from a comfortable, privileged, established background myself, and my family connections have opened doors for me. But, in my view, it becomes problematic if you present your lives as your laboratory. Some posters have expressed disappointment with you when they found out that you had another residence you could escape to. Although long-time readers of AT always knew this, I think that this aspect of your lives was sufficiently hidden from your more casual readership to have come as a surprise to them. The "365" statement on Oprah didn't help.

2)There's a contradiction between urging people to pare down, yet constantly pushing this or that new product. You will very likely disagree, but I do think you need to re-examine your message here

3)This is a less fundamental issue, but there's a contradiction between the simplicity and organization your site proclaims, and the total chaos of how it's actually organized and run.

In the interests of full disclosure, let me also repeat another more fundamental objection that I have to the AT philosophy: small is not beautiful. Small is what people have to put up with when they live in places like New York or Bombay or Tokyo where real-estate prices are out of control. Small means having no room of your own, no privacy, no freedom to do as you please. It's oppressive and limiting, not ennobling and liberating. There's nothing beautiful about living in cramped quarters. I know two cases of teenagers who grew up in tiny apartments and suffered from psychological disorders because of the stress of constantly having people around.

People live small because they have to. It's dangerous to romanticize living that way (and it's wrong to do it when, privately, you have access to a lot more). It's certainly very useful to have a website that teaches people how to cope with the small spaces in which they are forced to live and the ensuing stresses. I admire those parts of this site that do that. But I do feel that one mustn't present tiny living as a Good Thing.

Maxwell and Sara Kate,
I continue to be absolutely amazed at the amount of information and photos about your lives that you post online and reveal to the world in other media. I guess with so much out there and esp. with the anonymity of blog posting, it's inevitable to have some bad stuff thrown your way. But I'm am also amazed at the balance and, yes, grace, as others have noted, with which you respond to these assaults. This cannot have been an easy thing to deal with and I admire and applaud you for how you responded. And thank you for taking down that vile thread. Keep up the good work and get healthy, Maxwell!

It seems that this Oprah thread has created somewhat of a new chapter for AT (management, readers and haters included). How about along with the vow of positive energy, we have a new rule -- no commenting on minor spelling or grammatical errors?

Everyone I know who watched the Oprah show that day (including me) thought it was a great. Your personal lives should not be under attack. Instead, people should use Apartment Therapy to their advantage, as it is a wonderful tool. It comes down to individual choice. If they are not interested in living in a small space and ridding themselves of unnecessary clutter, they should go about their business without indicting others. Thanks for your work on this site. I really enjoy it.

Just wanted to say... For all the good and happiness that AT brings-- I don't need to know Maxwell's life story. All I do know is that he (and all the AT staffers) is darn good at his job and I get the benefits for free! Hopefully those evil posters (I stopped reading it before it descended into madness apparently) have left the AT community or have decided to just chill-- for goodness sakes at the end of the day, isn't this just one of many websites you visit in a day?

Sigh - AT - correcting vocabulary one word at a time; irregardless that I “bastardized” the English language with a word that causes some debate on both sides on whether or not its usage will ever be universally accepted.

Thanks Ralph – I’ve seen a similar product at either Home Depot or Lowes, but am holding out for a local version that comes in sheet form which I’ve seen in a few UK deco mags.

AT,
i wish you would just end this particular comment thread. it's bringing out the "design dabblers." they thrive on negativity. we are small and beautiful when we look at the big picture.

I like to read about different ideas for living spaces and the way furniture etc fits into these spaces along with color etc.

I for one do not give a rats ass about this pedantic bullshit people drivel on about trying to prove their silly points.

But I also have the option of not reading those bits if i don't want to

A generous and thoughtful response to the devolution of the Oprah thread. We, all of us who have ever posted an opinion on this or any site, are participating in the earliest days of an experiment in communication and community. What happens when communicated language is, like the language of a locked journal, utterly free of out-of-the-web consequence? On this site, the result is so often overwhelmingly positive (no not always shiny sweet, but almost always refreshingly constructive and well-considered) that wild swings of free-flying cuts and ad hominem attacks that long ago left any realm of constructive context are doubly jarring. It will inevitably happen again. There will be another thing. People will be heard. Opinions will be voiced and there will likely be a move by some into personal attacks. But at least now it can be short-handed, “Are we really heading in the direction of the Oprah Thread again?”

This site has been my almost daily companion as we cut our square footage in half with the birth of our daughter. A move that was equal parts decision and necessity, it has been a joy and occasional struggle. It was this site, and those who participate in it, that eased the difficulties and helped us to see what we had. While watching the Oprah episode my husband suggested, if we ever buy a place, we keep things this small. Whatever the outlying snark, the heart of this site is inspiration. Thank you for all you have set in motion and continue to foster.

Design Dabbler is exactly right. i'm just glad he/she typed it all instead of me.

thanks to everyone who stood by their guns on the Oprah thread. and for those who didnt see the oprah thread, maxwell's comments above do not address many issues that were brought forth, although SK did say they would take the discussion of the ethical issues related the rent situation into consideration. Perhaps if the thread is truly only taken down "temporarily", you'll have an opportunity to read it.

someone yesterday commented that all the critical postings were wasted there. clearly they were not!

So, Design Dabbler, you see no value whatsoever in proposing to the people that might *have* to live small, that they do it gracefully, joyously, unapologetically and as beautifully and responsibly as possible?

You honestly see no value to that?

So wtf are you doing here, then?

And ps, there are people of means (more than yours, more than mine, more than the G-Rs) who do indeed chose to NOT live in 5000 square feet of Frontgate ostentation.

We breathlessly await pics of you manly pink bedroom, btw.

before someone beats me to it.. "choose"

I thought irregardless was funny :). I have a friend who says this. But, oh well....moving forward....

While I don't think an explanation was due from Maxwell, I do think it shows class. Yes, gaining fame usually means losing some privacy, however, I continue in my belief that personal attacks are, well, tacky, and unnecessary. There is a way to debate issues that doesn't always show up here. That's been my only point of discomfort - enough nasty posts prompts some of us to respond and then a cycle begins.

Perhaps the most interesting post here-in my mind-has been the one from elizabeth in AL - she has gained true knowledge from AT in her chosen field, and she expresses gratitude. How refreshing.

While the fact that you and your family live in a tiny apartment is interesting, to me it has always been one of the least interesting things about this site. I come here for the great work you do in putting everything together, and for the community you foster. I don't think you owed anybody an explanation about your personal finances. The site speaks for itself. Well done.

Okay, here are my two cents.

Maxwell has written MANY posts on the weekend place; when they painted the office/nursery purple before the baby was born, he asked if they should paint a room there all in yellow, etc. They even showed the best little chairs they had around their dining table. (I so want those chairs.) Just because someone cannot search the site and do some research before they attack someone is not his problem. Therefore, since he has mentioned the house numerous times, the term disingenuous does not fit. No matter what your feelings on a subject you should always do your research before you accuse anyone of anything.

In addition, even if they can make it to the house 2 weekends a month, they still have to exist in their apartment space FIVE days of the week.

As I see it, from what the Gillingham-Ryans have shown of the place in the Hamptons, it also follows their philosophy, with its sparse furnishings, lack of clutter, and calming feel. It's just on a larger scale. There is no problem with that, especially since this site is mostly focused on apartments and NOT houses.

P2 - as always, your posts are perfect. Love them.

Whenever I read this site (which is every day and somewhat obsessively), I marvel at the joyful, creative, funny, generous people who post here. And not just Maxwell and the other AT folk – but the community as a whole. I am full of admiration for this inspiring, talented group of people, and I’d like to think that the Oprah episode was just a temporary psychotic break from the constructive and positive dialogue that takes place here.

Like others who have posted before me, I’m puzzled by the urge to begrudge Maxwell and his family a little bounty and grace in their lives when they have given so much of themselves to AT. Having access to a country house (or three) and a financial safety net is a wonderful gift, not a sign of hypocrisy. I wish the entire AT team unlimited success so that we can all continue to benefit from your passion and vision.

Patrick,

why is it that your post (coming from an AT worshiper) is the first on this thread to become hostile? interesting, it reminds me of the Oprah post - the first people to become hostile were AT fanatics like yourself.

perhaps the Oprah thread would have gone very differently if the AT Fanatics like you were not quite so obsessively defensive.

now, i breathlessly await your response.

Well,l on the show they used the sheet as well - SO, just do an internet search "Coin Pattern rubber flooring" or "coin pattern Garage flooring" etc. you'll find it.

i've been a loyal reader of this blog for about 8 months. i didn't read the oprah thread (I wish I could now!), but i wanted to throw in a comment regarding the issue of whether it's hypocritical for the GRs to promote small living when they have family property in the hamptons (or wherever).

there has been a trend in the past few years of which AT is only one example (think of domino magazine, for instance) where a certain interpretation of "NYC living" has set a new standard for interior design. As far as I can tell, this means smaller-scale living, yes, but also a mix of high and low cost decor, graphic/modern visual trends, attention to detail, original objects you can't find "just anywhere” and (more recently) greener living. I have embraced this trend myself.

But I know that NYC is worlds apart from the rest of the country (especially non-urban areas), and that the people who live here are usually *very* well-off, regardless of occupation (or how absurdly small their apartments are). this is the reality of post-1990s New York! i don’t like it either, but wouldn’t it make more sense for those of us who think it’s wrong to work at changing our political and economic system (which has become decidedly more “neoliberal” and aimed at helping the wealthy over the past 30 years) than to get all huffy on a design blog?

I Heart you Guys! Nix the haters! Keep doing what you do and congrats on meeting the big O.

I am glad to see all the positive comments above. I didn't catch all the Wild Wild stuff, but was a bit saddened that you had to explain yourself. I do understand your response.

I enjoy your website and the message that you convey. It really resonates with me as I try to start my own design business in the Philly area. I am inspired by Apartment Therapy and use it as a reference frequently.

Wish you all the best.

Jackie (of course I am speaking to the original one!) you have made my day.

OMG - I actually have a decor related question...

Re: the coin patterned flooring, I have read that it is easy to maintain, that it is washable, however, has anyone here actually used it? I'm wondering if dirt becomes stuck to the edges of the raised pattern.

Since I have a hairy cat and minute little things flying around my apartment (art materials and jewelry making residue) I can't help but imagine that the relief of the flooring would be easy to clean. Any thoughts on this?

stephen--

You think that was hostile? Wow.

But, um, even if so, not aimed at the people who make this forum possible, correct? See any distinction?

And btw, I was sooooo not a contributor to that Oprah thread trainwreck. I believe you were one of the lovely gents wearing the conductor's hats, if indeed the same stephen.

And quite honestly, that thread was soooo not full of, or driven into the gutter, by any regulars that I recognized.

Patrick,

apology accepted.

elizabeth in AL: Seriously, your comments exhibit much more intelligence and grace than many of ours have lately, probably including mine. It's nice to see someone young(er) have brains, talent, and grace. It means that all is well - somewhere. :)

stephen--

nice come back

and make sure to introduce yourself at the next AT function

:-D I don't know how to put a big toothy smile in a blog....but...makes me wanna say "let's be friends!" ha ha. and that is a compliment that is taken to heart and very much appreciated.

patty,

I'll be wearing my pink peacock outfit. i hope we don't match!

You know...I made a mistake chiming in that Oprah thread the other day. From now on, let's just not repond to these negative, out-to-get-you bloggers.
Their tree leaves may rustle, but there won't be anyone there to listen. Of course, they will try (as they did with this one) to hoard all threads with their bad vibes, but again, the rest of us will just bypass their comments and continue on with our own.

Maxwell & Sara Kate, Thank you for AT!

Design Dabbler, since you disagree so strongly with the AT philosophy, why do you read/post to the site? I'm not being snarky, I'm genuinely curious.

Stephen: I remember commenting on that post numerous times attempting to get you to stop your rant and I also posted then that non of the "in" crowd were involved (I'm not the "in" crowd) except perhaps one.

Today's thread opened well and I just wonder why we can't keep it that way? Why can't we simply keep this thing civil? You still seem to be the only person holding on to this anger.

Oh, and to be clear, the first person ever to become hostile on the O thread was Steve R, and then you. You, Stephen. Not an AT regular.

thx for the search tip Ralph, it just didn't occur to me to use "coin pattern" in my searches, the ole google spat back a number of returns i hadn't seen before! cartwheelfactory.com has a product called soft floor tiles that i'll look into since they have a variety of bright colour options - most companies only do "dingy"

jackie,

"Why can't we simply keep this thing civil? You still seem to be the only person holding on to this anger. "

that's exactly what i was asking patrick.

and hopefully you'll be able to read the oprah thread again to see who said what.

this thread was opened by maxwell RE: OPRAH THREAD. there will be plenty of design threads after this.

Jackie i don't think the ridges are that high/deep? we have an OLD cat and a toddler who both leave debris in their paths so i think this is the perfect product for our entry way, which is curretly a rather gnarly lino product from god knows when - i don't want the hassle of pulling it up but have toyed with the idea of painting it - which of course would mean tossing my family out for a few days - hmmm now that might not be a bad idea!

Design Dabbler:

Some people do decide to live in a small place because they prefer it. I'm much happier in my small, cozy apartment than I was growing up in a big, lonely house. I feel comforted by the manageable size of my apartment. I'm sure that there is more to the "psychological disorders" of your two teenagers than the cramped spaces in which they lived. The apartment I've occupied for the past 13 years was previously my landlord's. He lived in it with his parents, wife, and three sons. None of them suffered any "psychological disorders" either. If you object to the apartment lifestyle, perhaps your time would be better spent by browsing websites which cater to spacious housing.

To Everyone:

Please ignore him. Attention seems to be fueling his rants.

I missed the entire Oprah thread. That said, I am a regular reader of AT (NY,LA,Chicago and SF). Maxwell may have referred to a Hampton home but I missed that as well? This does tend to remind me of the time that Martha Stewart held a $500 a plate dinner at her home. It was later determined that the fried chicken came from the Colonel. There was quite a stink over that. Silly for the attendees to think that Dinner at Martha's would = Martha cooked dinner? You decide.

Stephen:

GZgoingMod aka Geraldine has a good idea, and I will begin practicing that now.

I'm sure all of the upper management represented by each commenter here would agree: all of this drama is killing productivity.

Moral of story: we love our drama, our Anna Nicoles, our bald Britneys; we become little Simon Cowells everytime we think we know better than someone else.

