sleek lines, but still earthy.

Comfort, color, and low maintenance.

I love it in moderation. I always thought that my style was strictly MCM, but I've found that I prefer spaces that incorporate just a few MCM pieces while mixing them with other styles. Too many MCM pieces looks uncomfortable to me.

I like individual pieces of MCM furniture, but very few MCM rooms. Unless everything in the room is absolutely spotlessly perfect, it looks sad and drab and cheap.

I like the clean lines, the prints, textures, colors..It is classic and doesnt grow old, just better!

I like it because the scale and casual/entertaining vibe feel right for my urban home. But I want to mix it up and not live in a museum -- bring on a modern mix!

I'm surprised people are picking the unique/artisanal choice. MCM was the most mass-produced industrial-style furniture in history. It's the polar opposite of hand-made, artisanal furniture.

MCM can be great, but except for a handful of rare never-produced prototypes, it's the opposite of unique -- and on purpose.

I don't like anything about it!! I feel like nobody sees what I see though. It's so trendy that it hurts my soul. Bleh. I'd rather go further back and get myself a proper antique instead of something retro, or move forward with contemporary designs. The only time I like this style is when the context suits it - on film.

I wanted an "all of the above" button in the poll above.

For me, it represents the pinnacle of american culture; a time when the future looked bright, when technology would improve our lives, when clean lines and simple aesthetics (think Japanese or Shaker styles) would come to define a uniquely american style. And when I think of the yutzy stuff that followed in the 70's and 80's, well, what can I say.

I am glad the Mid-C style is being embraced by young folk, and revisted by contemporary designers.

PS -- if you are in LA, you msut go to LACMA and see the exhibit on California Mid-C style.

I never thought of midcentury design as "earthy," though many classic pieces honor the natural materials that make them. I appreciate the fusion of industrial thought, materials and processes with the whimsy, ergonomics and optimism of MCM. Unless you're accentuating a midcentury kitsch factor, MCM furniture will always look timeless in your home.

I hate it and read AT in spite of midcentury modern. Bring back Mission.

+1 to mid-c frank

I like the aesthetics of an MCM house: the layout of the rooms, the angles, the large windows. I would not fill the house with all MCM furniture. Maybe a few pieces, as jng2b states.

I like it because it can be very elegant in a very small space, and it has a calming effect on me that other styles do not. It's a nice simple base, and if I add one funky piece of furniture it combines very well with the MCM.

To me it's about comfort and style. Not all MCM is perfect, but it was designed for and around the human body. MCM furniture is pure...very little excess ornamentation. And it looks great in modern, traditional and eclectic homes.

I like the freedom from traditional forms and formulae, as well as the acknowledgment of negative space.

I'm with gochrisgo. The scale of the furniture is great for my place. But I do love the simplicity and warmth.

While I adore the aesthetic, it is mostly about scale. Living in a small house, I need small furniture, and MCM fits my style more than the much older pieces I would need does.

fabric and legs of mdm furniture.

I also like and appreciate the international aspect of mid-c style. It's my understanding that the Nelson benches, for example, were influenced by Japanese design. Then you have Mies, Aalto, Wegner, Paulin, Periand, Hvidt, Saarinen, etc. etc. etc. And, if properly done, they can all mix well together.

the colors! bright yet warm at the same time. Modern items tend to have room for both...

I love the simplicity of it. I'm not a fan of a lot of ornate details. Styles like Victorian and French Country are way too much for me.

I realized while shopping with a friend who loves antiques that while some people like things that remind them of the past, others like things that looked to the future and even though MCM is from our past, you can definitely see the futuristic sense that the designers were working with then.

MCM furniture's scale, practical informality, and simple lines suit my 1954 tract ranch bungalow as well as my lifestyle. It's flexible enough to be used for different functions and also to work well with other furniture styles.

I like the simplicity, but I think there is a limit as to how much to have around... houses filled with MCM stuff can really look "overdone". I don't care for the more "funky" stuff that comes from that era, however.

Clean lines, warm colors, sense of design.

I don't like it at all.
There. I said it.

