The pictured structure looks like a pretty nice home. But it's not really a "home." This is a 750-square-foot "guesthouse," constructed (along with the pool) at a cost of something on the order of $2 million. It's in Los Angeles. I read about this guesthouse in The Wall Street Journal on Friday, August 22nd.
The Wall Street Journal carries a lot of news. (It also has "opinions," but those are a different matter). A typical edition of The Wall Street Journal has a "Main" section, a "Marketplace" section, a "Money & Investing" section, an entertainment section, called "Arena," and a real estate section. The Journal's real estate section is titled, "Mansion."
The activities that we typically find discussed in the "real estate" section of the newspaper have to do with the human transformation of some part of the Natural World into a part of the human world that we create. Usually, this activity is called "development," as though the Natural World needs to grow up and develop an understanding of its real responsibility in serving human demands.
I question the premise of this kind of "development," as any regular reader of this blog well knows.
My point today is to suggest that if constructing our human world has "upsides," and human benefits, which it certainly does, there can be too much of a good thing.
Our "development" activities should strive for the least, not the most, impact on the Natural World.
"Mansion" is not the right rubric under which to consider issues of "housing."
http://online.wsj.com/articles/the-popularity-of-guesthouses-1408638276?tesla=y&mg=reno64-wsj
No comments:
Post a Comment
Thanks for your comment!