I'm a lurker on this blog, but it is one of my favorites. I live in the suburbs and long for the simplicity, the "smallness," and the style of a smaller footprint. "Regardless" of what anyone says, there's a reason we all keep clicking back over to AT: we love it.

M and SK, keep it up.

p2, what were you implying you would you do if stephen introduced himself at the next AT function? it all sounds very threatening.
i think it's time to re-examine who's actually angry here...
and figure out a way to quell these cat fights.

I also think people are freaking out based on the words "Hampton home" with overblown visions of Georgica Pond, Lizzie Grubman running down the locals and P.Diddy's Hummer.

There are relatively humble abodes out there in the Hamptons... would people be getting so hung up if they had a "family cabin in the Catskills"?

Neal:

Ok, maybe I'll look into this. I have a small kitchen area and my work area where I want to cover the carpet and this product might be a good idea.

I will look into this further. How would you go about painting it? I have an extensive knowledge of paint (prior artsy career). Is this rubber? I would be curious to see what type of primer would be necessary.

To Maxwell: Bravo.

It never ceases to amaze me how many people comment so negatively. If the philosophy/spelling/content of the site is so unbearable and wrong, why even bother looking at it?

I (dare I say) CHOSE to live small. I could have had a place twice the size of the one I live in, if I wanted a bland McCondo with all the charm of a styrofoam plate. Living small is not necessarily a negative thing, I'll take the 850 sq ft loft in the old candy factory facing the Bunker Hill Monument over the 3000sq foot McMansion facing the other 3000sq ft McMansion 12 feet away any ol' day.

everyone should just take a deep breath, exhale, and click back on over the design part of the blog and RELAX - or stay here and show support. no one needs to argue. especially about who it is that's arguing. that's just silly.

heatehr--

oh dear lord.

I just meant that things said here, under the cover of anonymity, tend to be different than what someone would have the balls to say face-to-face, and that comment was meant to serve as a reminder that there is indeed also an actual physical, real-time AT community here in NYC.

Neal: I just re-read your last comment. I can't believe I thought you meant you were going to paint the coin tile.....oy.....ok, back to normal now.

ENOUGH ALREADY!! really does it matter. He who is without fault has cast the first stone I guess. It amazes me how trifling people can be. The family has explained, he has parents who own it's like the Dallas compound all family members own it by default. Sucks to be the rest of us whose 'rents were not able to afford us that. He works and he publishes. So you know what people, move on. Get your own and stop spoiling this site for the rest of us. I am getting a lot of ideas here as well as enjoying the lovely "regular" (for want of a better word) homes not the high-brow stuff in printed mags. Can we just leave them alone now.
Maxwell, the explanation was totally unnecessary. You've shown the haters your throat.

I'm completely out of the loop as far as the Oprah drama is concerned, but I have to respond to Design Dabbler's statement that small is not beautiful. To me, living small is one of the most beautiful things that we can do in this era of tremendous waste and excess.

Small means that I am constantly surrounded by things that I truly love.

Small means that I am not forced to fill extra space with meaningless possessions that I must waste my life keeping clean/updated for the enjoyment of...no one.

for real mat

I have a "family home" on the Cape. Its roof is caving in, and the windows need to be replaced (yes, all of them), and it's settled so far (due to shoddy construction and lack of a proper foundation) that furniture shifts in the night. It is, in short, the very shittiest house on the Cape, but people do get all worked up when I mention it. The fact is that nothing my family owns belongs to me, but the cost of upkeep, repairs, and taxes somehow does.

I just have to say that rather than seeing anyone at AT as a hypocrite, the fact that you guys CHOOSE to live small says a lot more than if you HAD to. I think you are being true to your beliefs in deeper way than those who have no other choice. I love this site and its philosphy, and I think you're doing a great job. I didn't see the nasty thread, and I'm glad. Keep up the good work!

I am not one to comment except in the most dire of cases (microsuede being a dire case in my mind :)) but have been a dedicated reader for a little more than a year. I love this site, I have derived much pleasure and value out of it. I see no need for Maxwell to defend himself.

The oprah posts that I saw, and I think I saw most, were fairly civil. They did bring up questions about the use of rent controlled apartments by the non poor (though not wealthy) that seemed fair to someone who knows nothing about rent control.

Personally, I could care less as I don't live in NYC, and such questions hardly devalue the site in my eyes. But they weren't entirely unreasonable.

Both sides represented, it is the diplomat's daugher in me!

maxwell, you don't have to apologize or explain anything. i never felt you were misrepresenting your life or lifestyle. i certainly envy it, but i don't begrudge you it. (although i would it mucho if you guys could offer more budget design suggestions for us starving artists.)

i for one like small spaces. i find them beautiful. i live in a small space by choice, although i could afford more square footage. it keeps my life simple and my material/ecological footprint small, and that's more beautiful than any sofa.

i like this site. i'm sorry people who don't like this site continue to visit it and then get nasty when the site doesn't please them. if they post their addresses i will send them some pampers.

peace.

I'm sorry, coco, I missed that. Could you please post it again?

My comments on the Oprah thread and the comments i've made here, to me, are certainly not just "hating" or cat fighting etc. they are much more important than that to me. i wouldnt spend time commenting extensively if i was just causing trouble.

the issues that were raised on the oprah thread by me and ALL the others (both sides) are extremely important.

Obviously i use this site, visit it wuite often etc. I'm not "hating" on people. I and others raised several issues ont he oprah thread that were completely valid and appropriate, and were met with obstinance and idiocy instead of an open conversation, therefore leading to hostility (on both sides, agreed). the prime example of this can be seen on this thread, when someone raises a completely valid issue, albeit in the minority, and is met with moronic childness instead of genuine interest or response.

i never posted anything regarding this subject except where this WAS the subject (regardless of whoever else did) - that would be two threads - the Oprah thread, and now this one - both of which are/were the appropriate place to post my comments regarding that/this particular topic.

the hostility on these two threads, and other basic design related threads TRULY usually does begin with a few regular people who have something smart and sassy to say that doesnt really matter or have any real criticism or value.

On the one hand, living small is giving back to the Earth by not taking up more space than you really should. On the other hand, I really wish I had 3 houses in the Hamptons where girls could give me sponge baths.

My 2 cents. I found the Oprah-train wreck posts an interesting read. Would I want it every day? No.

When is that smallest apartment contest starting? That's why I came back to the site a couple of days ago.

Tony G.

umm, I fixed the "guinea" pig spelling.

p2, i completely understand but perhaps if we don't agree with someone we should just leave it at that. instead of "wtf"ing right off the bat and figuratively stomping our feet on the ground... it only adds fuel to the fire. "design dabbler" is allowed to his/her own opinion just as much as anyone else - even if we may disagree with it. as i read i, he/she wasn't personally attacking anyone

HA! Good one Oliver. I think this thread seems to have the beginnings of another train-wreck....can't we all just agree to disagree? by being negative we only invite more negativity in our lives.

FYI - a difference of opinion does not equate negativity.

You continue to be a class act, Maxwell. I hope one day to be able to call you a friend.
~Monica

Stephen,

Simply disagreeing with you (or Design Dabbler) doesn't make one a hostile poster. Perhaps you are being a bit oversensitive to imagined slights.

heather--

There is context and history to my response to him, so it was not "right off the bat."

And where were you yessterday, policing the civility of responses? We could have used your even keel then, for sure.

Lemon,

I'm mainly referring to the Oprah posts, however, as more than one person has already said on here, Patrick threw out what was percieved to be a hostile comment for no reason, unprovoked.

I think this was a very gracious reply. I also have to say that Maxwell has mentioned the Hampton home numerous times. If people missed it--well, that's not Maxwell's fault.

That said, I couldn't care less if Maxwell was filthy rich or if his parents are filthy rich. This site has been invaluable to me as I have renovated my own small space in NYC. I appreciate this site and the owner/community guidance very much. If that means I "drank the Kool-Aid," so be it.

Maxwell has said numerous times that the site is about carefully considered purchases, not about living the life of a monk and giving up all possessions. It is also true that there are people who choose to live in smaller spaces. If you offered me a 5,000 square foot McMansion, I might snap it up and sell it, but I wouldn't want to live there.

Patrick,

"And where were you yessterday, policing the civility of responses? We could have used your even keel then, for sure."

i think this is exactly what i/people are talking about... instead of stopping with your first sentence, you just had to throw in the little stupid jibe.

...and why has no one touched onthe fact that it was OPRAH for Pete's sake. She's not exactly known for her minimalist tendencies.

I started reading AT when I knew I would be moving into what I thought was a small place. Sure, it's a studio, by virtue of having no interior walls except for the bathroom, but it's 16' X 30' - a veritable expanse in comparison to the places I often see here.

I've got the book, and I plan to use it (stand back!) and I love the ideas I see and the links I find. Let those that think they know better go ahead and to their own blog.

Man, I can't believe that thread turned into a flame fest! If people have probs with Maxwell et all, then gtfo, noone is forcing you to visit the site.

GET WELL SOON MAX!

patrick, sorry i'm not on here all day, every day. just read this post this afternoon and found it curious that so much anger still remained from something that happened yesterday.
let's all take a deep breath and try to let go!

Stephen--

Wow, super-duper endurance. I loooooovvvee that in a man. Someone's been taking his blogger Cialis.

But, hmmm, when you (or someone you agree with) have(has) a negative opinion, it's all about the art of the debate, civil conversation, freedom of speech and important issues.

When I express anything *remotely* negative or annoyed, it's "stupid jibes".

Interesting standard.

Now, where exactly did calling me "patty" or using the word "stupid" in your response to me fall exactly... free speech or artful debate?

Stephen,
Sorry -- I misinterpreted your post. There must be some sort of rule that every public interweb forum must eventually devolve into chaotic fighting. Just the other day, my sister was viciously attacked and called all kinds of vulgar and crazy things on a message board for -- of all things -- children's figure skating. Something about anonymity combined with lack of tone...

Well, I did my AT detox for a while and then curiosity got the better of me. There has been an interesting response.

Some people, like me, in the Oprah Thread had less of an issue with the country house and more of an issue with the rent control aspect. To me it was a question of fundamental honesty. Hearing the claim of "holding on" to the small NYC apartment despite having other space was kind of like hearing someone brag about cheating on their taxes. It was also disheartening to see people bending over backwards to justify the site owners. Taking advantage of the system in this way just smells bad to me.

uhm...Stephen...I don't believe I necessarily said that a difference of opinion was negative - I believe I said "agree to disagree" which, and correct me if I'm wrong, is not dissuading or condemning the difference of opinion but harping on the subject all day long is argument simply for the sake of arguing, and that, my friend, is where it can be taken negatively. i did not specifically say anyone was being negative - it was just a meager attempt at trying to come to some sort of a resolution here. everyone is expending so much energy on such an unimportant issue - or it should be taken as such - as someone's material possesions. it seems (actually is obvious) that this world is now just a menial display of bought objects by which people measure themselves against eachother rather than companionship and compassion for the fellow man. this is where i leave this thread and everyone can continue arguing about having oposing beliefs.

bitter queen

Negative posting makes baby Jesus/Oprah cry. WWOD?

Heather (and Olivia, too),

If you missed much of the hostility, that's good. I checked in late last night, and was quite flummoxed and horrified to see the pictures posted (no matter how hard people try to justify them) and the address. Not to mention, the posts making fun of Ursula and her name.

Yeah, it wasn't pretty. There were some interesting points made in the thread, but not by the people throwing out stuff like that.

Stephen--

Ah, your debate skills are ever so sharp today!

patrick,

you're wearing me down. i cant keep up. gotta go put my face on.

The fact that you have the means to live bigger makes it even cooler to me that you guys live small. I don't think that having a weekend place deters from that. Heck, I rent a storage locker, does that make me untrue to my (relatively) small space? I watched (only your bit) of Oprah and I thought it was inspiring.

As for people who think it's unfair or "dangerous" to romanticise small living, that's ridiculous. Sure, many people live small because they have to - I know I do. But isn't that all the more reason to celebrate ways to make it beautiful?

Thank you for sharing your home. I didn't see the other thread, but you should not have to put up with that sort of stuff. If people don't like the site or it's philosophy, move on.

I'm sorry - I really was leaving - but are you really resulting to name calling?

Thoreau

-Bobby

Stephen--

Yeah, calling people "bitter queen" is really tiring, isn't it?

Someone just ip block that guy already >_

well this is it, you've got your wish, i'm outta here.

interestingly enough, i'm heading to my cottage upstate...

have a great weekend everyone. especially you patrick. you're cute when you're all red and mad.

Stephen:

"bitter queen" ?? I do not know P2, except for his regular witty posts on this site. And I do not know the Gillingham-Ryans personally. However, I feel compelled to say that whatever your feelings on the G-Rs, their financial and/or property ownership status, we have now learned enough about you to determine that you are irrational, exceptionally rude, bigoted, intolerant and tactless. And I would prefer a part-time small-apartment dweller, part time Hamptonite, all the time class act over that anyday.

er... make that "its philosophy..." sorry, typo.

You should see me when I'm BIG and RED.

just thought i'd check back and see what's happened. good-looks like it's turned in on itself and is burning out. phew!

Obviously if only you didn't have the audacity to have a well-off family (really, how dare you?? in fact, how dare you have any personal background/life at all??) then all the rest of us would have lower rent to pay.

The internet is such a bizarre place. Sorry you've been getting such negative feedback. I couldn't care less if you owned three neighborhoods and a hair salon in the Hamptons, it wouldn't make it any less fun/useful to visit this website (and I don't think it's any of my business to begin with).

Maybe this site is not the place for it, but the snarkiness, unease and tension surrounding the question of wealth and resources available to devotees and founders of AT alike signals to me a desire for a more complex and sustained discussion of class in this country (and beyond). In particular, the way consumption (and the choice to refrain from consuming) can mask people's true relation to production (i.e. their class position--do you sell your labor for a living? Do you own the means of production? Do your parents?). This is not deception on anyone's indiviudal part, but one of the main characteristics of psot-industrial capitalism. The betrayal possibly felt is just the rude awakening that consumption is ultimately an illusion of some sort.

I LOVE this site and have the book and am grateful everyday for it. I also appreciate the trickier, pricklier comments that push the premises of our exchanges. However, I did not read or see what sounds like super mean stuff posted on the oprah thread.

The other thing getting lost here is that even if they DO split their time between two homes (and even that does not seem accurate), the COMBINED square footage of the places they live in is STILL less than what most peopel consider "small".

