A few comments to the comments on my post... Maro, our Mexican trip was taken after we retired. I no longer have any desire to landscape as a business. But I still love the creative part, often stopping at interesting houses under construction and making quick sketches of landscape ideas for my own amusement. The tingle of deep design involvement, the working of ying and yang, feeling the pulse of a design as I play with light, shadows, texture and other feelings not easily translated into words, will forever excite me. I agree, bahia, on your remarks about high walls surrounding dwellings. However, our archeologist son points out that in the early days man surrounded himself with walls to protect his family, food crops and to prevent sewage from spilling into the family compound. There were, of course, many reasons for walls, much dependent on climate and location. In some respects I would rather live with your abundant, overplanted, ever changing palette of color. It allows me to be casual, not afraid to change the position of a chair or garden ornament. The minimalist approach generally allows no additional room for change. The design is right there in your face, always perfect, always complete saying, "admire me". Accordian, you have brought up a point to be stressed. It is very important to design interior, exterior and landscaping as one package. We talk about this every once in awhile on the Forum. Most home buyers locate a house too late in the building process to have this happen. Sadly they are faced with many of the landscape problems we see posted daily here. Yes, there will always be "something missing" in these developer aberrations.

localeater- I will order some samples of browns while I'm shopping. Mr.MM is going to be surprised when the next 400 lbs of tile samples start rolling in. EAM44- we definitely have more brick, but I'm not sure I want anymore. It's kind of a pain to clean. Maybe sealed wouldn't be horrible, but it's still got a lot of nooks and crannies for things to hide in. I scrub down the brick around the range a few times a year and it takes a few hours, and it doesn't get many splashes, just dusty. controlfreakecs- Maybe match isn't the proper word, but I certainly don't want to add anymore colors. I'm okay with picking out a color that's already there, even if it's in small amounts. chesters_house- I kind of like the idea of a pattern, but would it be too busy? crl- It seems that paint is going to be the easiest, and maybe best choice. ineffablespace- you're talking to someone who would wear black pants and a black sweater and think it looked okay because they are both black. This whole post is making me realize that my wardrobe probably needs a lot of work as well. saipanlady- I'm hesitant to do something just behind the range and sink. The sink would probably be okay, but would a square of something look weird with the arch above?

White slab doors with oak trim were for cheaper houses OR for people who wanted a contemporary look. But it was often considered chintzy by the mid 80s, unless you really were going clearly 80s modern. Perhaps it was considered so downmarket because it was easy to make cheaply--it may have started in upscale kitchens, but the technology was fundamentally inexpensive. Like Formica. Laminates are a wonderful material, really. But they're inexpensive, so they are most often found in less expensive settings. I never said shaker cabinets were NEW. There was nothing NEW about oak. How classic can you get? There was nothing NEW about cathedral doors. Yet golden oak cathedral doors are now synonymous with the 1980s. White shaker cabinets are the same. Of course they're not some kind of revolution. The oak cathedral cabinets weren't supposed to be, either. They were both intended to evoke tradition, history, classic comfort. Side notes: Espresso on this stretch of the East coast made a make for approximately.5 seconds. Not long enough for it to look very "dated." The super ornate looks is very popular still among the Iranian population here, as well. The flooring choices are particularly different from the run of the mill! The Smallbone style didn't hit Dallas until the early-mid-90s. It was the bridge into Tuscan, which made a much bigger impact across the south and southwest, at least. All the detailed cabinet fronts. ! But..it wasn't "just white." It was "an update on the tired, passé, cliched white of yesteryear." An old cabinet couldn't just be painted white to make it the right style. It had to be aged. It had to have faux layers of color applied--to be classic, to evoke history, etc. Funny how that look is so dated now. Sure, it's painted. It's painted "wrong." I should have been clearer that a gray or white shaker door painted kitchen, or one with a blue, teal, or green accent area of paint, is going to be pretty rapidly dated. This is what 95% of people who say "painted" now mean. Not EVERY kitchen that's painted will be dated. Some aren't in style--or out. They'll be fine IF they're appropriate to the house. (Another side note: The island pot rack. I'm embarrassed to say how late I still did that pot rack!) Of COURSE there are other trends than the most dominant, anyhow. There is a particularly hideous Spanish revival style of the 1970s--very dark doors with a weird pattern--that is still in hundreds of thousands of homes in the Southwest and almost nowhere else. There is the knotty pine style of the 80s-90s--mostly in homes that decide on rustic. My take is that the less clear of a style your home has, and the more it looks like every other kitchen, the more danger you face in things looking dated. The more forceful the home's style, the more things will look "right" if you respect that style, with fewer casualties from trends. At least in the long run! There's a fabulous 80s Art Deco revival that someone just bought, and I was thinking the other day that it was probably "awful" from 95 to 05 or even 08, but it's so delightful now. I think things will look the very worst if you pick something really trendy that defies your house. Like a French country kitchen in a Tudor. It does mean locking yourself and your home in to some degree of definitive style. But in the long run, I think it makes for a more cohesive experience, which might be "classic" by some definition. Now, I say this as someone who bought a shag gray on white trellis rug several years ago because I thought it saw striking and unique... (Not anymore!!!! That's going to be so tacky so soon!) My living room is also gray and yellow. Not that it's more than temporary, with the kids (no, food isn't allowed in there, but they're just STICKY some days), but there is a clock ticking on those things, for sure! This book was published in 1999. Most of the kitchens were put together in the 1980s through about 95. Almost none of them look dated now. Almost none of them were ever on trend, though. (And many of the kitchens are AMAZING.) https://m.barnesandnoble.com/w/great-kitchens-at-home-with-americas-top-chefs-ellen-c-reinheimer/1119132158?ean=9781561582877

Lol, Lobby. And yet you're here. A time will come. Regarding the amount of stimulation or calm. Long ago, the first time I visited the home of a certain really outstanding family, I was so surprised. They were achievers in so many ways, constantly contributing, traveling, entertaining, civically involved, very into sports. And affluent. I'd describe their active living areas as something like hospital waiting areas, but perhaps not quite so nice, could really have used an industrial designer to give it some style. Lots of seating for big groups, though . Then I realized this family used their home as a launch pad, not a shelter. I'm a shelter sort naturally, always have been. Books, art, memories, eclectic mix. I also need stimulation in my home because in these years with health issues I'm not that active. It's still easy to sympathize with people who need serenity and little stimulation at home, though, because there was a period long ago when I got all the stimulation I could handle before I got home to my second "job," with always more to come the next day. I've always really disliked, "Decorate for the life you have, not the life you wish you had" for itself as limiting and preachy, but especially as a general mantra for everyone. It doesn't just seem small and anti-aspirational -- It is as exactly wrong for some people, such as those living dynamic lives of directed change, as it can be a sensible guideline for others, such as people raising children on limited income. Even they may be able to put their spare change in a can and buy an "unaffordable" piece of art or furniture each year, moving toward the home they want. Morris's "Have nothing in your house that you do not know to be useful, or believe to be beautiful" does have strong appeal to me as a general guideline to clarify thinking, emphasis on the beauty since our kids are grown.