"...Has the speed of information dissemination increasing led to homogenization of American home styles?..."

My opinion is that the lack of any sort of design or architectural education, at any level in the normal educational cycle, may be the leading cause of residential homogenization throughout much of the U.S. One can't appreciate American home styles when one doesn't know what they are.

"...Do people who are building a home that is not in a development or at least not part of a production model tend more often to choose a regional style?..."

If the number of postings here by people asking for opinions and help for home designs from Internet-based plan factories is any indication, choice of "regional style" is not a factor at all. Deciding factor appears to be "features", i.e., large islands, diagonal walls, humongeous garages, mudrooms with cubbies and which shade of white is best.

"...Why so many CAD-designed, uncategorizable hodge-podge "transitional" stock plans, and so few Dutch Colonials, Dog Trots, Georgians, etc?..."

Weather and climate, which used to be dominant influences in residential design, is no longer a factor, thanks to Mr. Carrier who invented air conditioning. For the rest of the answer, go back to question one.

True, Matt. We tend to forget all the dreck in between. :-)

I do agree, Virgil, that some of it is the feeling that we no longer have to build to accomodate our environment. (Although I would argue that it's still wise to do so).

I suppose what I'm really asking is this, why do people sigh over this:

Or this:

Then turn right around and build this:

Is it considered the "safe choice" because that's what everyone else is doing? Is it hard to find a builder who wants to do something that isn't standard? Is it because you'll inevitably have to give up a few things and possibly a bit of square footage to be able to afford to get the details right? Or is it because none of the trendy decor stuff will "go" with a house that has it's own sense of style? Do people just prefer now to build a bland box and empty and refill the interior with each new passing fancy? Is it because the inside of these things is more suited to "Instagramable decor"?

..watch first 3 min..they address the issue)) it's a cartoon these first 3 min, an introduction of sorts.. no language is required

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lVpmZnRIMKs

(it's a very famous romantic comedy from Soviet times where the plot is based on unbelievable similarity of buildings in suburbs everywhere)

PS I'll look for regional architecture, yes. If I'm lucky. One is not always lucky to choose. starting with where to live at all.

Say here in So Cal we lost our head over Spanish Ranch and got ourselves involved in 2 year gut remodel which I'm not sure was the wisest thing to do, in retrospect--but besides it being one of my favorite styles ever, it's very regional. And it's not even something very graceful from the beginning of last century-it's '68 or '70 styled ranch..still while we were house hunting I would be jumping on anything spelling this Spanish influence-and learning it's already under contract. Regional, yes-but still very hard to actually get. Especially within some reasonable price.

Actually any house here that stands out in some way, in a good way-will be appealing to many and you either won't know it's on the market at all , or you'll see it just to learn it's contingent, or you'll pay helluva money in this or that way, or you'll compromise on the area(unless you're a family that is okay being further from schools and doctors and whatnot), or something else.

I was also lucky to spend my childhood right in the center of a big old, very old city..so all the center was very pretty and well maintained, even though they were from time to time "improving" (uglyfying more like) the Central Square which our apartment overlooked-so from being a very pleasant place it gradually shifted to "wth happenned here".

But the more one moved from the center, and the newer were the developments, the more you risked completely loosing your way among all the identical buildings.

There was a rationale behind it of course-you need to put people somewhere..and sometimes you're in a hurry 'cause aftermath of war, then growing population, then..

Then I don't know:) Probably what they show in that 3 min cartoon))

I read the Places article before I read Virgil's comment about the lack of design/architectural education, and the one thing that jumped out at me from the article was this,

By 1945, when no less an arbiter than Life declared that “Houses Should Vary with Regions,” it was clear that the new American regionalism had gone mainstream.

The US used to be a country where the leading popular magazine of the day championed and discussed good design and architecture.

Not no more : ( . Shortly before Life Magazine gave up the ghost, it started the annual Dream House project, but with the magazine having lost its place in the pop culture conversation, the project didn't really seem to go anywhere. I do recall a good conversation here the other year about Hugh Newell Jacobsen's Dream House design.

