[PREV - NOWHERE_TRANSIT] [TOP]
NOWHERE_VICTORIANS
One of the things that "The
Geography of Nowhere" (1993) by
James Howard Kunstler seems
strongest at is it's summary of NOWHERE_MAN
architechtural history.
History of the Victorian:
"The revolution started with what was at
first mockingly called the 'balloon
frame.' Prior to this time, all wooden
houses -- whether Georgian, Greek,
Federal, Gothic, or vernacular farmhouse
-- were supported by post-and-beam
frames. Massive timbers were connected
by joints, such as the
mortise-and-tenon, and secured with
wooden pegs called 'trunnels' (from tree
nails). Hand-wrought iron nials
existed, but they were mainly used for
finish work, and were so terribly
expensive that families leaving New
England to settle western New York and
Ohio knocked apart the insides of their
old farmhouse in order to salvage
precious nails for the next homestead.
[...]
By the 1840s this began to change."
p.161
And so on.
He touches on:
White pine forests in upper Michigan.
Canal shipping.
Factory-made steel-wire nails.
At one point, he suggests
baloon-frame houses rot
and sag after roughly a
lifetime (meaning what,
50 years, 100? Maybe SF
has the weather gauge here.
More:
"The light and versatile wooden frame
made possible all those turrets,
balconies, bays, cupolas and porte
cocheres of the Victorian styles. ..."
"At the same time, factories
mass-produced wooden mill-work --
brackets, spindles, balusters, shutters,
moldings, and all manner of decorative
items -- ..."
"These houses became such exercises in
wretched excess that the next generation
ran shrieking back into neoclassicism."
p. 163
"Discusses a book by Downing and Davis
called _Cottage Residences_, published
in 1842: 'The plans offered by Davis
and Downing formed a schematic basis for
the orgy of styles that followed, which
came to be bundled under the rubric
''Victorian.'' ' " p. 159
All of this is from Chapter 9, "A Place
Called Home", and it left me puzzled.
It's a history of American building
styles, and I get the sense it's
supposed to be a tale of decline.
Myself, I have trouble perceiving where
things are supposed to shift from good
to bad.
One remark:
"The tragic thing is that there
existed in America a fine
heritage of regional
home-building traditions, rich
with values and meanings, and
we threw it all away." p. 149
Is his concept that everything *after*
the invention of the baloon frame
sucks? That would be *extremely*
reactionary, in my opinion, but he Funny: does he
does appear to be sneering at loathe *both*
Victorians in places ("frippery", "Modern", and
"orgy of styles"). "Victorian"
Architcture?
If baloon-frame Victorians AGES
are okay, when did things stop
being okay?
On page 168, he talks about the
lack of charm, and charm being
related to connectedness, and Possibly he envisions
the car is the villain that a steady collapse
produces the disconnect... proportional to technical
advance, with the car
If Victorians are not okay, as the capstone?
then how could cars be
responsible for them?
--------
[NEXT - PEDDLING_SUSTAIN]