All of the above in the survey. And the pieces that we had in our family were incredibly comfortable. We had a grasshopper chair, which I used to lie in upside down to read (feet up the back). I did the same in the Butterfly (Hardoy) chair, except at an angle. We'd put our legs over the arms of the womb chair. I LOVE this furniture. I think most of it is so incredibly beautiful that it can move me to tears. I have my favorites: Eames, Bertoia, Knoll, Saarinen, Noguchi, Nelson's lamps.

I love that lots of the pieces are often orange. I love orange.

I'm with the people who don't think MCM furniture is that great. I'll be drawn to a piece here and there, but I don't understand folks dying with love for everything MCM.

On the other hand, I am very interested in MCM architecture, when it's not too boxy.

I think signature MCM pieces are beautiful but everything MCM is like stepping into a time warp. I like adding a modern twist like reupholstering new fabrics onto MCM pieces.

It's so easy to live with.

My style generally skews to antiques (rustic European, Mexican, Spanish Colonial), but it is eclectic enough that the few mid-century pieces I have (Bertoia dining chairs, Braakman tea trolley, Noguchi horn lamp, Aalto Paimio armchair) fit in with the mix and even lighten things up a bit. I LOVE bent and molded plywood; it's simple and clean, yet warm and somehow artisanal.

P.S.: Not that crazy about "privilege" used as verb, though ;)

I like it because of the colors and the tones of woods and metals.

I think Anna Hoffman didn't educate herself about MCM design before she created the poll, to the points made by several readers.

I think MCM is very complex -- it depends on negative space for its aesthetic effect in the same way complimetary colors or flavors or sounds accentuate each other. I haven't gone to design school, but this is patently obvious.

It juxtaposes all kinds of materials and certainly isn't minimalistic -- although some people incorporate MCM as part of a minimalist design. The best MCM designs I've seen include gorgeous textiles, leather, glass, metal, stone -- all in the same room at the same time!

It certainly is not artisanal -- which is a hallmark of craftsman, art nouveau, and rococo design, for example. And last time I checked, neither Kant nor Aristotle included hand-crafted in their philosophies on aesthetics.

I don't like it. I can appreciate it, as a style, when done well and cleanly, but I'm really not on board. It reminds me of musty houses belonging to other people's grandparents (not that I'm putting my own g-peeps above other people's -- mine just lived too far away for me to see what their houses were like).

MCM design lets shape, proportion and materials show their beauty, without ornament.

Just occurred to me: Anna is conflating MCM with Scandinavian design, which is characterized by simplicity / minimalism.

They're not the same.

The styling is timeless. My Eames lounge chair and ottoman are classic and won't go out of style. I like having pieces that can stick around for a while without looking dated.

I don't like MCM. I find it cold, stark, and unfeminine. Give me some texture and detail!

It's intelligent design, therefore rejected by the norm of society. I grew up with this style, and realized how different my parents were from the other kids homes. Thank you Mom and Dad!!! Thank you for teaching me the value of art and design. Onward march Modernists! www.frithmobiles.com

None of the above, because to me there are other styles more interesting.

I like the fact that most MCM furniture is classic and timeless - never seems to go out of style. All you have to do is take a look at just about any Julius Schulman photo of a 50's-60's Palm Springs, CA interior, and that same photo could have been taken today. Personally, I like to mix classic pieces with newer, clean-lined items for a more classic contemporary look.

I agree that MCM style is great for mixing with furniture from other periods! I love the sleek lines and graphic patterns and color.

It's not timeless, as some have suggested. Sure, a photo from 1965 looks like an interior from today. But if you'd had that same room in 1975 or 1985 or 1995? It was VERY much out of fashion, akin to having Laura Ashley decor today.

When I was very young my parents built a modernist house and bought all new furniture....Scandinavian, Eames, Nelson, Knoll, Heath, Larsen fabrics...the Sputnik chandelier. It was a shock to move there from a California bungalow and I can't say we kids appreciated it much. Nothing was very cuddly, no cozy corners on the furniture, and though all the plate glass gave wonderful views, it wasn't very warm either. And gawd help you if you fell down outside on the gravel, or tried to play hide-and-seek in the pampas grass. Like much of the era, a lot of it was just for show, and there's a reason there's no evidence of children in Julius Schulman's photographs.