Has the speed of information dissemination increasing led to homogenization of American home styles? Beginning with the Sears kit home, and culminating with modern production builds, things have gotten more and more "the same" from coast to coast.

I think it's definitely one cause. The development of air conditioning of course was another. The big production build companies eating each other to have fewer and fewer smaller, and independent companies is another. The trend in the past few decades to find comfort in similar interiors and exteriors -- Pottery Barn catalogues, HGTV, Pinterest, Instagram -- yet another. Few people want to be different. Or if someone dares to be different, then everyone else piles on lol. Of course, it helps with the piling on if the trend is easy and cheap.

We just got satellite TV in the fall, after 25 years of having only two small local Canadian channels. I've watched HGTV TV over the years visiting families or staying in hotels. So I know I'm slow and behind the curve : ) . Something I noticed from my TV watching this winter is the the trend, I would assume sparked by Chip and Joanna Gaines, toward saving older houses which tend to be of the more vernacular style, and refurbishing them. And I note that there are a lot of regional shows now -- my husband was asking recently if there's one for every state.

Is this less noticeable in the custom home market? Do people who are building a home that is not in a development or at least not part of a production model tend more often to choose a regional style?

My husband is a small independent builder in rural western Canada and around here the answer is no, they don't tend to choose a regional style. The current popular style is something hybrid McMansion-y.

If so many of us fawn over historical styles and house, why do we not make an effort to build anything with near the charm? Why so many CAD-designed, uncategorizable hodge-podge "transitional" stock plans, and so few Dutch Colonials, Dog Trots, Georgians, etc?

You need a certain level of quality for that, and not only is it hard to find, but it's usually expensive. And it takes a lot more work. North Americans have been conditioned for decades -- McDonalds, Walmart, Amazon -- to want and expect cheap and fast.

I think we talked here about (former) decorator Bailey McCarthy's new house (the old house on the property is a Victorian farmhouse), which was in Architectural Digest in December, what the architect William Curtis himself called "the dumbed down Greek Revival we see a lot in central Texas." It's a lovely house, outside and in, but I think projects like that help contribute to the mindset that you can only do something like that if you have a ton of money for an architect like Curtis, and another ton of money to hire Miles Redd to decorate it when it's finished.

Unfortunately, I also think "so many of us" here on GW/Houzz doesn't really translate to so many of us here in the real world.

I hope this makes sense. We're in the midst of calving so if I'm typing gibberish it's the sleep deprivation...

In the same town where that "30s gem" I shared is, I recall a new house proposal going before zoning about 20 years ago or more. People on the board took issue with some features, one board member even saying "well, I certainly wouldn't want to come up the driveway to see THAT feature." The homeowner, thoroughly frustrated by this time, retorted "well, I don't think any of you will ever be invited here, so don't worry about that." Well, in the end, they built most of what they wanted to, you can barely see it from the road, and I'll bet no board members were in fact ever invited. Oh, and after this, the town initiated an architectural review committee. Sigh.

Several years ago I had a client in northern Michigan that went on a vacation to Mexico during their house's design process. They loved the Mexican architecture and decided to purchase several architectural antiques into their new home, they must have thought I liked surprises. They directed me to keep the exterior "Northern Michigan Cottage Style" while having the interior traditional "Adobe Style". I accepted the challenge, but made sure they knew I did not recommend it and that they would probably have a hard time selling it whenever that time came. Years later I saw them in town and they informed me they sold the house . . . and had a hard time doing it.

Aprilneverends and others, here's a musical version of housing design by the late, great Allan Sherman in the 1960s, with the Boston Pops Orchestra. It's 24 minutes and you'll want to hear it all. I give you, Peter and the Commissar.

Thank you for that treat, bpath. I love, love, love Allan Sherman : ) .

Love that, bpath. A classic.

Becky, if I were closer, I'd come help. :-) I always did prefer beef calving calls to dairy.

Onward..

You need a certain level of quality for that, and not only is it hard to find, but it's usually expensive. And it takes a lot more work. North Americans have been conditioned for decades -- McDonalds, Walmart, Amazon -- to want and expect cheap and fast.