I've been reading AT for forever, even though I never comment. I don't really have much to say about the debate here (except that maybe everyone's taking this all a bit too seriously), but I wanted to say that Design Dabbler/xyz's satire on AT in Open Thread 375 was totally hilarious. And so right on. I love AT, but I think we should be able to laugh at ourselves AND have a little debate now and then without getting so... angry. Here's the link to the thread for everyone who needs a laugh:
http://www.apartmenttherapy.com/ny/open-threads/open-thread-375-018252

Also, the Oprah thread is back up, for everyone who has no idea what everyone else is talking about:
http://www.apartmenttherapy.com/ny/news/at-is-on-oprah-now-018277

I love you guys.

Folks who criticize "hypocrisy" are inadvertently sending the message that people who CAN live large, SHOULD live large, or else be seen as fakers. I live in a small apartment but have the luxury of Prospect Park as an escape. Am I a hypocrite because I have the fortune and wealth to live in New York City and not Calcutta?

I admire keeping to a "small is good" ethos even more in those who aren't simply forced to by circumstance.

I didn't read the other Oprah thread, but really?!, it was about rent control and a family house in the Hamptons?
As the holder of a 400 sq ft rent-stabalized apartment in New York, and the mother of a five month old, who has very recently been looking into what else I could get, the options are not good.

Perhaps the people acusing M & SK of taking advantage of the system don't get the history of rent control, (it was created, not for the poor, but for the middle class), or perhaps they don't get the very large leap they would have to make to stay in the neighborhood they live in in the same amount of space!!! $2000/ month is a reasonable rent jump, just to maintain in a 275 sq ft,one bedroom, not stabalized, apartment. That's a jump of $24,000/year, and a two bedroom, even more.

This is a beautiful site, with a great community, and I have to say, M & SK's willingness to share their 9 month cure and Ursala, helped me and encouraged me as I struggled to come to terms with my small space and my baby.

While I don't like eveyone's tone, I admit I appreciate both side's POV.

I live small but with only one apartment and no escape hatch, I do feel like I have to face certain issues that people with a second (or third or fourth) home do not. These are the issues I struggle with most. I would LOVE to live light and leave 10% of my space empty. At the same time, I don't want to get rid of my wedding dress, or the dress I wore when I was 9 to my mother's funeral. I want to store Christmas decorations, more than one winter coat, my son's artwork. I've had to sell furniture that my parent's owned and that I loved and it broke my heart to do it. My husband's closet houses paintings his mother made but we don't have room to hang. I worry that my kid will never own a bike because I don't have room for it. But do I want to spend $200+ a month, month after month, for a storage place?
These are the issues I really have a hard time with.

I did somehow miss that the G-R's had the houses in the Springs. I could care less about the location but - oh - how I'd love the space! But that space does allow them to perhaps live more lightly in the city than they would otherwise. On the other hand, it's really no business of mine. This is their site and I've been helped by the community more than once.

Anyway, it's probably not worth getting all nuts about. I like to live lightly emotionally as well as physically. That is the real secret in my opinion.

It's too bad we're getting trolls here (like stephen), but I suppose it's to be expected as a part of the site (and community) going through it's growing pains.

I'm sure it'll work it's way out, and at least we have a little moderation to help! :)

M, S-K and O:

I agree with the posters late in this thread who are urging us all not to get too worked up, but there are two additional points I'd like to make:

1) You're running a business. I see no reason why you should be ashamed of it or present it as something self-sacrificial. As I said in my earlier post, what you're doing is useful (even if I don't agree with the overall philosophy). You're also making a living, and there's no reason to portray it in any other way. Several of the comments today have thanked you for running the site -- as if it were some sort of charity for the design-challenged. The site, the entire AT-package, is how you make your living. Embrace it. Otherwise, when you do become the next big thing, and independently wealthy, you'll have to produce for your disappointed fans excuses for your success.

The general atmosphere of "the G-Rs are above petty commercial success" that sometimes hovers over this site is what, I believe, a lot of people find off-putting.

2) Consider the tone that you want your site to have. Do you want one that encourages an open exchange of ideas and vigorous debate? What has struck me today is how close to the truth my parody (under the assumed name xyz) comes. It's a bit like parodying Dick Cheney or Bill O'Reilly. How can you do a better job than they do themselves? You've collected around you, I'm afraid, the beginnings of a cult. It must be hard, I realize, to reject all that adulation, but your long-term interests lie beyond the hard-core believers. There's no way you'll be able to expand the appeal of AT without broadening your base. You'll need to find a way to accommodate dissenters and doubters, along with true believers. If you look at the discussion today with an honest eye, you'll see how those who disagree have been branded "the haters" and how they are constantly being urged to go away. It's not in your interest to have that happen.

I agree that civility is important. But I am not in favor of blocking people. I wasn't in the case of Jonathan in the past, and I am not in the case of somebody like P2 now -- even though he greets my every post with comments that are distinctly uncivil (when he talked today, on another thread, of my "miserable disposition" I had the distinct impression he was not complimenting me). Let him stay, I urge you. Your daughter will need bibs for some time to come.

Wow, my cable cord was knocked out of place so my VCR didn't tape the Oprah show. Then I've been on insane deadlines so I hadn't checked the blog. I'm actually glad I missed the Wild Wild West of the Oprah thread.

I only started reading the blog last fall and totally picked up the fact that there was some kind of Hamptons space. The pics of the home also suggested it was humble.

I really appreciate the message, inspiration and community of AT. It's really helping me honor "homemaking" and creating a sanctuary for my husband, poodle and me.

What an exercise in futility. Don't you all realize how worthless it is trying to convince the other side you're right? I'm always amazed by how heated and excited people get, and for what? Nothing comes out of it, you go on feeling your way and the other feels the opposite. Just go on and do something productive.
As for the whole GR thing, isn't the only real valid question, is it illegal for them to live in their current small apartment or is it legal? I mean the rest is all opinion, you have your right to share it, and that's what makes it good and the GRs bank on you sharing it to make their site successful, but hasn't every angle been covered? Why do you keep repeating? Are you contributing anything anymore?

Oops didn't mean to post twice. That was weird.

I just want to clarify that although I have, in the past, posted on the topic of the genuineness of various statements in light of access to a second home, I did not post this past week - the "A" of the Oprah posts was someone else. IIRC, I last posted, in response to SKGR's invitation, about the kitchen installation (and how the uneven wall was fixed). Just so you regulars know . . .

I personally bear these people no ill will, and just want better transparency on the product recommendations.

A

I neither saw the Oprah show nor read the Oprah thread. But from context I'm getting a sense of what went on.

The idea that anyone should have to apologize for promoting small space living because he/she has another space to go to on weekends and holidays is so breathtakingly stupid as to be offensive.

Maxwell has NEVER hidden the fact that he has a weekend place. There have been numerous posts about things he's done there to make it gorgeous. The How To: post about painting your floors and not screwing it up is the one I remember.

And why SHOULD he have hidden it? Is his rare sensibility for making the most of a small space -- and his obvious commitment to green, responsible, beautiful living -- suddenly of less interest because we find out his family has some resources? For that matter, since when is frugality only for the resource-poor? I live in NYC and I know many people who are astoundingly, mind-bogglingly rich. Not all of them choose to live like Croesus.

In my eyes, this "debate" has betrayed very little about Maxwell that he hadn't already told his readers about himself. What it has mostly done is reveal many readers' astounding capacity to miss one of AT's most steadfast convictions: that riches in fact have very little to do with money.

lol Who cares what Oprah has to say... she has a budget plan, diets and things she advocate and promotes... did she fix her weight problem??? Does she need to be on a budget?

I love this site. I hate getting sucked into the internet because I start feelling guilty about everything I could do that needs doing....Dog walking, Laundry, re-upholstery projects, ext. However, I am addicted and check it at least once a day if not more. There is a wealth of information here that could be utilized by almost anyone regardless of social standing, or apartment size. I WANT TO WORK FOR MAXWELL!!!!! I THINK THIS SITE IS GENIUS. I could photograph interiors for the house tours. That is my dream job. A magazine is a great idea..... I could be an intern. Think about it.

I'm a "lurker" here too, I never post, I never even read the comments really. But I love the site, and even the snark (and arguing about arguing) have added another element of entertainment for me. Keep up the good work, all of you! I got a great giggle from the open thread 375 as well.

OH ERINOREA you beat me to asking for a job! noooooooo! :-)

I think the argument that it's maxwell's site so he can do whatever he wants is stupid. Yes, it's empirically true, but it misses that the point of the site (and particularly the commenting system) is the community it serves. Deleting discussions is not in the interest of the community, especially if you then go on to talk about them... at least let me SEE what you're responding to. Close a thread to new comments if it's gotten really acrimonious, but to just hide the whole thing, then have your say is really the wrong way to deal with a community that has reached a size that will necessarily include fans as well as polite dissenters and even outright trolls. That's just part of what AT has become and deleting entire threads is not respectful of the majority of the community.

I think there's too little acceptance of dissent amongst some ATers and too much "troll feeding". If a comment is seriously snarky to no purpose, just don't respond. If you respond, you invite turning the whole conversation into that.

On the topic of how people live vs. what philosophy they promote: If you're going to use yourself as an example in this context, I think it's important not to misrepresent how you live if you want your opinions to be respected. Maxwell has been open about his dwellings (not just now, the weekend place was mentioned before as others have pointed out). Whether or not he has the same challenges as someone else who lives in 250sq.ft. is beside the point. We all are individuals and are going to have different resources and different problems to address. In my opinion, the point of the AT community is to help one another live comfortably in the spaces we have, regardless of their size and our means.

I think it's a mistake to fetishize living in small spaces, whatever "small" means to you.
Living Small or Simple has its pros and cons just like any other choice we make about our lifestyles. Whether it's all you can afford, or you prefer it that way, it doesn't define your quality as a person any more than the brand of shoes you wear.

On the topic of the contradictions of the site: We all have to buy things occasionally, it's part of the way we live. AT isn't suggesting you buy every product they showcase or anything, so get over it. It's a resource to help you learn about useful/beautiful items. We also all have to get rid of things on occasion, this site is also about that. Life is full of contradictions; it doesn't mean they aren't compatible to be discussed in the same forum.

Also: I think that a properly threaded comment system would be both more useful and also helpful in reducing the effect of trolls. Please look into upgrading to some software that handles threading nicely.

Saying that it's "breathtakingly stupid" is as offensive as some of stephen's comments.

The "how to paint the floors" is mentioned again and again as the one example of the other homes. If there were more, I don't know about them. While I'm not saying he's hidden the fact but I don't think there have been "numerous posts". Show me the links

And is have 4 homes really "green living"?

There was also a post about the dining room chairs.

Your family owning and part-time renting 3 properties is substantially different from "owning 4 homes".

plenty of people choose to live small regardless of their bank accounts & family. i know more than a few men who live in a condo who are each worth several million a piece.

good for you! :)

Wowie-kazowie! I’ve been away so long and I tune in to see how the Oprah event went and look at this insanity! While I understand the debate at hand (fame brings drama, yo), it seems like people are putting the emphasis on the wrong syLLAble as my mother used to say.

Now, I used to work for Maxwell, and while we may not have agreed on everything (I loved to stir up the drama in threads- him not so much), this idea that he is somehow manipulating the public with his story is insane. Perhaps if Maxwell had more than the 5 minutes on OPRAH he could have mentioned his blog (about small spaces) his mission (to help people make the most of small spaces) and even his weekend getaway (to get the hell out of small spaces). Omitting these things maybe made Maxwell and family seem hypocritical as if he was bragging about how he lived when in reality he has choice and options. However, it seems clear to me that any of this information would have lessened OPRAH’s story idea, which was that her cutie pie “discovery” Nate is THE BEST and has TERRIFIC and UNIQUE ideas about small spaces. Saying that the G-R’s don’t spend every waking minute in their apartment isn’t a good sound bite for the segment. Mentioning that Maxwell has a blog, book and lifestyle suggests that cutie pie Nate didn’t create the idea first. Not being first goes against what OPRAH is about.

I’m not an Oprah hater- deal with it. But Oprah is all about being first and “discovering” things. (I promise you plenty were downloading The Secret long before Oprah started kvelling last week).

These thread debates were always my favorite part. Yes, a few bad apples can spoil the fun (from BOTH sides). There is nothing wrong with a few points of view especially on things as subjective as design, taste and lifestyle choices. That’s it. I’ve said my peace.

That was fun!

xoxo

Oh Maxwell & AT,

I don't know how you tolerate all the mean, psycho posters. I would've punched their lights out (i.e., deleted and banned them) for highjacking my blog as one or two people have done here. You don't have to explain anything. Let them get their own blog.

Best,
Jackie

Hey Maxwell!

Mostly a lurker here - a small space advocate in downtown Vancouver Canada - and until the Oprah show I didn't really know your personal living space situation, so it's not like it has a huge impact on your suitability as a design guru. I've got your book, enjoyed watching you on Mission Organization, and find the AT site a great repository for small space ideas.

After the Oprah show, though, I find the weekend getaway house reality just a little disappointing because it seems to conflict with the "350 square feet 365 days a year" image you presented on the show. Then again, I've worked in broadcast and newspapers and have yet to find a story told 100% right - essence can easily get lost in the telling and the production, and it's easy to let the wrong words slip out.

Regardless, great site, great book and you have a fan in Canada's West.

Allison--
Did you miss the part where that thread is back up in all its original glory?

Are they doing anything illegal? Because if not, this discussion should end. END. E-N-D. It's over, what more can you possibly say that is not just futile?

G-B: I seem to have missed a whole lot of nastiness. I have found your book a good motivator toward a simpler and more manageable home. Your site and your regular readers have been helpful to me several times. Your links have been a terrific resource, since there is a dearth of style where I reside. As a longtime reader, the cottage in Hampton ( I feel I'm missing some clues on the importance of Hampton) was not a surprise: I seem to remember it as a place for experiments in colors between renters. Your message seems clear: simplicity and beauty are one.

I didn't read the Oprah thread--and probably won't even if it's back up--nor did I see the show. In fact, I've never seen the Oprah show, which probably makes me part of a tiny minority in this country.

But I do know that I found AT at a time that I needed it. I don't really love "small," but I had to embrace tiny living about two years ago. My husband died suddenly--at a young age--and I knew that sooner or later I'd have to give up my 5-bedroom house in the northern suburbs of New York. The sooner/later turned out to be 9 months, and I decided to return to where I grew up--Manhattan. But all I could do was a 1-bedroom apartment, and to say I downsized is the understatement of all time. AT has been invaluable to me as a source of ideas to make my incredibly shrinking space livable. I check in every day, and I'm rewarded every day.