As an adult, I appreciate the DESIGN of it all, but that's what it mostly was. DESIGN, not family living. It only looked good without ANY clutter and with the magazines lined up just SO, and the comment about negative space is exactly right. I use the Eames chairs as my dining chairs and while I love them for many reasons, they're only comfortable if you sit all the way back. NO perching for Mr. Eames, thank you very much. But DANG I wish I had the Sputnik now. Ours was wrought iron....black with the crystal stars.

Not a fan overall, but every once in a while I'll see a piece that calls out to me.

I'm not a huge fan-it has no whimsey or silliness to it and perhaps that is what the appeal is; after decades-no centuries of ornate and heaviness out come the clean, sleek and simple lines. I appreciate it, but don't yearn for 'MCM.

I like the lines and spaces, as others have mantioned, but only of individual pieces. Some don't work for me at all. Not fond of Danish Modern, but it's light weight at least!! I think MCM often lends itself to the eclectic look I prefer, so that's a plus...

It's not what I grew up with, but is what my oh-so-much-cooler-than-my-parents great-aunt and uncle and aunt and uncle had. Both families had moved from New England to Tucson AZ in the 50s and 60s. Whenever we visited them in the surreal suguaro desert, I felt extremely sophisticated in those surroundings.

aesthetic based on functional form. like post and beam architecture, the function is the form and it is beautifully simple or simply beautiful. there is an authenticity to it that i find very attractive. several styles fall into this mold; japanese modern, scandi/danish modern, mcm to name a few.

and yes, the warmness sets mcm apart from the cold and bold modern aesthetic.

rather than growing to like this style, i believe i have found the style i was always drawn too. i believe i will enjoy it even after it falls out of favor with hipsters.

The best part is knowing that by purchasing what is essentially used home furnishings, I am helping the environment. Besides, each piece is a work of art and mixes well with handcrafted accents like textiles, pottery and glass.

@ artfemme11: after buying bertoia chairs and getting back aches, i realized these things are not for sitting. and yes! the eames chairs are for sitting, but not perching. i'm using them for dining chairs right now and many guests have had the chair slip out beneath them... not fun. i've learned to pay attention to comfort and am very happy with my lounge chairs and sofas.

Contemporary modern = sterile

Mid-century modern = sexy

I would say a few months ago when I started reading AT I didn't really know all the designers of MCM though I knew the overall aesthetic. And to be frank I didn't like it. But I also associated it with the modern today. I felt the rooms were empty and had no character. And then MCM grew on me and I decided that was how I wanted my home. And now today I realize that it isn't how I want my home, but I just want some of the elements mixed in like other's have said. I will say that it definitely has opened my eyes to so much more than I could have ever thought possible for my home.

I LOVE mid-century modern because it has a definitive sense of style without compromising comfort.

Hate it.

It's how to make your home look like an office waiting room.

Plus, I'm SO tired of it. It's really time for a change.

While I picked the "unique/artisanal" quality, Lisa (Montreal) is correct - I hadn't thought about it that way, I had the prototypical images in mind. I think today, quality original pieces aren't' so common, hence the special quality. I also don't understand people who hate it for being "trendy" - it cannot possibly be trendy; it's historical. It's popular again, that is true, but that is different.

when i started my blog about our MCM renovation, i wrote a post on what i liked about it. you can read it here:

http://midcenturymodernlove.com/2011/06/06/you-like-that-really/

Wow, I love the dynamic discussion! Please keep it up!
I did want to respond to @Lisa (Montreal) and @urbancricket, who very correctly point out that most furniture from this era was mass-produced and specifically designed for mass-production. One focus of the Museum of Art and Design show is MCM's *basis* in the craft tradition, even if it then got translated to industrial production. I included the "artisanal" option in the poll because I'm curious about whether that is palpable to a modern consumer, but I didn't mean to suggest that it was always handcrafted (though many MCM designers, like Nakashima and de Swart, were certainly artisanal craftsmen).
And, @urbancricket, lots of overlap between MCM and Scandinavian design. Both were very interested in simplicity in certain ways, but I totally agree with you that they were not by definition 'minimalistic' at all (I don't equate 'simple' and 'minimal.')
Thanks for your thoughts!