Would it REALLY be cheaper to build one of the Dan Gardner monstrosities, with coffered ceilings, quartz everywhere, huge built-ins, windows with ONE shutter, and all the trimmings than it would be to build a tasteful Dutch Colonial?

(Honestly asking, because I assume that a lot of money is thrown at those things)

How much of it is a desire for conformity? What the neighbors have, but a little nicer? Is it less "impressive" to invite people over into your parlor than into a 2 story foyer?

Or did we, in the rush for "modernity" in the 50's as so many people left the farm behind, also leave behind an appreciation for regional styles? Will it come back with the rise of Granny Chic?

Becky, if I were closer, I'd come help. :-) I always did prefer beef calving calls to dairy.

Holly, if you were closer, I'd take you up on that in a heartbeat : ) .

Would it REALLY be cheaper to build one of the Dan Gardner monstrosities, with coffered ceilings, quartz everywhere, huge built-ins, windows with ONE shutter, and all the trimmings than it would be to build a tasteful Dutch Colonial?

I think size is part of the problem, and this is the Walmart-Big Gulp philosophy of American consumption. You can have something small and well-made for a fair amount of money, or you can have something BIG for (comparatively) not a lot of money. Which do you choose? A lot of Americans seem to be choosing the latter.

This also ties into what you write, "What the neighbors have, but a little nicer?" There's always that element of keeping up with, and one-upping, the Joneses.

Is it less "impressive" to invite people over into your parlor than into a 2 story foyer?

I think most people don't seem to know what a parlor is, or they associate it with their great-grandparents.

Or did we, in the rush for "modernity" in the 50's as so many people left the farm behind, also leave behind an appreciation for regional styles? Will it come back with the rise of Granny Chic?

As I wrote above, I think if anyone can do it, it's the HGTV shows and personalities, like the Gaineses and the Napiers on "Home Town".

But I think current society is firmly entrenched in the desire for conformity plus the "if I want strawberries in December in Chicago, I should be able to have them" geography-be-damned school of thought.

> Is it hard to find a builder who wants to do something that isn't standard?

Yes, who would. As a GC, You are taking a dip into the unknown on the fixed budget where customer wants to pay $120/sq ft. Good luck with that. How do you estimate callbacks, extra detailing, carpenters not sure how to even frame that stick roof, or odd ceilings.

I'm not sure JoAnna Gaines did much but homogenize her own personal style nationwide. :-) I swear every parade home last year had a giant clock.

I agree that HGTV is a marketing machine, but I'm not sure they have a vested interest in selling us on regional architecture.

Yes, who would.

Well, my builder. Quote: "Hmmm. I've never seen that before. Let's do that!"

You are taking a dip into the unknown on the fixed budget where customer wants to pay $120/sq ft.

Hmmm, again. Well, I would presume both sides would be benefited by a more specific bid.

Good luck with that. How do you estimate callbacks, extra detailing, carpenters not sure how to even frame that stick roof, or odd ceilings.

I will grant the Craftsman up there has a bit of a head-scratcher of a roof. Tricky bit, and steep on top of it. However, it's certainly easy enough to order gambrel trusses, at least locally.

Maybe it just amounts to finding the right guy. 'Nother quote from mine: "I'm not doing this to see how much money I can make at it. I want to drive back here with my son in 25 years, park along side the road, point and say, 'I built that house.'" Which is not to say that he doesn't make a living at what he does. It's just that he gets as much joy out of the idea of leaving a legacy as he gets income out of the work-a-day process. As a random aside, he used to work for Pulte, but managed to get into a position to hang out his own shingle and do what he really wants to do.

If HGTV can sell some folks on regional architecture, it's a bonus side-effect : )

I'm just happy to see older houses on those shows being remodeled rather than torn down. Around here, 20yo houses are tear-downs, sigh.

My husband enjoys non-standard projects. That said, he's never been able to accommodate those who want a quick quote or want to know how much per square foot. He always tells them there are too many variables. I think especially as house building gets ever more expensive (and out of reach for many), most prospective homebuilders prefer the ostensibly cheaper online house plans -- not realizing that the quotes aren't realistic, and they'll end up pay more both in money and in the inconvenience of living in a poorly-planned house. But as we've seen so often in the Building a Home forum, we can't convince most of either.