Maxwell: I owe you this url from the multi-site Xmas party. It's lokifurniture.com. The owner/artist is Jamie. He makes steel windowsills (for those of us with grotty, unredeemable sills) and many other things.

Neal: Please look at dalsouple.com. Fabulous colors for rubber flooring. Not local, but all you'll find here is the traditional "dingy" rubber flooring look.

Posted by Julianna at 02/23/07 5:38 PM

I read the Oprah thread and these posts here. I mostly agree with what Julianna said above (except I have a larger apartment). She has good points which I'm too tired to elaborate on.

I don't think anyone should get banned however.

As someone who did criticize you - and did see the validity in debate . I feel many comments could have been presented more graciuosly, as you are always gracious and encourage a civilized site. Thank you for the clarifications. I do feel they were imporant as so much of what makes this site wonderful is people going out on a limb and sharing how they really live. I am happy to find you are the G-R's I thought you were. Thank You, I will continue to be an avid and grateful supporter of this site.

Gee Maxwell, I don't think you need to make any excuses - you have created a great site and given so much to so many. Unfortunately you are now a public figure and therefore there is always a price to pay! I am sorry you were attacked - I didn't read it and even the knowledge of it doesn't mean a thing to me. I read your site everyday and I thank you for giving this to all of us

This thread has made me think more about the relationship between founder and readers. I have been following AT for several years and there's no doubt that Maxwell's voice and sensibility (design/philosophy) made AT a favorite place on line. As AT has expanded to other cities, other bloggers, lots of (too many?) contest entries, perhaps its harder to keep Maxwell's personal sensibility as prominent in the mix. So his presence is felt more in personal stuff? which invites people to make their focus more personal? A theory.
I am a fan in any case. AT is entertaining, thought-provoking, useful-ish. Thanks.

I feel completely vindicated by Maxwell's revelations. First, let me say, that it was good for Maxwell to be honest. I appreciate it. It would have been very easy for him to make up a story about how "poor" they are.

Now, this started for me when Maxwell stated in newspaper articles, several times, that they NEVER will give up their $750 rent-stabilized apartment, even when they move out. They will keep it as an office and a "laboratory" for their design business. That is illegal. A rent-stabilized apartment is by law to be a PRIMARY residence, not a pied-a-terre. The G-R's elegantly demonstrate how bad rent control is for NYC: the result is savvy people with resources hoarding apartments designed, by law for the poor (or middle class). Those apartments are removed from the market, and everyone else's rent goes up. And what really irks is that the NYTimes and Oprah and most of the people on this site have no problem with this kind of scamming. It is disturbing to me that someone with a wealthy family, and 3 (THREE!) homes in the Hamptons feels justified in keeping a rent-stab apartment illegally. And would brag about it! In the national media!

And for me, proof of their intention to keep the place is spending 20K on renovations. Even with their family money, that's alot to spend on an apartment you don't own. But they effectively DO own it, due to rent control. And this, ladies and gentlemen, is a major reason why a young person has such difficulty finding an apartment in NY.

But a new issue came up, that is even more puzzling. The Times, and Oprah, both portrayed the G-R's as living in this apartment exclusively. The tone was one of can-do optimism. The Times piece gushed "and baby, too!" Where did that idea come from? From the G-R's. They stated several times that they were raising their baby in this 265 sq. apartment. And on Oprah, Maxwell flat out said they spent every day of the year there. Now we know why they are so comfortable living in that space. Because they can get away whenever they want, to their three Hampton places. I cannot understand why Maxwell, or anyone else, would want people to think that they were raising a baby in a closet, when in fact they have far more resources. I believe they wanted to be congratulated for making do with little, when in fact, they have much. The whole thing is bull.

Now, I know I'm going to get attacked again, probably personally. Some people will think I'm mean. I don't care. I am not saying the G-R's are bad people. The G-R's may have good taste, and provide a service for people on this site. They could be the second coming of interior design. Peachy. But, people who brag about stockpiling cheap apartments illegally in NYC should be called on it. And there are poor people in NYC that are really and truly raising their children in closets. They could use a $750 a month apartment. It is an affront to have the G-R's pretending to share their predicament, so the G-R's can stay in the "right neighborhood."

(And just for the record, I do not want their apartment, and I am not a "hater". I just don't like what they are doing, not who they are as people.)

Dear Steve R.

I'm not one of your haters, nor part of the Maxwell "fan club" as I'm fairly new here and I don't comment, just read for the most part.

As was stated above indirectly, I found all the posts about this topic interesting and even relevant to the AT.com philosophy as a whole. You and the other made some good points. But you also over-reacted a bit.

I hope that since you've made your case clearly that we can all drop this for now. You don't agree with the GR's decisions. Some of these decisions have yet to be made (regardless of what they stated before, they aren't doing anything wrong yet: they might still move, and the baby is very small and really doesn't need all that room that you think is being withheld from her).

They weren't bragging. And they haven't "stockpiled" yet. It seems they will take into consideration the ethics of holding onto the apartment if/when they move. But if they want to continue to live there, it's legal for now, isn't it?

So please, give it a break. You and the others made your case. The points are all there and seem to have been discussed enough. More back and forth arguing over the same points previously presented isn't going to add anything constructive.

I thank you for your posts so far. But continuing from this point points towards some sort of obsession with online arguments where there is never a winner.

Forgive the mistakes/lack of clarity in my post, it's way late here and I've got a mean flu. But really, calm down. Walk away from AT.com for a while. :)

Some people who live in apartments in the city have the advantage of escaping to their parents' house some weekends to do laundry, breathe fresh air, and decompress. I was one of those lucky ones until I moved out of state from my parents, and I never took it for granted as long as I had it. I am sorry for people who don't have such a gift, but it does make life in one's apartment easier the rest of the time.

It sounds like Maxwell and family give alot in return for what they get. Give them a break, whydoncha?

I know I'm going to get savaged for this one, but I can't help it...

Next in the NYTimes: the G-R's show you how a family can eat nutritiously from handouts at soup kitchens. The G-R's (and baby, too!) go to soup kitchens exclusively, 365 days a year. (Except weekends, holidays, vacations, and whenever they need a break from soup kitchens). Although the food there can be limited, with a little spin (and an extra $1,000 a week)the G-R's manage to raise their child on the free food given out by churches and synagogues to the homeless. The G-R's can afford to eat elsewhere, but they haven't found a restaurant in a vibrant area that they like as much as the West Village Homeless Center. They show that it is possible to have beautiful, fulfilling dinners from homeless shelters!

The G-R's say they plan to continue to take food from soup kitchens forever, even though they can afford their own food. They say they like the quality of the free food better. "Even if we don't eat it, we're going to keep the food for our relatives when they come to visit, or experiment on recipes for our innovative food website!"

Lurker- you seem like a nice guy, sorry about your flu. But I can argue, cajole, and joke about this stuff, and have fun doing it. Really. I like this stuff.

I'm sorry if you don't want to read it again. This was my only post on this thread. If you don't want to read it, don't.

Please, give other posters a break. If the G-R's aren't hurting anyone, then I'm certainly not. Let people speak if they like, don't discourage debate, even if it is messy and repetitive.

And Chickie, what does Maxwell and his family give alot of? And what are they not getting in return?

Man, I swore I wouldn't contribute to this train wreck, because do I need this kind of drama in my life? No. Is it going to matter in the big scheme of things a year or more from now? Nope. But, I'd like to say that I really enjoy coming to this website and looking at all the links and photos of what people are doing with their living spaces, whether they have larger budgets or smaller. The only negative feeling I have towards this blog is jealousy that I don't live in NYC and therefore probably miss out on a bazillion cool finds from street corners to thrift stores to seriously discounted sample sales. I am also very jealous of the thriving Craigslist resource you guys have--where I live, it's pretty much non-existent. To that end, I'd also like to say thanks to Maxwell and Sara-Kate for running the site not because I think of it as a "charity service" but because they've used their design education and knowledge and whatever to put together a great resource for fun, cool small space design. Woo hoo!

I grew up in a house with five other people (three daughters, one son; who wants to fight over that bathroom in the morning?) in around 1000 square feet. Add one German Shepherd, a cat, and a budgie, and it was sometimes squishy. I had to share rooms with my siblings. However, we did not end up with (too many) psychological problems due to lack of space. I think it made us more aware of what was important in our lives and of making do with less space, which means that as an adult I much prefer my 500-ish sq. foot apartment in an 80-year-old house than moving to a larger/newer home. And believe me, I am a rarity here in red-neck Edmonton, Alberta, where a lot of people make their living from big oil and have the houses and the pick-ups to show for it. Three hours to the south in Calgary, you encounter acres and acres and acres of new housing that used to be farmland, before you even really get to the city. These are all huge single-family dwellings that require buckets of money for services and amenities in order to fulfill a traditional lifestyle fantasy that is ultimately wasteful and most likely unsustainable. I suppose this means I also appreciate AT as a resource/community to know I'm not alone in my desire for smaller, sustainable living. Ultimately, I use AT in a way that supports my CHOICE to maintain small living, and really, whether someone's got a shared family home for a week-end getaway or a bachelor pad on Mars makes no difference to me. Although I suppose the design would be different.

Before I hop down off my soapbox, may I also add that in future, a new trend should be started: similar to the custom of people yelling "Hitler!" to say "knock it off" in a threaded post when trolls or similarly argumentative-for-argument's sake people hijack a thread, that we yell "Oprah!" instead. It would have the same effect, and might provide a laugh instead.

And for God's sake NO I am not comparing H to O (no pun intended) so let go of my windpipe already.

Peace to all, get well soon Maxwell, and sweet dreams to those off to bed.

Bonne nuit!

OPRAH!



Mlle Kate

Steve R, you make me laugh. At this point you confirm that you're quite a bit like my fiance who has no problem being an argumentative ass online and just looooves these back-and-forth arguments. I've nothing else to add except I hope you get bored eventually and that others don't feed the trolls. Good night. :)

Steve R.,

hysterical!

This is my first time posting but I've been a voyeur at this site for the past year or so, every since I purchased my condo. I come here for inspiration and creative ideas, which I'm simply so impressed by.
Your site is such a gift to those of us that enjoy interior design and want to turn our apartment into a home, instead of simply a few walls with space.
I did read a few of the posts regarding the Oprah show but I stopped when i saw the negative turn it was taking. I simply didn't want any part in it.
Maxwell and Sara Kate, you given us so much you do not need to open up your life to us in this manner to absolve yourselves of anything. What grace you've exhibited in light of it.
I love what you do and truly feel sorry for those who felt the need to attack.

I'm fairly new to AT, and really don't care where the G-R's live, or if they have a weekend getaway, or if they are making a lot of money. I come here solely for decorating ideas.

If people feel negatively about the G-R's then they should take it up outside of AT, by writing a personal letter to the G-R's, or if they feel that something illegal is being done, take it up with the powers that be who govern, and presumably monitor, the housing regulations.

I'm relatively certain that at one time the G-R's had to meet criteria to rent the apartment. If their situation changed for the better, and they later became successful, that is their good fortune and I wouldn't expect them to leave if they like it there.

How many of you who spoke negatively would have done differently and moved once they attained success, if they really liked the place and were able to stay there at a low rent?

I also think it was unkind of the people who made reference to the G-R's being "unphotogenic" on Oprah. Go look in a mirror, or look at photographs of yourselves and unless you are a Venus or Adonis, have the courtesy to keep that kind of opinion to yourself, as it certainly doesn't befit a decorating website.

From what I see the negative commentaries made on this site are becoming commonplace. Let's keep the criticism constructive and germane to the purpose of the site.

The general population is akin to the human body. Two percent is allocated to the anus. Lately we have been hearing way too much from the two-percenters........

Dear Enough-

What's kind of sad about people like you and Tammy is that you seem unable to handle any kind of criticism, constructive or otherwise, when it is directed at someone you like. Tammy can't even read it. I imagine she had to shield her eyes from the intense negative vibe. Then you guys freak out, with comments about negativity, and accusing people of attacking, and anuses, for God's sake. No matter how hard I try to keep this discussion about issues related to apartment living in New York, some posters just want to shut people up if they don't like what they have to say.

This is a useful discussion. We know understand that you don't mind wealthy people hanging on to subsidized apartments illegally. You think they deserve to hold onto that place forever, in violation of NYC laws, because you like their decorating ideas. I find that revelation constructive and germane to this site.

You know, the human brain is only 10 percent of the human body. I imagine you've heard enough from the ten percenters as well.

I enjoy AT so much. My butler introduced me to the site. It is such fun to see how ordinary people live. Well done!

Steve R-
It's not that I can't handle any kind of criticism, but that I feel that your comments belong in a different venue. I value constructive criticism, and this is a decorating and design website and comments should be germane to that subject. Your comments here are not addressing the issues that bother you to anyone who can do anything about them, so if you truly feel that you and others are being wronged, then take the issue to the source of the problem (the G-R's personally and privately, or the NYC housing authorities)and let the rest of us read what we came here for.

Hey Steve R., maybe we'd understand more of your point (and obsession with this topic) if you told us:

Your annual income
Location of current home
Condo? Coop?
Rent or own?
Age
Profession
Investments and savings
Married, and if so do you file separately
Living history, including how long at each location
Shoe size (that one's just for me)

and while you're at it, post any pics of yourself at parties and social events, and post pics of your apartment(s)

p2-
Steve R. is 54 and lives in a closet at his mom and dad's in Hoboken....

Long time lurker here. We should remember that a blog is a business. Though AT touches on domestic issues of home and private concerns, the blog itself is a public domain and is in the end a significant economic factor that supports commercial enterprise, like Oprah. AT's appearance on Oprah has created all this fuss specifically because this business aspect of the blog is usually repressed, obscured by simple and non-political/-business talk concerned about home, how small is the new black, how small is cool, etc. This is not to say there isn't any truth to all of this or that it's hypocrisy. Oprah has done a lot of good with all her money & has worked hard to be economically responsible & I'm sure the GR's are trying very hard as well (like Bono & the Gates). That said, we cannot ignore the consumerist/economic element of AT. BTW, I know (via friends) some of the people in the Hamptons photos. Gaby D. (who posted the photos) is quite a big wig in internet circles as the director of Gawker Media (the internet publisher of Wonkette & other big blogs). A very interesting person (originally a British lawyer), Gaby personifies this contradiction of money/responsibility. She has worked very hard for nonprof organizations & yet fought like hell against People Magazine to get Hello Magazine's picture of Brad & Angela's baby on the cover even though People had exclusive rights. Other people I recognized at the party are big time British hedge fund investors.