I'm with Lisa (Montreal) on the mass-production aspect of it, yet that is one of the things I like about it. Eames and so many others beloved that the masses deserved beauty in their homes just as much as the rich did.

I also enjoy the nostalgia of it, and the hunt- but like many others, moderation in everything we do.

I love how the spirit of it slowly turned from "everyday design for the masses" to $700 fiberglass chairs.

I have furnished much of my home with Mid Century furnishings and decor, but not necessarily because it's the "trendy" thing to do. And a much as I love the small scale, the clean lines, the functionality....for me it's really something less tangible than all that. I remember as a kid the way I admired my grandparent's style. It was warm, fun, and modern- just like them. Some of my favorite childhood memories were created in that home. So years later when I was lucky enough to inherit many of their Mid Century pieces, I couldn't wait to build my own home around them. Sometimes I don't think you necessarily choose a "style". It kinda chooses you :)

the coziness from warm woods, the texture from patterns, the genius in the simple and clean designs. the way it all comes together to remind you of nature in an odd way.

i do however dislike how everyone is hung up on designer names and always trying to identify their furniture.

i don't like the snobby use of MCM.

actually up until a couple of years ago i didn't even know the term MCM, all i knew was that i was in love with mid century scandinavian moddern thanks to early influences in my like.

Where I live, older houses are in short supply - and good luck finding an apartment with "character", let alone in good condition! I've lived in charmless, post-1960 buildings for most of my life, and I find that having a couple of MCM-esque pieces helps my Art Deco furniture "fit in" better. MCM is one of the few styles that can work really well in a wide variety of settings.

I grew up in a mcm home and although I'm fond of it, I'd never use it in my own place...

My favorite thing is that it's so totes trendy that I can find things that I like while everyone else clamors for this Atomic Age Bomb Shelter Chic stuff. Don't get me wrong; a piece here and there is OK (my Finnish heritage would shun me otherwise), but I prefer eclectic/industrial/farmhouse industrial.

I like how MCM can provide seating and storage without excessive weight and bulk.

I like MCM with a great deal of restraint/in moderation, and as a background for other more ornate pieces. I have a MCM-inspired couch, and its clean lines make it easy to accent it with antique (and more ornate and fussy) pieces like my coffee table and side chairs.

All MCM rooms (heck, *any* room that's full of all one style!), though, make me want to run away screaming. *shudder*

i agree with markbright!

I was going to answer the first one, but then I thought again. What I mostly like in this period is that the furniture is well made, they hold up for decades. I think something went terribly wrong after the 70's, since then all pieces are made of only fiberboard.

For the most part, I don't really like it. The only furniture in the post images that I would consider owning is the George Nelson bench.

I like some of the SCAN-like pieces, but otherwise, the scale is too small and a bit flat for my tastes. I prefer pieces from the 20s, 30s and 40s mixed with a few modern pieces.

Sooo tired of mcm, and hope this phase is soon over.

Bring me more modern house tour please!

I'm really sad you didn't have an option for people who don't like it (or don't like it as much as others seem to) - I've been wondering what percentage of us are on here, given how much Apartment Therapy focuses on it!

I'm with markbright, except I'd like to see some space given to Arts & Crafts more than Mission... but honestly more than anything I'd like to see more variety! I have somewhat eclectic taste and every once in a while there's a one-off post about a more interesting or new-to-me style that I'd love to see explored in more depth.

I'm definitely for more arts and crafts on AT too! I think people are just fatigued with MCM. I am too, but I cannot deny that it is a lovely look.

I don't like it when entire rooms are meticulously designed around the furniture. It seems less personal and "authentic" to rely on one singular theme to express your interior style.

Sometimes I feel like some of these homes here are "how MCM can we make our living room" contests. It's almost become a caricature because looking at photos from MC (yes, even the ones going for the more MCM look) even they don't have the dedication to this look as some folks today do.

If I had to pick one thing though, I love the flexibility of the look. I personally love sleek lines and global so it fits in with that. I really only "love" the credenzas from MCM. Everything else can stay away.

As for the idea of MCM being a reminder of the "good ole days of America", as an African American I have conflicted feelings about that sentiment. But that's a whoooole nother convo.