Hmm. I'm going to file this under "re-muddled" in my brain. I love the hardwood floors, I even like the blue tile in the bathroom and the white sinks with the metal ring around the edge - but not with the black. I think mid-century is not a style that mixes well with the original style of the house.

And the wall paper (or decorative paint job) on the accent wall in the living room is just ... bad. That would be the first thing to go.

That is a little odd. Not sure how I feel about it. I love all the elements by themselves but not together. Love the leaded glass.

Now if I could get that coffee table, it would be perfect for in our house.

I don't know what that is in the stairwell but I don't like it. I wonder if it's old and the current owners kept it. It doesn't look like their overall aesthetic to add something like this.

I'm having trouble getting past that area rug...

Looks like whoever updated realized the leaded glass, bathroom tiles and paneled staircase were well done and worth keeping - then they had trouble pulling the whole look together.

My kitchen sink is from the late 50's and has the same stainless band around it.

I think it IS remuddled, but they did it with some kind of vision and consistency. Remember, this is the 1950s equivalent of tricking out an essentially contemporary 1970s house with crown molding and traditional light fixtures, and Victorianesque mantlepieces in 2012.

The proportions of the rooms seem lovely but the placement of the furniture seems designed to prevent socializing. I want to move the chairs and sofas into groups to make spaces where people would be comfortable. I wonder if the photos were taken after the owners began packing or if they lived with it like this.

These photos are wildly distorted by the Realtor's camera, so I don't think all the furniture is as remote from each other as it appears.

I don't know, I have a feeling that they may be "curating" their furniture and objects, so it's a little spare. Also they have kid(s), so they may not leave much around on the tables and such. The bedrooms look a bit more lived in.

Does *any* house of one distinct style look good with something else that's distinctive grafted onto it? I would say not usually. The renovation in this case can be looked at from the removal of more than half a century, so we can 1) look at the original house and think it would look better untouched, and (2) look at the modified house and at least find it an interesting specimen of what people were thinking about when faced with what was then just an outdated house.

I wonder if, in 2050, people will look back at the surviving 70s contemporaries with bathrooms and kitchens that have their origins in the 1920s, and colonial revival crown moldings and "early electric" based light fixtures, and wonder what WE were thinking. This is the kind of thing that annoys people when I try to explain that what they are doing is the future's version of *this house. Of course in 2060 they may be looked as interesting combinations as well.

Palimpsest,

We are building a very modern house and I am delighted that both the architect and my husband are enthusiastic about putting in Danish modern furniture. You have posted often about decorating with both the structure/design of the house and with sense of coherent wholeness in mind. At least that is how I have interpreted what you wrote. I find those ideas very helpful.

But, as I read your above comment I wondered about putting furniture from 50 years ago into a new house. Still it seems to me that, despite the time discrepancy, those furnishings will fit with the crisp design of the house.

A rather random comment - as I read your posts I often find myself wondering how the timing of an individual's first exposure to a given design affects his or her response to it.

Thank you for your discussions about deciding what furniture you want and then being patient & persistent enough to wait for the right piece of furniture to show up, and then being willing to reupholster, if needed. I find those ideas very helpful.

I think furniture is a completely different story in the sense that a cohesive architecture of one period and cohesive interior furnishings of another period can coexist, within reason. I've seen intact Victorian interiors filled with mid-century modern furniture and ultramodern highrise apartments filled with 18-century antiques, and I think either could be spectacular.

I am not sure that anyone would bat an eye if the house above were structurally intact 1910 (minus the typical wall and floor coverings) and the furniture were identical to what's there now. It's the idea that a previous owner tacked some pretty strong midcentury modern elements onto the existing fabric. I don't think it is entirely successful, but I *also don't think it is entirely unsuccessful, because there was a unified approach (and of course it's now historical in its own right which makes it more forgivable :))

As for your house I think the strongest modernist furniture was designed when the technology for it was new, 40 to 90 years ago, and it would be perfectly appropriate in your new modern house.

Thank you for your reply.

I was surprised at how willing my eyes were to enjoy the mid-century modern changes along with the original windows and some of the other architectural features in the house you posted. I did find the black wall of tile and a few other things, including the stair well wall paper, created an unpleasant sense of dissonance but overall it seemed to me that it worked. Maybe because both the original and the modern changes had strong lines.

Thank you again for your thoughts about our plans for our house.

I love the mix of styles (but I'm a stylistic schizo in my own home, and actually prefer a mix of styles over slavish uniformity) and the bathrooms are very well done. There isn't enough "stuff" for me, but what is there is nice and suits the spaces IMO.

As always, thanks for posting another thought provoking space, palimpsest.

What makes it dreadful is the probability that the people who renovated it in "midcentury" style are the very same people who removed its original, irreplaceable trimwork. They could plead ignorance, since this all happened a generation ago, but today committing that same atrocity would be unforgivable.

I think I would read the space differently if I knew it had already been stripped before it was midcentury-modernized.

My kitchen sink is from the late 50's and has the same stainless band around it.

It's the (in)famous hudee ring!

Here is a link that might be useful: more about hudee rings than you ever wanted to know

They were prescient enough to keep the leaded glass windows, the overall fenestration pattern and the pocket doors though.

My mother's decorating books from the time of her marriage talk about how to get rid of or minimize all those dreary dark mouldings and recommend trashing the windows for nice big picture windows, and the drafty, dust collecting pocket doors, for wide open archways.

But like I said, people are doing essentially the same thing to modernist and contemporary houses from the 60s and 70s right now to general approval.

"But like I said, people are doing essentially the same thing to modernist and contemporary houses from the 60s and 70s right now to general approval."

This is why I find myself wondering about the timing of first exposure to a given style. I was an adolescent when my parents first bought modern furniture. It is still my favorite furniture and now the young adults in my family like it, but those who grew up with it don't care for it.

Good point, orcasgramma. Everyone in my family had colonial type of furniture in the 60's and 70's while I loved all the sleek modern furniture I saw on TV even as a kid. To this day, I do not care for colonial-style furniture.

>But like I said, people are doing essentially the same thing to modernist and contemporary houses from the 60s and 70s right now to general approval.

Yes, putting the Edwardian One True Kitchen in a ranch house.

And crown molding everywhere.

I think to a lot of people, all of history is simply "B.M."--Before Me. Victorian, Craftsman, 70s, it's all in the same category, "Old Timey," so therefore it must all go together. It doesn't, of course, but many people can't tell the difference.

My kitchen sink is from the late 50's and has the same stainless band around it.

Why circuspeanut, I had no idea the ring around my sink was called a Hudee ring. The sink is olive green and every five years or so I get a yen to replace it then come to my senses. Thanks for the info!