I posted this on Sara Kate's post but I think it belongs here:


My head is swirling...
Just spent over an hour reading this and the other posts in response to the original Oprah thread. You all amaze me with the abundant energy and commitment you put towards figuring out the G-R’s, their present and future living plans, their financial status and their profit margins. Yes, they have a site. Yes, Maxwell wrote a book. I think it's lovely that they are willing to share some of their own decorating and their own theories in practice by giving us glimpses of their home. But to make a gazillion angry, bitter assumptions? It's like criticizing the way a farmer manages its crops while sitting down to a feast of farm-raised delicacies! You come here, you use this site and the book as a resource, great...that is what it's there for (thank you Maxwell). All that invasive crap about the G-R's and their lives? Who cares? Why does how they choose to use their money have any effect on you? The recent post Maxwell made regarding the O thread was well thought out and honest, but we don’t need to know any of that stuff he disclosed. I don’t care where they live, how they pay for it or what sponsors may or may not be involved – and I don’t think any of you should either. We just want to hear about sliding felt doors, polyurethane floors and closet organization. Seeing a picture of the adorable Miss Ursula is a bonus that we are privy enough to get here and there.
Thank you, Maxwell for giving us this wonderful public forum and this amazing resource. Thank you, Sara Kate for all of your contributions as well (as a cook I love the cross referencing), and collectively to the both of you for opening up your lives and your family for the good of strangers and home decorators across the globe. Inevitably, you are making yourselves vulnerable to the bitter, angry people that exist out there, but I certainly hope it will not deter you from continuing your mission, your generous donations and your kind, honest approach to improving our all of our homes and making us decorating gurus!
-Serra-
(winner in the Green Thumb Contest, Pet Décor Contest …and a daily reader of AT)

oy...

Last word. There did I get it? Do I win now?

Patrick-

Nice try. I don't think you have any problem understanding my point, and all the personal info in the world wouldn't help you if you didn't. My points and concerns are valid whether I am a rich man or a poor man. This question of yours is also revealing. I believe that many of these posters refuse to criticize the G-R's behavior because they are enamored of their taste. Since they appreciate the web site, all criticism is invalid. Patrick, I think you fit that mold. That's why my income, and living arrangements, mean something to you, rather than the points I am making.

So, to help you, I will tell you something about myself. I don't commit housing fraud. I don't illegally hold onto apartments meant for the poor and middle class as if they were my little fiefdoms, keeping them as offices and "laboratories". And I certainly do not pretend to raise a kid in a 265 sq.foot apartment when in reality I have three Hamptons houses in (as Maxwell so hilariously puts is) "a very special place".

del- thanks for the info. I don't think anyone here would be surprised that the G-R's are hanging with the ultra-wealthy in the Hamptons. Well, maybe the people who take the G-R's at their word would be surprised.

FWIW, I personally know someone who practically lives alone on a whole city block of green space in a very densely-populated city of 10 million souls 12 timezones away from NYC, and he's crazy about AT.

Tho it seems quite a few people here live in a space the size of their computer screen.

I read that thread but didn't comment on it. There is just not enough time to read through all the bickering.

This site is a great resource and I'm sure the Gillinghams are great people.

But what they are doing with keeping the place if it is not their primary residence is illegal in NYC. Sorry.
I also had no idea that they have summer homes! NO wonder they dont mind a small place. Yes, I live in a shoebox-ONE SHOEBOX.

How is this any different than politicians and policy makers who try to legislate how people live and should live while they themselves don't live how they want others to live.

I just got into to this site late last year and would say this is definitely for the well-to-do demo. Still a great site though.

Steve R-
Have you nothing better to do than to sit welded to your computer soapbox and extoll hourly the injustices to the less affluent? I can imagine you sitting there right now, just waiting for another comment to pounce upon! What are you trying to accomplish? Are you trying to get everyone to agree with you and will you not give up until they do? It is not likely to happen. If you really wish to make a change to the plight of the disadvantaged then do as Enough is Enough stated and talk to your housing authorities to find out what they are doing (or not) to keep things kosher. We AT readers have heard you and now we'd like to get back to reading about decorating our apartments, tiny and expensive though they may be. If you feel as you do about the GRs, then I propose that you and those who agree with you boycott the site. That way, you won't upset yourself and the snarky comments can finally cease.

Stephen R (et al)

you do have some valid points..but now that you've made them and everyone else (including the G-Rs) have made theirs..what now? What is your "end game"?


btw: you know you're just helping to increase the hits on the website..right? lol

Steve R.,

You have made your point - the SAME point - dozens and dozens of times, over and over and over and over again, ad nauseum. Stop trying to hit everyone over the head with your mighty hammer. WE GET IT. You are just a needle stuck in a groove at this point.

I couldn't agree with ScottB's post more. It is exactly what I would have written myself.

Thank you for all you do- Everyday I look forward to seeing what you will post on this site- so please keep up the good work!

Even though I am enjoying this immensely, it's true, it does get old. But I will just say this. When I made this point on the previous thread, many people wrote in to attack me, saying that the G-R's didn't really own property in the Hamptons, or that they were really poor, or maybe they own property but they stay in their apartment, ANYTHING to avoid the conclusion that the G-R's were not on the up-and-up.

So, a couple of people agreed with me, the AT community (whatever the hell that is) abused us and called us bad names, all the while crowing about how much class the G-R's had. Finally, the arguing got so heated that Maxwell chose to reveal a little more about themselves and guess what? It's even worse than we critics imagined. They are not there "365 days out of the year", as they proudly told their Oprah audience. They choose between three freaking Hamptons houses in a "very special place", which are earning rental income and a wealthy family footing their bill to boot.

So you know what? I'm not sorry at all for being a stuck needle. Maybe the next time you all read some NYTimes article that seems a little fishy you'll ask some questions instead of swallowing the kool aid.

Maybe when their child gets bigger they will "move out" of the apartment. Maybe they will realize that they are not entitled to the apartment as a "laboratory" because they don't own it, and they will announce on their website that the apartment is up for grabs, and give the landlord's number so that interested parties can try to rent it. Maybe some poor grad student or artist will be able to move in, and really use it as a primary residence as the law intended. Somehow, I doubt this will happen.

We now have a perfect example of the injustice of rent control. It has been very difficult to find people who admit taking part in the real estate shenanigans in this city. Finally, the G-R's are brave enough to say in the pages of the Times, here we are, and here is what we are doing. We are keeping this apartment, forever.

The next time the rent control laws come up for renewal, maybe people will think about the G-R's and all the others who play this game, and do something that will really improve the city. End rent control.

Steve R., I'm in the minority of people who appreciates hearing your perspective. I don't think you've said anything that is gratuitously mean or insulting. I initially thought this was much ado about nothing, but your thoughtful posts made me realize that there is something disturbing about Maxwell openly discussing violating housing laws when so many people in NYC can't afford an apartment.

I've been an occasional poster, but primarily a lurker both here and at the Chicago site. They're nice sites -- hardly the second coming (nor do I think they try to be), but I try to check in once a week for a useful tip or two.

I also did read the Oprah thread, I've waded my way through all the comments here and I find myself sympathetic to Stephen and Steve R's positions -- it's rare for someone to criticize AT or the G-Rs without getting attacked themselves. I didn't read either of their initial posts as hostile. Design Dabbler, IMO, was and is pretty civil and even though I disagree with him (living small sometimes is a conscious choice) I appreciate his contributions: they're a breath of fresh air around here.

Yes, Steve R has repeated his comments ad naseum. But so far as I can tell, no one has ever really addressed Steve R's very valid observation that Maxwell's stated intention to hold on to the apartment after they leave it as their primary residence is completely illegal -- not even Maxwell. (I'd be happy to be corrected on this point.)

Still, based on my (admittedly limited) understanding of NYC housing law, no laws are currently being broken and the GRs are to be commended for making their primary small space work so beautifully. I don't care that much if they have an escape hatch -- day-to-day living seems to be done in that tiny place and frankly if I tried living in a space that small with my partner, one or both of us would be dead in six months -- even if there was a second home. So kudos to you both for making it work!

I will determine my opinion of you, Maxwell, after a thorough audit of all your financial documents. Please forward any necessary account numbers and PINs my way.

Keep up the great work. The site is a great read and has become a part of my daily routine.

Steve R., as a low income artist residing in a rent stabilized tenement in Greenwich Village, I have a problem with what you said here "The next time the rent control laws come up for renewal, maybe people will think about the G-R's and all the others who play this game, and do something that will really improve the city. End rent control."

Why do you want to rid the city of affordable housing for those that need it and help give it some of its character? Your solution would create an island populated by a homogeneous upper class. Is that what you really want?

I think the posting by 'del' makes an important part.

'del' mentions that the Hamptons photos show some serious players in the New York media scene, as well as "big time hedge fund manaagers."

The AT blog also featured a series of other photos of the Gillingham-Ryans visiting friends in the Berkshires. Their friends there own an ENTIRE SHAKER VILLAGE. Can you even begin to imagine what that costs? I happen to know these people from my college years (just as 'del' happens to know the Gawker founder and others). We're talking about serious, old money people here--and what seems to be an impressive network of them.

I agree with Steve that rent control was not invented for such people (though I disagree that rent control should be abolished). I don't want to drift off into "guilt by association" territory, but I do agree that AT's (hidden) social connections seem to be somewhat at odds with the blog's message.

But then, many people thought Thoreau was a hypocrite, since he slept at Emerson's mansion when the weather got bad.

This seems like a dopey place to put your NYC rental market rage. The millionaires or suburban dwellers, fine - THEY *should* give up their city regulated apts, and we can all light a candle that those apts will remain regulated.

If *IN THE FUTURE*, Maxwell moves out of his apt and keeps it for an office/pied a terre/place for the kid to live in 20 years, his landlord can get rid of him. If she doesn't, I suppose she has her own reasons for that.

Haven't you seen all the press about landlords using investigators to build cases against people illegally holding apts? I'd personally like to see more about slapdash conversions that bring places to ridiculous "market" rates, and the long history of rents charged that were way above what the regulations allow. My friends who remain in the East Village always have the landlord checking up on them - these are people living legally, no subletters/no roomates. They just happen to have reasonably priced apts, while their neighbors are gouged every month.
And that's not the fault of the G-Rs. I'm talking to you, SteveR.

On another note, I don't understand anyone feeling *tricked* -- where did they claim to live a monastic life, or write about being disadvantaged? If you look around you, it's pretty obvious that they are not.

I'm hardly ever here but I used to be, a lot. I saw the Hamptons house post. I guess that's because I was painting my floor.... No 2nd house through the family for me, but no sour grapes either.
I'm here for the useful info, and to look at pretty pictures that might give me good ideas or a little hit of aesthetic pleasure. AT is great for that, no green tea KoolAid required.

del/M

Were there any *starving artist* types in those party pics? Or could you not recognize them?

Are you implying that people (the G-Rs, you, me, everyone) should choose their social circles and leisure activities based on their incomes, occupations, realestate holdings and parental/familial background?

Does that mean I have to stop going on vacation with my friend the legal-aid lawyer who earns half of what I do?

Does that mean I can't go to the beach/dinner with a friend who got a $1M wall-street bonus?

That I shouldn't have gone out for a beer with the guy who cleans the office bldg I work at when I saw him on the street the other day?

Mmm...no thanks. I choose not to live a lonely life developing friendships with people who are *exactly* like myself. That is a lonely way to live...

And other than getting a great dinner from my wall-street friend, their bonus isn't impacting my tax bracket or my mortgage payments. Nor did it ever occur to me to expect this type of generosity from my friend. Why would the G-Rs ask for $ from their hedge-fund manager friends????

The implied line of reasoning is...strange to me. Very strange.

Steve R -

thanks for not giving it up. i held on as long as i could.

now i can say i'm officially done with this site. why? because there are MANY sites like this that offer design advice and practical solutions where everything is above board. sure i'll come back every now and then when i need an idea on something super expensive i need to buy to fill my small space with (while purging something else of course), but i wont be using the site as a regular resource. it's just not worth it.

thanks again. and people - there's nothing wrong with using your mind ot think on your own instead of following someone blindly because the colors are pretty.

enjoy!

Yaaaay! Adios!

Virginia,

What's to address? Maxwell and SK said they'd take this into consideration into the other thread on this, and unless someone decides to boycott the site (as I fervently pray Steve R decides to, because he's incredibly repetitive) or call the authorities if we hear they are no longer living primarily in the apartment (as they currently appear to be), then I'm not really sure how people are supposed to address this. Is there going to be a mob with flaming torches march on the West Village? Because right now, that seems like the only thing that would make some people (Stephen, Steve R, and Design Dabbler) happy.

Forgive an outsider for saying this, but the little Oprah kerfuffle is just so darn American. Only in your absurd new age/self-help culture could a bunch of smug, wealthy, self-involved know-it-alls get bent out of shape over some guy’s design philosophy.

The greatest irony in this little spat is that the site’s founder and the maroons complaining about him are flip sides of the same coin. Yup, Maxwell comes across just as smug as most of the self-help gurus you people all seem to love. And he says some silly things that imply small-space living is morally superior – which his followers lap up.

But that’s Americans for you: attaching a quasi-religious value to everything they do. I blame the Puritan influence.

That said, Maxwell’s site is a brilliant idea, well-executed. Now, I don’t agree with everything he thinks, or like all the designs presented. And, like most educated people, I find that psycho-babble Americans love a little irritating. But I don’t read to have my own beliefs reinforced. I’m interested in hearing what other people think.

Incidentally, middle-class people sitting around their broadband-connected computers contemplating the best shade of white while earnestly griping that the man who runs this site is robbing “the poor” of a micro-suite in a trendy neighbourhood is just laughable.

What is it with you Americans that you have to designate everything a moral issue and then claim you hold the high ground? And then launch personal attacks on the people you disagree with?

Maybe you should just issue a fatwa on Maxwell and get it over with.

Say, I have a better idea. Maybe the moral avengers could do the rest of the world a favour and take a little of that self-righteous indignation and apply it to the hypocrisy and incompetence of your politicians? How about investigating them? Unlike Maxwell, they are obligated to explain themselves and their finances to you.