Plus houses have gotten much bigger over the years. More square feet and fewer people under one roof, then folks complain about the high cost of home ownership. I mention this fun fact because people seem to want bling over quality build. If you built a smaller house, I bet you could get some more reasonable architecture, as opposed to the McMansion stuff we see all the time.

Zalco, especially houses have gotten taller! 9-12' ceilings on the main floor, means the whole house looks like it's on steroids, if they try to keep to scale.

*Raises hand* I did it! We built a normal-sized brick Georgian custom home in a custom home neighborhood. It was designed by an architect. We are just under 4000 sq ft which is on the smaller side for custom homes in our area and definitely small for our neighborhood. I instinctively wanted our house to look like a house, not a castle or God forbid a hotel like the one next to us. I love our house, and we have been able to plug a lot of money into landscaping and interior decorating that we couldn’t do as much of if we had built 6000 sq ft. It must resonate with people bc I can’t tell you how many times that I’ve met people who find out what street I live on and say, “oh that’s the street with the white brick house that I love (mine), we walk on that street all the time.” :)

Vernacular architecture, in my neck of the woods, is probably prohibitively expensive. Furthermore, we have had, for years, developers purchasing large tracts of land, starting close to the downtown come and spreading from there. These developers offer a few different model homes to choose from. Hence, if one wants a home, one had and have little choice but to purchase a home from said developers. I do long for homes such as this, built to last, no question.

I think there were a mix a factors in the homogenization of architecture. Media was certainly one, starting with the plan books, then catalogues and kit homes. And now trends become global in no time. Then there was also the standardization of materials and products and the global shipping industry. Now the same products can be found in the same home improvement stores everywhere. And I think the third factor that is also very important is the rise of climate control in houses. Most of the regional styles were responding to a mix of culture, local materials, and environmental conditions.

Once you take the attitude that air conditioning and insulation can solve all problems, culture become diluted and replaced by stylistic trends, and materials can be shipped all over, regional styles have much less meaning. When someone builds in a regional style today, like picking up on the salt box in Vermont or the plantation home in Mississippi, they are doing so out of nostalgia, rather than out of necessity.

Though when I think about it, not a lot has changed in the way that the average person came about getting a new house. Most houses back then were not designed by architects, the same as now. The high style architect designed homes that set the aesthetics for each period, were not the homes of the everyday American. Most houses were created by builders, or built by their occupants. They picked up the style for their house based on what they saw in pattern books, or based on what their neighbors were building. That's very similar to the plan book houses and builder subdivisions of today. But all of the factors from my last post now mean that all of the builders nationwide are basically doing the same thing.

The problem is that once upon a time, good design was something that even "average" people understood.

This is the thesis of Jonathan Hale's book on architecture and design, "The Old Way of Seeing," that in previous centuries, everyone, not just the professionals and experts, had an innate understanding of good, classical proportion and good design, and the beauty of good proportion. Vernacular builders of the 18th and early 19th century had that understanding. Hale suggests that even some professionals nowadays have lost this understanding.

Hale also argues that culturally we've begun to prefer poorly proportioned and designed structures, as other criteria have taken over, including symbolism and status. For example, the oddly-shaped, double-height great rooms with double vaulted ceilings. If I recall correctly, Hale writes that the breakdown began to happen in the late 19th century, with the Victorians, who chose an orgy of excess (my words, not his lol) and mixture of influences in order to impress.

A few excerpts from the book, which has been recommended to me several times on GW (including by palimpsest) and which I highly recommend,

"Not very far back, as recently as two lifetimes ago, virtually all buildings were designed to common visual principles derived from natural forms and supported by a long tradition of geometry and measure. That tradition was a starting point. Most design today works without such a starting point, and so tends to go nowhere."

