This Saturday was our last column for The Seattle PI (sniff, sniff).
The section of the paper we wrote for, "@Home" has been discontinued. The same has happened to The Seattle Times "Digs" section.
Gone.
From what I understand, it had little to do with the content, but the advertising just didn't support it. Funny, because when these sections first debuted, there were LOTS of advertisers. Makes me wonder...
Regardless, it's really too bad. There was a lot of great information we put out for our readers in our section. I am really going to miss it. And I will miss hearing back from our readers - both the positive AND negative feedback!
Showing posts with label Design Files. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Design Files. Show all posts
Monday, October 29, 2007
Thursday, September 20, 2007
Ruminations On the Past
With hefty fall fashion and design magazines hitting the newsstands this fall, we thought that we’d take a look backwards into the design trends of the past. Not only were the prices vastly different, but the reflecting values and approaches were too.
We scoured our collection of old design books and how-to manuals and found some rather interesting (some might claim useless) tidbits that give us a humorous glimpse into the design arena of days gone bye. As you will see, it’s a far cry from the Crate and Barrel, mail order, and the internet extravaganza we now have. Enjoy…..
The following was a furniture budget offered as a suggestion in “Popular Home Decoration”, a design book published in 1940. It appeared in a chapter titled “A Bride’s Eye View” and meant to assist the young new homemaker with household planning.
Sofa Bed with slipcover $67.48
Two end tables $ 2.99 each
Lamps $ 3.25 each (note: assemble at home)
Side chairs $ 3.00 each
Dining table $ 3.49 each
Unfinished bookcases $ 3.95 each
Percale for draperies $ 8.75 (35 yards @ .25 per yard)
Bath towels .59 each
Double bed sheets $ 1.79 each
Bed pillows $ 3.00 each
The same text offered these 5 categories for families: Prosperous, Comfortable, Backbone of America, Just Getting By and Relief Groups. You were encouraged to determine your category as it made your position clear and was helpful for knowing what types of household furnishing you would be purchasing and how much you could spend.
If you were in the middle of the pack, you could expect to spend a whopping $179.00 to completely outfit your first apartment!
You were also encouraged to determine what your family “type” was. Check this out:
The Social Type: Bridge, parties, gossip, clothes and shopping.
The Intellectual type: Books, current events, theatre and concert attendance
The Community Builder: Church, charity, PTA and active club work
The Home centered type: Mending, washing, ironing and cleaning
The Creative type: Art, cooking, gardening and decorating
And once you figured all of this out, you could select from any of the following design styles to create the home of your imagination or dreams: Rustic, Casual, Informal, Semiformal or Formal. Each of these came with suggestions on proper wood finishes, fabrics and surfaces to compliment the feeling.
Much of the advice in these old books is still of value today. Their value lies in organizing the interior design process into a framework from which to hang your project. Today it might be framed in the language of designing in “layers” or finding your “personal style”. The challenge is to integrate the advice of a half century ago into the progress we have made, the choices we have and opportunities afforded us by technology and innovation. At the very least, they are an entertaining glimpse at a simpler time.
We scoured our collection of old design books and how-to manuals and found some rather interesting (some might claim useless) tidbits that give us a humorous glimpse into the design arena of days gone bye. As you will see, it’s a far cry from the Crate and Barrel, mail order, and the internet extravaganza we now have. Enjoy…..
The following was a furniture budget offered as a suggestion in “Popular Home Decoration”, a design book published in 1940. It appeared in a chapter titled “A Bride’s Eye View” and meant to assist the young new homemaker with household planning.
Sofa Bed with slipcover $67.48
Two end tables $ 2.99 each
Lamps $ 3.25 each (note: assemble at home)
Side chairs $ 3.00 each
Dining table $ 3.49 each
Unfinished bookcases $ 3.95 each
Percale for draperies $ 8.75 (35 yards @ .25 per yard)
Bath towels .59 each
Double bed sheets $ 1.79 each
Bed pillows $ 3.00 each
The same text offered these 5 categories for families: Prosperous, Comfortable, Backbone of America, Just Getting By and Relief Groups. You were encouraged to determine your category as it made your position clear and was helpful for knowing what types of household furnishing you would be purchasing and how much you could spend.
If you were in the middle of the pack, you could expect to spend a whopping $179.00 to completely outfit your first apartment!
You were also encouraged to determine what your family “type” was. Check this out:
The Social Type: Bridge, parties, gossip, clothes and shopping.
The Intellectual type: Books, current events, theatre and concert attendance
The Community Builder: Church, charity, PTA and active club work
The Home centered type: Mending, washing, ironing and cleaning
The Creative type: Art, cooking, gardening and decorating
And once you figured all of this out, you could select from any of the following design styles to create the home of your imagination or dreams: Rustic, Casual, Informal, Semiformal or Formal. Each of these came with suggestions on proper wood finishes, fabrics and surfaces to compliment the feeling.