Cassandra, your post cracked me up and was spot on. Gold star for you...will you be my guru?

has this thread broken some kind of record? it sounds like a broken record to me.

i discovered this site less than a year ago. not because somebody told me about it but because i was doing research on stuff for my new place. i found this site and visit it every day i'm on the computer. i've found out about warehouse sales, cool chachkis (yes, the spelling is correct, i've never spelled this in my life but when i checked myself on it, like somebody else would have, i found it to be correct :), and probably the coolest thing of all, being able to peek into other people's spaces to see what they've done with them.

i can't stand oprah but when i heard she was doing a thing on small spaces and AT was going to be on, it was only natural to check it out. they didn't even mention AT. what a bummer, big surprise, there is nothing small about oprah whether it be guesthouses, salaries, surprises, charities, celebrities, fashion and apparently, HEADACHES. first Tom Cruise, now AT (not comparing the two mind you).

but this is not the point. the point is, i have never come across any signs of moral superiority, or idealistic flag waving by AT since I started visiting the site. but as soon as i checked the site out to see what people had to say about the show i realized that there are plenty of self-righteous, judgemental soap-boxers who are miffed that they don't have their own site.

but does anyone have any examples of this idealistic, superior attitude portrayed by AT? is there some kind of manifesto? please don't include anything from the founders personal life because that doesn't have anything to do with it. maybe it's somewhere in the house tours? or in the kitchen section? maybe in the los angeles section? somebody please enlighten me in the form of specific examples.

Steve R.,

As someone who's worked with abused women and low income families for the last 11 years, may I say that you have a ***LOT*** of nerve describing yourself as "abused" by the members of AT. It's unimaginable that you really believe that.

So you have an opinion. You've shared it. It's clear that the majority of the participants don't agree with you, and/or just plain aren't interested in the way you are trying to school them. Your choices now are clear: take concrete action yourself, or just move on and give up trying to learn us all something.

Um, maybe it's only me, but I assumed that professional "bloggers" and "design consultants" living in "the Village" who can afford $20,000 of bamboo cabinetry which was harvested by blind monks wearing pashmina-lined gloves HAD to come from money. Why is this a shock to anyone? It still doesn't take away from the raison d'etre of the site.

SteveR--

There was, believe it or not, an actual method to my madness in asking you to give us some background, since SOMETHING in your background *has* to account for the HIGHLY personal indignation you are suffering, St. Sebastian-like, from the issue you raise (and reraise, and reraise...)

I also think if you said you were, for example, a pro bono lawyer championing the rights of the city's housing challenged, you *might* even give yourself some much-needed street cred with many of the people you've alienatd here.

And for all your bellowing, you *really* don't seem interested in proving your point, by perhaps taking a new angle or acknowledging the possible good points of your arguer-tormentors.

And why do you fail to acknowledge that if that apartment went back on the market TOMORROW, the rental rate would no longer be controlled (the amount of improvements made gives the landlord carte blanche to jump the rent). So perhaps hate the game, not the player.

And can we use something other than Kool-Aid in that beaten-to-death analogy? Perhaps "drinking the Cosmos"? MUCH more festive.

But the horse is dead. The ship, already a dot on the horizon. And your angry dog still won't hunt.

cassandra--
Love many of the points you make.

But not so much the "you Americans" part.

I only made it about halfway through before I gave up. I know it feels so good to have the last word but please, can we get back to talking about beautiful, small homes again?

Thanks,
A Lurker

I got to Apartment Therapy late in the game so I didn't know that the "G-Rs" (as their critics like to call them) were any more than contributors to the site. This never felt too commercial to me. Also, I didn't see Oprah and also I wasn't aware the G-Rs other places in the Hamptons to escape to if need be. Also I don't care. That's not the point.

Monitoring how closely the "G-R"s personal lives align with their design philosphy is something for people with a lot of free time on their hands to do, not somebody for people like me who have to work for a living. Or its for people who have some sort of personal axe to grind in public. Wasn't it St. Paul who said "O miserable man that I am, the things I preach I do not do, and the things I condemn I practice?" Paul wasn't perfect but somehow, he built up the entire Western church form a few scattered groups to a huge network of interconnected congregations. Good thing he didn't have People magazine or Fox News (or Stephen) sneaking around in his shadow everyday looking for some dirt to embarrass him and discredit his message. No, whether we're an envoy from God or just a plain old decorator with a few good ideas, we could probably all do better and one of the first things we can do is give other people a little slack about how they live their life.

Now I'm not part of the GR fan club, and their look seems a little first-apartment-after- college to me, despite the cool (but pricey) stuff they have, but broken-record-Stephen-Steve R-whoever (I can't decide if its several people or just one splitting himself into "different" posters so he can more easily pat himself on the back for his "honesty" and "determination") needs to get a life. If he wants to start up his own blog about how hypocritical the G-Rs are and how like mindless sheep the rest of us are, fine, then he should do that and see how many hits he gets in a day and let the rest of us spend our time getting what we come here for, not his petulat little diatribes.

I come here for decorating ideas not moral & ethical guidance, and if that's what Stepehen is looking for then he would probably do better to look for it somewhere else, like the high end of the AM band, where whiny talk-radio callers like him are a dime a dozen. One thing for sure, I wouldn't look to him for any kind of guidance at all.

Meanwhile does anybody have any good storage ideas?

P.S. Stephen, while we wait breathlessly for your new ant-G-R website, please knock off your "Kill rent control rant" willya? Rent control is the only thing that let my grandmother live in Manhattan at all. I would no more get rid of that because a few people may (MAY!) be pushing the envelope a little than I would get rid of Public Aid because a FEW recipents cheat. Talk about throwing the baby out with the bathwater!

Carry on, "G-Rs"! This is a great site.

LORD Cassandra, you're a tad up yourself, no?

Is it just me...or did anyone else start to think there might be one or two posters sporting their OCD?

Stephen -
You are "officially done with this site"? Bravo! Don't let the door bang you in the ass on the way out! Oh, and by the way, take Steve R. with you....please?

Yay Cassandra - spot on. We Americans ARE a bunch of self-righteous little prigs who go into septic shock anyone deigns to criticize us. Thank god for those Canadians, or all of North America would be filled with bloody ponces.

As for Steve R, while I understand and appreciate his point about the illegality and immorality of keeping a rent regualted unit as an office/pied a terre when its not one's primary residence, its (a) pretty much a horse in the morgue at this point, and (b) speculative as they are currently still living there. (Weekending every weekend in one of three familly homes in the Hamptons, while making them affluent chippies slumming downtown, doesn't make the Hamptons their primary residence - it makes it their vacation homes. There's a difference.)

Also, its pretty obvious that Steve R is a frustrated libertarian who ideologically hates all govt. regulation. Its probably 90% why he's making this issue his personal hobbyhorse of the week.

Don't get me started on Design Diggler, Esq. (AKA Look at me Ma, I'm a Lawyer) and his Bigger Is Better mantra - he probably owns a Hummer and is compensating for something.

And P2, could you affect the stereotype of the bitchy queen any more enthusiastically? If you turn it down a notch or two, girlfriend, you might gain some allies in your cause.

Oh, and eyes wide open - you hit the nail on the mile wide head. West Village? $20,000 of kitchen/bath remodels in a RENTAL!?!? A weekend place in the Hamptons? Professional blogging? About the only people who COULD afford that lifestyle are people from money, rent controlled unit or no rent controlled unit. You'd think maybe Maxwell's whole series on the remodel woud have given folks a clue: "We're spending $20k on this and are going to move out in a year when the kid gets bigger, but what the hell, you only live once..."

I think I need a gin & tonic and a wet towel....

P.S. I didn't know you could spell tchotchkes as "chachkis" but google seems to have it both ways. Who knew? However, the alternate spelling is a little too close to Chachi and the last thing I need is an image of Scott Baio in my head. And Charles in Charge giving us Nicole Eggert doesn't make up for it.

P.P.S. Soylent Green is made from people.

Do people who post long-ass diatribes really think others read them? There's like five budding stalker-types here who are just on and on....

I think AT should limit one posting per IP per thread.

Steve R,
It is not that I can't read the negativity, I simply choose not to because that is not what I come to this site for. Read what is written and perhaps you will understand.

Yeah, I guess I did repeat myself a bit. Probably because few people addressed the issue except to say "big deal" and to try and insult me. I thought I wasn't being understood, because people seemed to take this so personally. I guess this really is "Apartment Therapy." You guys act up like it's a psych office.

Oh well. At least Cassandra thinks of me as an American. Cassandra, baby, that's the nicest thing anyone has said to me on this site yet. Thanks.

And Tracy, and low income artist, you do realize that rent control began in WWII, as a temporary measure to keep people in their homes while soldiers were abroad, right? And that before WWII there was no rent control? And somehow the city had more affordable housing then than now.

As someone who grew up in public housing, I can tell you from hard experience that efforts at price control create more of a mess than the market. If you really want to help the poor and middle class, the best way would be with housing vouchers, that would enable people to choose where they want to live. When the government feeds someone, they do not demand that the price of a tomato remain at 10 cents. That would create a shortage of tomatoes, because a tomato is worth more than 10 cents, and soon, like in the old Soviet Union, there would be lines of people waiting to buy tomatoes. So, we allow private companies to farm tomatoes, and the market sets the price. And then to help families out, we give them food stamps to buy food. We don't send them 10 cent tomatoes.

The government sets the price for many apartments in New York. The price is too low. Those apartments get snatched up forever. Those are the 10 cent tomatoes. And the rest of us are chasing the remaining few apartments that skyrocket in value.

If we had no rent control, the prices of apartments would probably fall, overall. Landlords would be free to charge whatever they wanted, which would be an incentive to build even more homes. Most cities do not have rent control, and they do not have this kind of housing crunch.
People would feel free to move when their family size increased or deceased. For example, the G-R's, our long-suffering couple, would less likely to have to suffer in their tiny apartment. In our present market, people are afraid to move because they will never get that kind of deal again.

Sorry, I meant decreased, not deceased.

By the way, I wonder what the G-R's would say if the renters of one of their Hamptons places (who are paying the mortgage) decided to renovate it. And then announce to the world that they were never going to leave it, and keep it as a laboratory or a second home? And I wonder how they would feel, as landlords, if the gov told them they could not increase the rent on their new lifetime boarders?

Oh, and one more thing, sorry folks...

Dorianne, if you really worked with low income families, I would think you'd be even more concerned than I am with wealthy people hoarding homes meant for the poor and lower middle class. Aren't you even the least worried about this, seeing how you work with low income people and all?

Steve R., you are a two-bit hack of an ideologue. I've got news for you bub, we actually have a test case for a municipality that had rent control and then eliminated it - Boston, as well as Cambridge and Brookline.

In Boston, rent control was adopted in 1973 - specifically as a means to protect less affluent tenants. In 1994, it was eliminated via statewide referendum, with a three year phase out. By 1997, there was no rent control. Over the last 10 years, rents have increased as a faster rate than occured when Boston had rent control. Over the last 10 years, the percentage of Boston renter paying more than 30 percent of their income has increased by 30 percent. Median rents, in inflation adjusted dollars, are higher than when there was rent control. All new, non-government subsidized construction of rental units has focused exclusively on the luxury market. In addition, since the end of rent control, there has been a loss of pre-existing units as previously affordable units in 2- and 3-family homes (a significant part of the rental stock in Boston) have been converted to condominium units priced for affluent professionals. Prior to rent control, Boston was the 11th least affordable city amongst major metropolitan areas. Now, its the 5th least affordable.

In sum, we have a real life experiment in pre- and post-rent control. And contrary to the free market cultist, rents did not stabilize or get more affordable overall or any other such wild-assed predictions. Rather, the opposite happened - poor and working class households were widely displaced and the rental market became much more expensive overall.

Course, I'm sure none of this will disaude you from your religious views.

OK now I'm confused...

OK - for some reason my post immediately above has my sig as "Steve R." Weird.

Hey, Steve R.-

Can you pick a different handle? I picked Steve R. first. Do you like writing to yourself?

And what is with the personal insults? For the love of God! Two bit hack? Didn't you read the glorious leader Maxwell's dictum at the top of the thread?

I'm very curious about the source of your statistics. How are the rents measured? Who did the research? I am skeptical of research by tenants right groups that love rent control. They tend to do things like research only the rents in Boston Globe real estate ads, which heavily favor properties in Back Bay and Brookline, which are expensive districts.

I have some familiarity with Boston's rent control laws, having lived in one of Brookline's triple deckers back when it was rent controlled. The building was in bad shape, actually unsafe, because the landlord couldn't afford to make repairs (or wouldn't because there was no profit in it. And the leaseholders would allow other people to live in the apartments and charge them more than the main apartment rent, creating an unfair shadow market. Sound familiar?

In any event, it is true that Boston has been a mixed bag after rent control. But Boston is very different from NYC. The number of rent controlled apartments was about 45,000, far from NY's 1.1 million. So the effect of dumping 45,000 apartments on the market is not going to have much of an effect. In addition, gentrification has improved and beautified many old neighborhoods, much like in NYC. I bet that had rent control not been abolished, you would have seen these same figures. Proof of this was your statistic about a 30% increase in the number of people paying 30% or more in rent. I believe you got this number from the 1990-2000 federal census data, which is now seven years out of date. More importantly, rent control was phased out in 1997. This data was set before rent control's elimination could have been a major factor.

NYC has seen a huge increase in affordability problems as well, but we still have rent control. At least new housing construction is taking place in Boston, that's better than the days when there was no construction at all. I will admit that it's disconcerting that it is mostly luxury housing. Give it time. And try to realize that you are not the only one with some knowledge about this subject.

Dave - As I read Steve R's post I was just about to reply with the Boston stats but you beat me to it - thank you and well done!

Steve R. - I'm sure you must be aware of the fact that we have at the moment the most extreme income and wealth inequality in U.S. history. If you think your laissez-faire economic theory is going to fix that then you're even more of a fool than I first thought.

I commented earlier:
"I think there's too little acceptance of dissent amongst some ATers and too much "troll feeding". If a comment is seriously snarky to no purpose, just don't respond. If you respond, you invite turning the whole conversation into that."

I'd just like to say: I told you so and QUIT FEEDING THE TROLLS!

No matter how reasonable a point or post is the first time around, if you can't shut up once you've had your say, you're no longer contributing in a useful way.

Dave--

I've got your "wet towel" right here.

You're NO gentleman. But if you want a "hummer"...

And ps, Dave...

Could you keep things straight?

I can be bitchy. And I AM gay.

But "bitchy queen" is as tired an expression as "closeted straight man."

P2 - from what I've seen, you are "all bitchy, all the time" - that's why I said you act like a caricature. Try turning it down from Volume 11 sometime.

You haven't seen it all, my boy.

But you are sooo hot when you are all straight.

Steve R.