***

"The difference between our age and the past is in our way of seeing. Everywhere in the buildings of the past is relationship among parts: contrast, tension, balance. Compare the buildings of today and we see no such patterns. We see fragmentation, mismatched systems, uncertainty. This disintegration tends to produce not ugliness so much as dullness, and an impression of unreality.

"The principles that underlie harmonious design are found everywhere and in every time before our own; they are the historic norm. They are the same in the 18th-century houses of Newburyport, MA, in the buildings of old Japan, in Italian villages, in the cathedrals of France, in the ruins of the Yucatan. The same kinds of patterns organize Frank Lloyd Wright's Robie House and Michelangelo's Capitol. The disharmony we see around us is the exception."

This is the thesis of Jonathan Hale's book on architecture and design, "The Old Way of Seeing," that in previous centuries, everyone, not just the professionals and experts, had an innate understanding of good, classical proportion and good design, and the beauty of good proportion. Vernacular builders of the 18th and early 19th century had that understanding. Hale suggests that even some professionals nowadays have lost this understanding.

Agreed. I remember watching Norm Abrams measuring antique pieces and commenting on the proportions, then reproducing them. I think I developed a sense for it floating in and out of Dad's woodshop.

Thus far, I tend to find there are two basic types of GC. The first is the Craftsman. Often he enjoys working with his hands, but also has some sort of deeper background or interest. This is the guy who, when you ask how tall the wainscoting should be, measures the wall and does a calculation based on the height of the ceiling and what the right proportion should be for THAT room.

The other kind worked for a while as crew and then maybe sub, often for a production builder. They've decided that the GC job looks pretty easy and is "more money" so they decide to go into that line, instead. These guys often DON'T have any sense of good proportions. This is the one who'll hang one shutter on a window that is in a corner. I DO notice that very few of this type start out as trim/fine carpenters. Those guys generally stay in their lane, have an excellent sense of proportions, sometimes carry classical manuals regarding same, and will actually make a very soft, high-pitched wail if you suggest putting 3" baseboards in a room with 12' ceilings.

There's an interesting exercise for an enterprising design student: put together a visual quiz of good and bad proportions in design and see how many the average person can catch as "off." Even if they can't tell you WHY, how many of them will they look at a poor design and go, "something isn't right."

I think we've gotten so flooded with all the visual media that we focus on superficial aspects (Is it sufficiently "modern farmhouse," are chickens too dated?, etc.) and loose the ability to evaluated spatial relationships.

That said, visualizing things in 3 dimensions is hard. This is why I don't do orthopedic work.

"...The problem is that once upon a time, good design was something that even "average" people understood..."

Exactly. Understanding rhythm, proportion and scale were things that were once commonly understood by consumers and builders alike. No longer.

"...I think we've gotten so flooded with all the visual media that we focus on superficial aspects (Is it sufficiently "modern farmhouse," are chickens too dated?, etc.) and loose the ability to evaluated spatial relationships..."

This is what has brought "features" to the forefront, helped by the shows on HGTV, who spend as much video time placing and showing the features and furnishings as they do the architecture. Architecture, in these shows, has simply become the place where the sofa, plates, wall and floor finishes are highlighted and given the majority of video time.

When was the last time that you remember HGTV giving time to the question, "what should the proportion of the windows be?"...

Yet...look how important the proper proportion of the windows are to the exterior of this renovated home:

Do you see where the tallest windows are located? Where the shortest windows are located? And where the intermediate windows are located? Do you see how the facade is subdivided into three bays? Do you see the simplicity of materials and colors? Do you see the harmony in the details?

This are some of the important things we've lost, replaced by McMansion excesses.

[Warning: Stream of Consciousness Craziness Ahead]

Americans, as a whole, seem to prefer the comfort of standardization and homogeneity. The popularity of chain restaurants, national hotels, and production builders is an expression of that comfort.

Perhaps it's partly because Americans lack these things, ethnically ("Melting Pot," anyone?), that we seek them out, in attempt to gain what other nations around the world have -- a distinct, easily-identifiable culture and sense of self.

