It's not the "lack of interest in aesthetics" the problem in high modernism, and the author doesn't say so. It's a lack of interest in lived/organic/patina/messy-because-of-life aesthetics, and a tendency towards pure/empty/conceptual aesthetics.
>Personally this cozy, homely, "clay pot on the floor", pastoralism does nothing for me.
Well, that's a choice. And like any choice, there are tradeoffs, and ways of thinking and cultural consequences that are associated with it (not just regarging messy vs clean-looking kitchens).
> It's a lack of interest in lived/organic/patina/messy-because-of-life aesthetics, and a tendency towards pure/empty/conceptual aesthetics.
I think he's cheating, then, by comparing a real estate listing with his own lived-in home. Modern architecture and design spaces are just as conducive to lived-in-ness, when people actually live in them. You can hang art on the wall and accumulate whatever decorative touches and knick-knacks appeal to you or carry sentimental value.
Wanting the architecture and built interior design of a home to reflect the personal life and "mystery" of its inhabitants is classist as well, because only a limited number of people can afford professional architecture and design services to customize a home to reflect their personality. Most people customize a home themselves, via their own decoration, furniture, books, and other cherished objects.
In fact it seems bizarrely oppressive to assume that the professional designers of a domestic space need to stock a home with life before it is inhabited, as if the people moving in will otherwise suffer a deficiency of it. Whose life do you expect to see in an uninhabited house? What kind of Frankenstein's monster version of life do we expect the expert professionals to synthesize in their modeling programs, to create the illusion of a space being shaped by a living presence that has never been there?
Producing brand-new spaces that have the same aesthetic as lived-in spaces strikes me as something the machines will do after we are gone, manufacturing houses and adding childish crayon scribbles inside because there are no real children left to draw on the walls.
It sounds unfair to counter your long post with so little, but you're making the assumption anyone buying that house will make the kitchen messier. People buy the look and want to keep it, you can bet that kitchen will look just the same after being lived in.
>Personally this cozy, homely, "clay pot on the floor", pastoralism does nothing for me.
Well, that's a choice. And like any choice, there are tradeoffs, and ways of thinking and cultural consequences that are associated with it (not just regarging messy vs clean-looking kitchens).
>What's wrong with voids for example?
It's sterile and clinical.