Much of the advice in these old books is still of value today. Their value lies in organizing the interior design process into a framework from which to hang your project. Today it might be framed in the language of designing in “layers” or finding your “personal style”. The challenge is to integrate the advice of a half century ago into the progress we have made, the choices we have and opportunities afforded us by technology and innovation. At the very least, they are an entertaining glimpse at a simpler time.
Wednesday, August 15, 2007
What? We Evoke These Strong Emotions - About Decorating???
Not all reader feedback is of a positive nature:
Dear Robin and Christian and John (our esteemed editor):
How fabulous to read two columnists who have a lock on the truth! I am not an admirer, however. We just installed the shower head provided by the City of Seattle; it replaced that one they sent several years ago. This one allows us to turn down the water volume to just a trickle between soaping and rinsing, and despite the cold nipping at exposed wet skin, we take advantage of that feature because it seems to be part of being a good citizen.
Multiple shower heads are self-indulgent and environmentally indefensible as is the gigantic house featured on the front page of the paper today. Your training clearly reflects that you believe design and/or beauty is more important than anything else. You are shallow, and so "yesterday" besides. Your flippant dismissal of a tub for people with joint problems says it all. Don't pass yourselves off as thoughtful problem solvers. Your interests are clearly far more superficial than that.
M.E. , disgusted
(via email)
Well. I suspect this is in response to an article published a few weeks ago where the father wanted to update his single bed/bath condo for his son to live in, but still wanted to keep it in good marketable shape. He wondered if he needed to keep the tub for resale. We supposed that it would be okay,and maybe even great if he got rid of the tub and created a "spa-like" room. Maybe even including a shower with two heads.
This is not to say that those who luxuriate in baths or have joint issues are lesser concerns, but our response was towards a PARTICULAR instance of desire on the owners' part and future resale.
We said that the number of people that would be turned off by the loss of the tub would probably be minimal, in regards to putting it on the market.
Remember, this is a single bed/bath unit. There are many out there! Why not create some features that would make it attractive and unique?
Plus, what ever happened to life's little luxuries? I doubt a person uses a double shower head on a daily basis, for goodness sake! But - light a candle, play some great music and enjoy the double heads once in a while seems o.k. in my book.
I think too, there are issues in her answer that are a response to last weeks column about our view that there are varying shades of being "green". This reader may be on the far end of the spectrum, most people would NOT turn down their water in the middle of the shower... Maybe in the future this will be the norm, and the earth will be better off for it. But for right now...
Dear Robin and Christian and John (our esteemed editor):
How fabulous to read two columnists who have a lock on the truth! I am not an admirer, however. We just installed the shower head provided by the City of Seattle; it replaced that one they sent several years ago. This one allows us to turn down the water volume to just a trickle between soaping and rinsing, and despite the cold nipping at exposed wet skin, we take advantage of that feature because it seems to be part of being a good citizen.
Multiple shower heads are self-indulgent and environmentally indefensible as is the gigantic house featured on the front page of the paper today. Your training clearly reflects that you believe design and/or beauty is more important than anything else. You are shallow, and so "yesterday" besides. Your flippant dismissal of a tub for people with joint problems says it all. Don't pass yourselves off as thoughtful problem solvers. Your interests are clearly far more superficial than that.
M.E. , disgusted
(via email)
Well. I suspect this is in response to an article published a few weeks ago where the father wanted to update his single bed/bath condo for his son to live in, but still wanted to keep it in good marketable shape. He wondered if he needed to keep the tub for resale. We supposed that it would be okay,and maybe even great if he got rid of the tub and created a "spa-like" room. Maybe even including a shower with two heads.
This is not to say that those who luxuriate in baths or have joint issues are lesser concerns, but our response was towards a PARTICULAR instance of desire on the owners' part and future resale.
We said that the number of people that would be turned off by the loss of the tub would probably be minimal, in regards to putting it on the market.
Remember, this is a single bed/bath unit. There are many out there! Why not create some features that would make it attractive and unique?
Plus, what ever happened to life's little luxuries? I doubt a person uses a double shower head on a daily basis, for goodness sake! But - light a candle, play some great music and enjoy the double heads once in a while seems o.k. in my book.
I think too, there are issues in her answer that are a response to last weeks column about our view that there are varying shades of being "green". This reader may be on the far end of the spectrum, most people would NOT turn down their water in the middle of the shower... Maybe in the future this will be the norm, and the earth will be better off for it. But for right now...
Monday, January 29, 2007
New Year - New Blog
We've decided it's time for the Design Files team to start a blog!
Both Robin and myself will be contributing, and we hope (once this is up and running) to hear from you!
Both Robin and myself will be contributing, and we hope (once this is up and running) to hear from you!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