We are too large, geographically and socially, to successfully embrace a "standard" style of anything, really. For example, our language dialects differ from region to region, yet how many news anchors, television series actors, or anyone else designed for popular consumption, speaks in anything other than a "standard non-accent"? (Whatever the heck that actually is???? lol)

Conformity is expected and reinforced in our formal educational institutions, from daycares all the way up through universities. It is present in our workplaces (dress codes, name badges, cubicles, etc.) in the cars we drive (much less selection for a family with more than 5 members), and in the homes we live in (municipalities allowing large developers to buy tracts of land and cookie cutter them up). We are stigmatized for breaking the standard mold... Life is more complicated, the more you differ from the mainstream sameness.

So, when folks set out to buy or build a house -- a huge financial undertaking; the single largest for most of us -- the rational choice is the one that doesn't stand out. We are conditioned from young ages to avoid anything that makes us markedly different. Most people don't want to be "weird." There are costs to being weird, not all of them economic, but none as measurable. It's just too risky.

So here is a question: Has the speed of information dissemination increasing led to homogenization of American home styles? Beginning with the Sears kit home, and culminating with modern production builds, things have gotten more and more "the same" from coast to coast.

I'm not certain we'll ever really know the answer to this question, because the United States has such a short history; we haven't really been around that long. Most of our existence has been in "high speed information" times. It was much easier to develop regional styles prior to the invention of the printing press, a luxury we have never had, let alone prior to the internet.

Second question: Is this less noticeable in the custom home market? Do people who are building a home that is not in a development or at least not part of a production model tend more often to choose a regional style?

Sadly, not around here. :-( Not that I've noticed, anyway. It's possible I'm not looking in the right neighborhoods, but price point doesn't seem to affect my inability to find vernacular architecture.

Third question (Inspired by bpath's post of that lovely 1930's gem this AM): If so many of us fawn over historical styles and house, why do we not make an effort to build anything with near the charm? Why so many CAD-designed, uncategorizable hodge-podge "transitional" stock plans, and so few Dutch Colonials, Dog Trots, Georgians, etc?

I don't think "so many of us" fawn over historical styles... I think a very select subset of GardenWeb folks do. ;-) For reasons I ranted on, earlier in my post, lol. It doesn't help that even around the forums here, people caution others to avoid "killing resale," further promoting conformity.

America's contributions to the world are largely technology-based -- not art-based -- where mass production and making things more widely available reign supreme. Making things pretty doesn't seem to be a national past time, and those who value beauty over function are considered foolish.

I think the rise of the PUD / production builder / one stop buy, select, build, finance has given way to the Mr Potatohead architectural style (base home, add ons) and the homogeneity of neighborhood after neighborhood.

I built my current home in a neighborhood that had 6-8 local builders and was developed by a local developer. No "plan books", and each home was "custom" - but we had architectural review. One could only use a certain set of builders who each had certain "styles" they were more comfortable with - you could buy a spec home, use the plans each builder seemed to build (or some variation of) in each neighborhood they built in, work with their designer for a more custom / start from scratch home, or go full architect custom. We have a mix here - along the full range.

HOWEVER - that model appears to be moving further and further upscale. No longer can you get that experience at anything less than $1M. Any decent sides plots of lands are bought by MAJOR production builders or developers who want to own the entire process. And SOME neighborhoods north of $1M have larger lots or are infill in the city (which seems to demand more "creativity"and architect skills due to the limitations on lot size and restrictive neighborhood / historic issues.

The LARGE MAJORITY of new housing available is Toll Brothers, Pulte, et al.

Doing full custom means disconnecting all the steps of the process - find land, buy land, design home and pick out EVERYTHING, get financing, build home, get financing again (often). You can't do that in neighborhoods - so you either find a tear down, an infill lot (usually it's vacant for a reason...) or you are further outside the city like I am. It's WAY more work, and a much larger investment in time and money. And - you DO give up certain conveniences / amenities.

I think the overall development and building business model is driving a singular style profile (without regionalism) and TV / internet continues to shrink the globe / reduce regionalism and reduce how folks "identify" themselves. Add increased geographic mobility, and you get more and more infiltration of "blended" styles (or McMansions).