That's a skillfully manipulative attempt at deflection, but you cannot fling accusations of "abuse" around and expect not to be accountable for it.

Since you are unable to back up your allegation, then you owe the participants of AT an apology for your slander.

I hope that those who vehemently post such accusatory statements (both sides of all arguments) are also spending an equal amount of energy fighting for other causes they believe in. Hopefully in a more productive fashion, rather than arguing a moot point on a design blog.

Dorianne:

The definition of the word abuse:

a·buse (ə-byūz') pronunciation
tr.v., a·bused, a·bus·ing, a·bus·es.

1. To use wrongly or improperly; misuse: abuse alcohol; abuse a privilege.
2. To hurt or injure by maltreatment; ill-use.
3. To force sexual activity on; rape or molest.
4. To assail with contemptuous, coarse, or insulting words; revile.
5. Obsolete. To deceive or trick.

When I used the word abuse, I meant in the manner of definition #4. In the english language, some words have more than one meaning, based on something called context.

You might want to check a dictionary before leveling allegations of slander. "Assailing with contemptous, coarse or insulting words" is exactly what people on this site have been doing.

If you are unable to back up your allegation of slander then you owe me a personal apology. I'm laughing because you're kinda stuck in groove right now, but it's the wrong groove.

Design Dabbler- I'm sure your three Hummers are in "a very special place". Have you thought of renting them out for families in NY? I think they are about 265 sq feet inside. LOL

Steve R.

I think i love you. god you must be gorgeous... alas...

Will this never end?

"The pen is mightier than the sword" certainly seems to apply here....We all want the same thing, to live decently, so instead of fighting one another we'd best look at what each of us can do to remediate it.

I think we can all agree that rents are too high everywhere. Rent, like everything else, is driven by supply and demand, and so naturally the heavily populated areas will have higher rents. I have lived in five states and have found that the rents in each area were a direct reflection of the wage levels in the area, and wages are generally higher where more services are needed. Where the rents were low, there was no work, so I had to commute a far distance and the commuting expense ate up whatever rent money was saved by living in a lower cost area.

Rent control, like so many other programs for the non-affluent, does not work. You can't expect a landlord to be able to even maintain a property properly if he makes no profit, as his costs of ownership rise, but he is limited to what he can charge. Why would any landlord want a property if he cannot make a profit? I am a confirmed capitalist, and feel that everyone should be fairly remunerated for their work or their services.

That being said, there are too many people using the systems in place for their own benefit. Steve R. has a valid point in being angry if a system is being abused, but he should take his anger to where it will do some good, not just blog about it on a decorating website.

Not to get off on a different subject, and what I am about to say may sound simplistic, but it certainly ties in to the economics that face all of us. What we can all do is to voice our opinions to the people who we've given the authority to act in our behalf - the politicians, from the local level all the way up.

We have too many people who are deriving benefit of the system and not paying into it, so WE all pay for it. In my area, we have a high influx of illegal immigrants from Brazil. They work under the table doing cleaning, for the most part, and pay no taxes on that cash. They have no interest in becoming U.S. citizens. They work hard, certainly, and when they have saved enough, they take large sums of untaxed money back to their homeland to live well there. Meanwhile, many of them derive other benefits here, as well, such as free emergency medical treatment and free (to them) education to their children. I have no problem in allowing people to immigrate here, but make them accept the responsibilities that we citizens do, as well.

The welfare system also needs a complete overhaul. I have no problem in giving people a hand UP, but there are many who perpetually receive a hand OUT. In the building next to mine Section 8 is accepted, and the tenants are all welfare recipients. When they move in they are given vouchers for furnishings, and if they are pregnant, the vouchers include funds for brand new nursery items such as cribs, baby carriages, etc.. No problem there. However, when the child graduates from the crib to a bed, they get a voucher for the bed, and they LEAVE THE CRIB WITH THE TRASH, to be hauled away. Why doesn't the welfare program require them to turn the crib in for someone else in need to use it? There is a Salvation Army right across the street, yet these people won't even carry the item across the street and donate it. They didn't pay for it, so they don't see it's value. Meanwhile, I have been working since I was 13 years old (am now 50), I work two jobs, and I can't afford to buy new, so I shop at the Salvation Army across the street. I have friends who make decent money and when their child was to be born, they purchased used items for the nursery.

We also need to stop sending support checks to other countries. There are enough charities established so that those who wish to help can do so voluntarily.

I am sorry to rant here, but I think the rent issue is just a small part of the malaise affecting all the other consumer issues. I am not pleased with what the elected officials do with my tax money. In the next election I plan to vote out all incumbents. Hopefully, new people, who have not been tainted by existing politicos, will address the issues that the present administration has not.

I write to my elected officials and voice my opinion, but I am only one. If we all were to do so, perhaps we could bring welcome changes.

I'll get off my soapbox now. Sorry to have gotten off on a tangent. I well know that this is not the correct forum for this type of discussion.

Time to close the thread, time to close the thread, time to close the thread!

Sonia-

Now that's what I'm talking about! Thank you. I appreciated your "rant" very much. I don't think we should veer far from real estate issues here. But you can write about whatever you want! That's what makes this a great country.

Forbidden,I'm a straight guy. But I take compliments well. Thanks.

But design dabbler has me wondering: I wonder how the G-R's would decorate their Hummers?

"We took all the doors off, and replaced them with curtains. If gives a sense of space and light, and tends to help eject us in a crash. It's a very special thing."

To "really, really, REALLY bored" and "Just Bored"---
If you are that bored with this thread, why are you coming back to check it??????

steve r,

yeah i know you are, hence the alas... guess i'm stuck with patrick (shiver).

but cmon man, throw me a bone.

oh - and to the posters who are tired of reading this thread - umm,,, are you being forced to?

As far as Maxwell et al having a weekend place to go to and not being entirely at the mercy of their "small space" - I say to those naysayers -get a stoage space! The work of AT is inspiring and fills a real need on both the physical and metaphysical level. I can't help but read some of these negative comments and think about the truth of the sentiment - if you show your light, there will always be someone or something that will try to extinguish it. But to live an illuminated life, is there really a choice??
Aside from all that - have the G-R's considered Co-op Vollage on the Lower East Side. Still some extraordinary values on co-ps in Manhattan. We've lived here 4 years (500 sq ft efficiency 1 br) and totally love it. Feel free to contact me for more info, and an inside scoop!

oops - meant to write "storage" and "Co-op Village" which includees Hillman Housing, Seward Park, East River and Amalgamated...we're in Hillman btw....all are located east of Essex Street and west of the FDR Drive on or near Grand Street/East Broadway.

Steve R,

There are several things about your rhetorical style that make me think you have a personal ax to grind with the G-Rs.

Lest you attempt to discount the following by asserting that I am somehow part of the "cult", I'd like to disabuse you of that notion with the following: I feel entirely neutral about the G-Rs. I don't know them, I don't want to know them, I like AT because it has helped me solve some very specific issues with my apartment. I read AT all the time and have found that the folks here are on the whole very generous with their advice, very diverse in their opinions, and quite polite and tolerant when it comes to conflict or dissent—until it gets personal. The AT community has been very helpful to me, but I don't equate that community with the G-Rs, nor do I imbue the G-Rs with any special powers or consider them the holders of a special philosophy. They are two people who run a set of sites that have helped me. I wish them the best, much as I wish you the best.

The following things make your arguments lose some authority with me:

1) You attempt to take intellectual high-grounds of various stripes—NYC rent laws, free speech, etc.—but your posts always seem to circle back to the G-Rs specifically. Your diction, your tone, and your fixation on the G-Rs belies a certain emotional investment in what you're expressing, an emotional investment that goes beyond merely elucidating an intellectual position.

2) You claim that your beef with NYC rent laws is a valid topic for this site, but you are incapable of casting your argument in a context that goes beyond the G-Rs themselves—I'm taking a guess here that about 90% of your posts mention them specifically, and usually in a fairly derogatory light. This makes me think that the reason why you've chosen to air your "NYC rent law" grievance here has nothing to do with its relevancy to AT's topics, and everything to do with the fact that the G-R's run this site. Because of this, I come away with a sense that your primary motivation is simply to make people who like the G-Rs stop liking the G-Rs.

3) You imply that Maxwell's quote re: keeping their apartment is a guarantee that the G-Rs are going to break the law. Your harping on this quote, your implication that Maxwell's stated intention is somehow proof of a selfish motivation that will unquestionably manifest itself in the future, seems disingenuous to me and motivated only by a desire to defame his reputation.

4) Your implication that the G-Rs themselves own the three houses in the Hamptons, that they spend some unseemly quantity of time running about among these three properties, and that their ownership of these properties means that they are hypocrites, is, again, a rhetorical choice that is, at best, hyperbole, and, at worst, poor reading comprehension. According to the G-R's statement, the houses are owned by their family and were purchased long ago. Your dogged desire to turn these circumstances into something other than what they are smacks of jealousy or something worse. Their family owns some houses. They go there sometimes. As many folks have already stated, this situation—where you sometimes leave your primary residence to spend time elsewhere—is pretty normal.

I take what you say about NYC rent laws seriously and, having lived in the city since 1995, have struggled with housing issues over and over again. I am gravely concerned with what I consider the very complex and challenging problem of affordable housing in the city and have myself taken things very personally when I've been in the middle of real estate nightmares.

You seem like an articulate, thoughtful person who wants things to change in NYC. However, I think putting the G-Rs up as an example of everything that's wrong with NYC housing is a terribly simplistic representation of an extremely intricate problem.

Surely there is some other site on which we can continue this conversation, a site that is frequented by people who have been thinking about this issue from a diversity of viewpoints? Because you seem so committed to this issue, I wonder if you can recommend a place for me to go. And maybe I'll see you there and we can talk about this issue without the G-Rs being such a tremendous distraction.

All the best,
L

This site is not about the revolution, it's not a religion. Compared to stark raving mad consumerism this place is anti-consumerism. But really, it's just a different kind of consumerism. And it is what it is. It's ridiculous make inferences based on stuff that's reported in the press and then hammer for hypocrisy. Lighten up! Or, join the Franciscans, live in poverty and minister to the poor. Or, better, start a revolution.

The lonesome NY Observer Real Estate blog could use some of you rabble-rousers.

Thanks for your post Lynn. I do get up on my high horse unfortunately, and it always bites me in the ass. I keep going back to the G-R's because, this is their site, and so, it's germane to talk about them. I am not emotionally invested in them. However, the way they act, I've seen before. There is a subset of people in the city, wealthy people who like to play proletarian. They like to pretend they are working class, or poor, or adopt the mantras of the poor, in order gain some sort of gravitas, or meaning. Or they are embarrassed at having resources, and want to acquire the "street cred" that they THINK the poor possess. And that fakery I truly dislike. And I think that's why they sort of play themselves off as poor, you know, with the "we live 365 days a year in a 265 sq. foot apartment" and the "humiliation" of not being able to find a place to live that they liked (as they told the NYTimes).

It takes on such importance on this site, for me, because here is an audience of people who are trying to make the best of small spaces, people who believe in rent control in order to help people with lesser means. That they worship the G-R's, who behave in this way, is disconcerting. I certainly don't want to defame them. All I've done is quote them.

I know several people think this is not the place for this. I disagree. Somewhere in the discussion how to save 10% space open (as Maxwell preaches) should be some discussion about how easy it is to preach this with three houses in the Hamptons. (Claiming your family owns them is purposely vague. Which family members? They seen to be there all the time).

Look, Martha Stewart gets alot of bad press, even though she has beautiful taste. What's so wrong with making fun of Martha when she says you can design your own toilet paper? What's so wrong about saying, hey, Martha, that's easy for you to say, we work for a living? Personally, I think the G-R's are pretty funny. I should have made more jokes about this site, and less earnestness about real estate in NYC. But I love NYC, and treating it wrong really gets my goat. Sorry.

SteveR,

You've made a lot of interesting points during your feverish crusade to expose the G-Rs, but you are wrong when you claim that the G-Rs affect to be anything but what they are: earnest, well-intentioned members of the genteel class.

As for Martha having good taste, she puts cabbage-leaf plates on her wall.

Hey Steve R.,

Your latest post is a brilliant example of the rhetorical tactics I outlined in my earlier post. Kudos, friend—you are either pathological or hilarious, I can't decide which.

I'm bummed that you didn't give me any advice about where to go to carry on the rent law conversation! It makes me think you're just a windbag and I don't want to think that. Give me something I can use, man...

L

Beautifully written, with an economy of explanation and manners one doesn't often see nowadays.
Yet another example on "How To" - again, well done. ;^)

L-

You may find this hard to believe, but I don't usually go off like this. It's fun though. I would like to visit a site that has some informed people who are passionate about these topics. I would think that there are real estate blogs a-plenty. In one of the other threads, someone mentioned some real estate blogs, but I can't find them now. Sorry to let you down. Hmmm...pathological or hilarious. I'll take hilarious for $200, Alex.

Steve R.,

You got it: you are hilarious.

Too bad, I was hoping to have your learned opinion on the RE blog scene. Let me know if you find such a place, and I'll do the same.

Happy Sunday evening, all.

L

Cassandra,

I LOVED your post. I was thinking along those lines but couldn't even begin to articulate it.

Namaste

"They seen to be there all the time." (That's Steve's typo, not mine)

You know where they are "all the time"? Creepy! More and more stalker behavior from what I see. A restraining order would help maybe?

Maxwell,

I don't care about your personal life and I don't care about what your family has. I hope you don't feel the need to explain or apologize further.
I appreciate your philosophy and the community that has grown around around Apartment Therapy is great.

Thanks for all of the hard work that you and the rest of the team do.

Nancy

Late to the party, again, but plus ça change: Steve R. railing, the bobble heads bobbling, p2 double entendre-ing. However, it's been worth slogging through this latest installment of the Importance of Being Gillingham-Ryans to find Design Dabbler's send-up of the Hallelujah choir.

Ha!

I knew I liked you when I first came across your blog and it was confirmed when I contacted you about particpating in The Modern Show. You were wonderful to work with that day. Your generousity of creativity and spirit were quite evident. As always I wish you the best. Your response was immediately eloquent and honest. Long Live Apartment Therapy.

I raise this question with regret, but the newly restored Oprah thread has several posts missing, without comment or explanation. As far as I can tell they are mainly posts by Steve R. in which he raises legal questions. Does this bother anybody?

No.

Yes.