When I was a house-hunting single chick, I looked at a townhouse development by Pulte. Wood doors and wood cabinet doors were an upgrade, the default was plasticy composite. The layout was weird (the balcony was only accessible from the bedroom, not the living room), and you could hear the wind whistling through the weatherstripping. And this was in the model home, which you'd think would be one of the best-made. I think they also did a sparkling new development/town in Texas, back when I lived there, that looked like cr*p 10 years later. I don't care if Pulte has upgraded, all that left a bad taste in my mouth for them.

The majority of my practice in the past several years is in a resort area in northern Michigan. Many of the projects are adding on to cottages built about 100 years ago. They have great architectural character and are an incredible reflection on the sociological attitude of the time. I think the reason they are so nice is the builders never saw a mobile home or track house.

(Anyone catch the malapropism?)

You and your one-tract mind, Mark lol.

I'm on trac with you brother!

He does it because he knows I wince, physically. Every. D**n. Time.

And here I was just about to say nice things about him. I was considering Virgil's comment and I have to admit being as prone as the next homeowner to worry about "features." But, at the same time, I was trusting Mark to keep the proportions and design working. Replay variations of this repeatedly:

Wait, last time around that was a shed dormer.

Yes, but when we changed the line here, it needed to become a gable.

Oh.

Wasn't that a gable on that porch last time?

Yes, but since we altered the roofline there, it would have given that porch too much dominance to leave it a gable.

Oh.

And so on.

I think the only time I REALLY gave him pause was that tile stove...

Now that's a feature.

ODD, I get what you're saying, although I haven't lost all hope. I think chains are less a result of DESIRING homogeneity than they are about a known quantity. I like a little local joint for a bite to eat as much as the next person. But only if I have it on good authority that it IS good. Some greasy spoons actually HAVE greasy spoons. If I'm out of town, I'm probably going to look for a chain that I know has decent food. Hotels - same. I am not Sam and Dean Winchester, so Imma forgo the MCM motel with the Magic Fingers bed and stay at the Marriott.

I DO think janni and the others have it right. It has more to do with financing. One-off custom builders are getting locked out of the development game. And so many of the regional builders are now NATIONAL builders.

I would disagree that we never HAD regional architecture. "Roots of Home" is a lovely analysis of native styles and how they developed. I just wish there was a version of Versacci and Schaeffer for the masses. It looks like Versacci has given up on both his Pennywise plans AND his brain child of modular, quality architecture.

Say as many nice things about him as you can.

I think chains are less a result of DESIRING homogeneity than they are about a known quantity.

I guess I kinda see these things -- "known quantity" and "homogeneity" -- as basically equivalent. Different sides of the same coin, almost.

Known quantities are comfortable, familiar, and they don't rock the boat. There's little to no risk. They tend to be more convenient and less stressful. In a country where we are not unified by the things that typically unify other nations (language, food, religion), we seek out other things for that comfort.

...Or, all of this is just a random hallucinatory product of being sick and sleep deprived for the past 2 weeks... Y'all be the judge.... lol

Yet...look how important the proper proportion of the windows are to the exterior of this renovated home:

Do you see where the tallest windows are located? Where the shortest windows are located? And where the intermediate windows are located? Do you see how the facade is subdivided into three bays? Do you see the simplicity of materials and colors? Do you see the harmony in the details?

This reminds me of when i was designing my house with our draftsman (someone my builder called a designer). I made some changes to the house in photoshop, sent them off to the draftsman to make the changes and when the changes came back, he had made the upstairs windows larger than the downstairs windows because they needed to be egress windows.

I wrote him and told him how second floor windows should NEVER be taller than first floor windows because then it makes the house look unbalanced and then it looks like the second floor is pushing down onto the first floor.

He wrote back how he's been designing houses for years and never heard of that. (His background is in structural engineering.) I wanted to write him back and comment how he never heard about that because he's no designer, but I held my tongue.

Meanwhile, one of the sugar cube style homes went up around the corner. He designed it with the homeowner and sure enough, the second floor windows are larger than the first floor windows and the whole thing looks unbalanced.