No, This was explained in Maxwell's response. I didn't read the posts but it is safe to assume that they must have been removed for negativity or rather a personal attack or something. Go back to Maxwell's response...he clearly states certain negative responses are not tolerated and people will be blocked from communicating on the site. Even if they were removed for legal reasons...so what? Couldn't that be just smart business? How many readers and blogged participants have put out fires before they get out of hand? Lets move on folks.

I love a ragiing debate but can't get worked up over NY rent control or aesthetic/ financial authenticity or ethics. I did enjoy the clues that the GRs are more fun at a party than I would have guessed, I thought someone was making a wild fabrication to taunt those of us who weren't reading all day.
I can however, get into a hissy fit over someone with full on vomiting stomach virus boarding a plane. Even if you are the president of the US scheduled for an important dinner with the prime minister of Japan, the decent and courteous thing to do is go to your own bathroom and stay there. I would say this face to face but only by yelling from about 50 feet away. Rudeness most foul, Sir!! I hope the wedding party escaped contamination. You can redeem yourself by contacting Wende if that is possible and letting her know she is missed for her smart and thoughtful comments and we hope she is well and will return someday to the AT comunity.
If, Maxwell you were stricken mid flight, please accept my utmost sympathy and apologies. But still send our regards to Wende if that is within your power.

Okay - here's my roundup.

G-Rs - Deceptive and prone to pretentiousness but definitely gracious
Steve R - Right but a little repetitive
Patrick (the other one) - Stereotyped and intellectually challenged (ooh, errr missus, that's a big one, etc, etc...)
The Sycophants - Sycophantic
XYZ - Brilliant satirist
People who keep saying "stop this thread now" and "why can't we all live together?" - missing the point.
Me - lowly fool

The winner so far is Steve R...

kate:
You say "I didn't read the posts but it is safe to assume that they must have been removed for negativity or rather a personal attack or something."

Here's one removed post, in its entirety:

* BEGIN POST

Lauren-

Since you want to get personal, you should know that I was raised in the South Bronx, in a neighborhood that makes Jackson Heights look like Mayberry. So I do not mean to be elitist when I say that housing values in Jackson Heights are lower than they are in Manhattan. It is simply fact. I am not slamming Jackson Heights by pointing this out, any more than I am slamming my own old neighborhood. Angry? I'm a New Yorker. Where you from? Born in Jackson Heights, hmmm?

Careen- who cares about the other comments on the site dealing with their Hamptons house? That was before they got in the Times and on Oprah, bragging how they live happily in their apartment 365 days a year, and that they will never let go of it, even though they don't own it. And will keep it as an office forever. People catch on slowly.

Design Dabbler baby- You're the best. If you are a woman, you must be gorgeous.

Posted by SteveR at 02/21/07 8:15 PM
* END POST

Apart from calling me gorgeous, where's the personal attack here on anybody?

Odd coincidence I see I posted after a different Kate, I am the one in NC who lived in a trailer with 3 kids and now have a nice house. Where you live and what you have does not matter.. having friends &, family and enjoying yourself with them is what matters. Keep that in mind.

And, Martha Stewpot: I am xyz. Unless Design Dabbler has a negative score in your rating system, please combine his points with xyz and tell us where he stands. Steve R. will still be the clear winner, I think, but I suggest that DD+xyz ranks as a clear also-ran.

Design Dabbler - a thousand pardons. Stevo wins for sheer enthusiam (and for having a valid point) but you are way ahead on entertainment and sense of humour.

Please can we have another XYZ spoof? Pretty please with gold place setting tags on.

I have only one though/question for the G-R's. They stated in the NY Times article that they would hold on to their rent controlled apartment when they find another, larger place to live. Keeping it as an extra office or laboratory.

Since this seems to go against the spirit of rent control (if not against the law), do they plan to relinquish the apartment at such time they move to a larger apartment to house their growing family?

I suppose I see it this way; because of their rent controlled apartment they've been able to live in NYC at a decent price while starting a business for themselves. By saving money on their monthly rent, they've had money to do the things they want.

If, as they said they would, they keep the apartment despite moving to a larger home they, in effect, keep such an opportunity from someone else (or other family.)

It just seems rather selfish to do such a thing. You've had this opportunity and instead of letting someone else have it, one wants to hoard it; keeping it for themselves.

I'd be curious to know if the G-R's plans have changed? If so, why? And, if not, why?

so it's over...phew!! Amen

Martha Stewpot (although I strongly suspect that that is not your real name): As I said earlier on this thread, or on some thread somewhere, how do you parody something that's self-parodying? How do you parody Dick Cheney? The AT community isn't giving me the *raw* material I need -- it's presenting a finished product. On the Oprah thread (available both on the original version and on the censored Director's Cut), I posted a summary of how that thread began: there were three "how adorable"s, two "how cute"s and and two "great"s. The only sour notes came from the posters who offered the more restrained "photogenic".

Then Steve R. rode into town.

i'd bend over backwards for Steve R.

I hope he didnt wear himself out.

Steve rides high in the saddle. His aim is strong and true.

Let's face it AT isn't exactly Domus. The constant refrain of "live smaller" while incessantly urging us to buy more and more consumer durables is a little paradoxical to say the least. I love the pyschobabble of the cured house - it's so cute and healing.

As the head of the Tate Modern once said the best selling art exhibition of all time would be called "Cuddly Kittens of the French Impressionists". Maybe AT are just giving the public what it wants.

Why on earth did Maxwell pull that comment? It's not like Steve hasn't drawn that unflattering portrait of the G-Rs many times before. So what the heck?

And I'm still steamed about Jonathan's banishment. What did he do that was so horrible? Crack some jokes.

this is getting very fishy....

I often think of a quote Jonathan made about feeling that he is the pinata and fate the stick. That other thread that was pulled had some personal interactions that were very helpful to me during a terribly sad month. I talked to some frinds who are psychologists and suggested they start a personal therapy/ home decor site and just let it rip. The clearng or hoarding of stuff is a deeply rooted behavior.

Steve isn't always so true. His claim that the G-Rs are guilty of class-fakery is false. In my experience poor people are unlikely to preach the virtues of letting go and living small, or to have much aquaintance with AGA ranges and Jasper Van Grootel chairs. They're more likely to complain that life is hard and that they wish they had more money. Anyway, if it isn't obvious from the site, the intro to Apartment Therapy, the book, makes it apparent that Maxwell's from a privileged background.

Also, this business about the three houses in the Hamptons. Maxwell says they belong to his family. It may be quibbling, but Steve simply refuses to make the distinction. I don't really care one way or the other, but let us stick to the facts.

Also, the remark on Oprah is understandable given that it's hard to control what happens on TV.

Like I said LAST YEAR when Steve was on this very same rant, I don't expect the G-Rs to fall on their sword just because rent control may be bad public policy. Especially since if I had a rent-controlled apartment in the Village I would hold on to it for dear life.

Maybe not after I'd moved, though. I wouldn't want Steve to think I was tacky.

Enjoying AT and even visiting it daily doesn't mean that one "worships" the authors. I've been reading this site for quite some time, and it never occurred to me to look into the lifestyle of the authors because A. I don't care, and B. their lifestyle is totally irrelevant. To say that one can only write about small living if one is poor and forced to live small is ridiculous. And you can get as het up as you like about their supposed hypocrisy, but anyone who lives in a 256 sq ft apartment with two other humans has my sympathy, even if they do get to go away on the weekends. That's a really, really small apartment! Does the toilet double as the sink or something? Jesus.

If you don't want to look at the products, don't visit the site. And if you can't be shown a product without feeling compelled to buy it, seek therapy.

Henrietta: The comment I re-posted was not the only one that was pulled. As far as I can tell, there were 18 others. Most of those others were more direct in questioning the legality of Maxwell's stated intentions regarding the NYC apartment. There can be only one explanation for pulling the example I used: AT is trying to stop word getting out that I'm an uncommonly attractive woman.

Rent Control is different from RENT STABLIZATTION. Rent Stablization is important to keep because many young people could not afford to live in Manhattan otherwise. I don't think there are very many controled apartments out there...I think that was a generation before many of us writing on the blog. The rent goes up with Rent Stablization and it has been a god send for many people. Anyway with rent stablization it stops when the rent reaches $2,000 and believe me landlords (so many scums out there...) will do ANYTHING to bump it up. I could point out examples I have seen but that would take up way too much space. My point is Rent Control was/is not flexible the rent stays the same for many years and with rent stablization the rent goes up and up. Isn't anyone objecting to the Disnyfication of the entire city? There used to be affordable places for people and now they are gone or at least endagered species. Not everyone has parents who can help with rent (have seen this time and again...people in their 30's...silver lining here...very nice families). I do not think it is anybody's business about the houses in the Hamptons but Maxwell and Kate came from a good place when they shared this information...after all...they are sharers...I think everyone would be a lot more positive on the matter if they thought an invitation was coming their way...lol.

I do roughly know the difference between rent control and rent stabilization. I am also aquainted with the nefariousness of landlords (you know who you are, KNAVES and VILLAINESSES). It's my understanding that the G-Rs' apartment is rent-controlled. No doubt I'll hear about it if I'm wrong.

Design Dabbler, be you man, woman, or hybrid, it is well known by now that you are uncommonly attractive. Cheers!

aCquainted!

Just one more post...Rent Stablization protects us from unethical landlords. The landlord in my building has been caught in so many lies...in fact there is a sign in the lobby stating that our super lives next door when he really lives in Queens...for a couple of years (even though I called them about this A FEW TIMES) the smoke alarms in the hallways did NOT HAVE BATTERIES. It was not until I told them the fire department was here because another tenant had small fire in her apartment that they put them in. We once went for three days in the dead of a very cold winter without heat. This is a little building in a section of NY that one would not expect to have these problems. THE TENANTS NEED PROTECTION FROM THE LANDLORDS.

Henrietta, after that compliment the only thing I can do is to offer a minor quibble (not about my attractiveness, of course -- even I can find no flaw there -- but about another issue):

You knew, and I knew, that "the GRs" had resources that stretched beyond 265 square feet, but there were other readers of this site who did not know. The usual regulars now ridicule these readers for not having looked closely enough at the site to know about the Hamptons refuge, but, then, close reading skills are hardly a strength of the regulars either. Consider in this thread alone how arguments have been misquoted and distorted.

Did the GRs actively mislead people into thinking that they truly lived "small" in the way that people with no other resources have to? You may disagree, but I do think that they did. There's a package they're pushing on this website, and their personal lifestyle has always been an integral part of the advertising. It's their own marketing that makes their lifestyle a relevant part of this discussion.

Does it matter if people were misled into thinking that the GRs truly lived small? I think it does, because there are people -- many people, oddly -- who seem to idolize the GRs. They may well be misled into making choices about how to live because "the GRs live that way." This sounds absurd, I know, even to me as I write it, but how else to understand this phenomenon where people gush forth their adoration at Maxwell's every move?

This business of slumming is complicated, of course. Intention is everything. It's one thing when George Orwell slums in Paris and London, since his intention is to write about life under conditions that nobody else is portraying. It's another thing to sit around offering advice to the poor and oppressed, pretending to be poor and oppressed yourself, all the while having an escape hatch. V.S. Naipaul has written blisteringly about "Revolutionaries who fly to centers of revolution with return air tickets." The GRs inhabit for now a tiny apartment in New York, all the while with return tickets in their pocket on the Hampton Jitney.

----------

The question of "the banned" is very troubling. Was Jonathan eventually banned for good, or did he tire of this site? Will Steve R be banned (or has he already been)? As a test, I've set up an email address for Jonathan and Steve R (and anybody else) to write to, if they wish: RUBanned at hotmail dot com .

Henrietta,

I hope your landlord experience has not been as bad as mine. Had to get lawyers involved....I won...at least until the apartment reaches $2,000 and its almost there!!!

"I raise this question with regret, but the newly restored Oprah thread has several posts missing, without comment or explanation. As far as I can tell they are mainly posts by Steve R. in which he raises legal questions. Does this bother anybody?

Posted by Design Dabbler at 02/26/07 1:34 PM"

Yes, it does. Not the first time this has happened either.

One more comment on Maxwell's answer and I really have to give him and Kate a little kudos -- LIVING WITHIN THEIR MEANS. This is not such an easy thing to do. I wonder how many of their friends came to their place before Apt. Th. started and said, "you live here, this is small"...I hate when people say that. It sounds as if at any point they could have asked for help to move beyond this point but did not. They would be crazy not to take advantage of family graciousness and enjoy the Hamptons place. Isn't great the family enjoys each others company... I admire the commitment to living within their means when credit debt has hurt many people. I tore mine up a long time ago.

Let's just say that my experience with landlords, i just do not trust landlords, has been sobering.

DD--In truth I've never paid much attention to Maxwell's evangelism on small living. I seized upon the Cure because it dovetailed with my own longing for esthetic repose. (I regret to say I've abandoned all hope on that score.) I don't like waste, but I do like space and would certainly buy more of it if I could.

The G-Rs are radical for choosing to live in a 265 sqare foot apartment (with a baby, for god's sake!), but New York real estate produces all sorts of eccentricities. Still, you're right. There's a world of difference between the G-Rs and what is probably a big chunk of their readership. The G-Rs can opt out.

Maxwell's acolytes don't seem too distressed by the paradox; for them, it may even even add to his allure. On the other hand, as much as I take issue with Steve R's scapegoating the G-Rs for a host of ills, I understand his indignation. The rich have gotten so much richer these past years, and it's unfair for them to game the system to even more avantage.

I don't know if Maxwell was innocent of the legalities or what when he made his infamous vow to hang onto that Village apartment. I guess Maxwell's lawyer advised him to pull those 18 comments.

Does it matter if people were misled into thinking that the GRs truly lived small? Well, it seems they do live fantastically, incredibly, improbably small much of the time. Some time ago Maxwell posted excitedly about painting the dining room of that Hamptons house (or one of them, I should say) yellow, and he was very guileless about it, as if any of us, if we could only extract ourselves from the mesmerizing stream of fanciful objects dangled before us on AT, could walk away to our own summer houses waiting to be painted yellow, and maybe take a walk on the beach.

It's pretty to think so.

Now that I think of it, so have I!

But didn't Maxwell stay in that apartment not out of self-denial but because he preferred it to the alternatives? I've lived in several places in Brooklyn and would have been content to live there the rest of my life, but I can understand Maxwell's reluctance to move there. The subway becomes a big factor when you leave Manhattan for the boroughs.

Oh to have all that time back spent underground waiting for the train! I would have years more to squander in sloth and greed.

I can't imagine putting so much money and effort into a space owned by someone else. Their landlord must be thrilled.