The Best Of Intentions
The emperor has no taste.
Brad Pitt gave New Orleans some ugly-ass houses. Now, I'm no priss about modern architecture. I like some of it a lot, but I've been to New Orleans and the hideous and self-consciously busy houses Brad Pitt had some architecture firms build there don't fit in at all. Check out the photos at The New York Times article by Fred A. Bernstein. Bernstein writes:
James Dart, a Manhattan-based architect who was born and raised in New Orleans, described the houses as "alien, sometimes even insulting," adding, "the biggest problem is that they are not grounded in the history of New Orleans architecture." But, like other architects I spoke to, he expressed admiration for Mr. Pitt. "He deserves a great deal of credit," Mr. Dart said, adding that Mr. Pitt had "done more for New Orleans" than any government agency.Jennifer Pearl, a broker who has several houses for sale in the Lower Ninth, has a practical view. "Brad has the very best intentions," she said. "However, had he come here with houses that looked like what had been here before, he probably could have had four times, five times as many houses up by now."
Another issue with the houses (except for Mr. Mayne's) is their elevation: to protect them from future floods, they have been built on stilts that turn their front porches into catwalks. The goal of porches is to create a sense of community, and that's hard to do when neighbors and passersby are literally overshadowed.
"It's like New York -- you know, the skyscrapers," said Ms. LeBlanc, who lives in a single-story house next to one of the much larger Make It Right creations, like a Mini Cooper boxed in by SUVs. "And there are going to be more," she added.
Virgina Postrel writes about the Times article:
The piece suggests, rather gently, that the actor has made a common mistake: giving what pleases him rather than what the recipient wants. The displaced residents of the Ninth Ward would like comfortable, inexpensive, and quickly available houses. Pitt prefers cutting-edge architecture. Residents are grateful for his generosity and good wishes, but their gratitude is tinged with regret for what might have been if he'd heeded their desires.
Okay, but this isn't just a movie-star problem. If If he'd built locale/heritage-appropriate shotguns, he'd have pissed people off even worse. What exactly is the appropriate porch design for a domicile built below the regions water level, and which will, eventually, flood? Boyfriend's trying to help people today. Show people are all about living in the moment.
Crid [CridComment @ gmail] at December 6, 2009 1:28 AM
PS- I think those houses (pictured at link) are purdy. If Mr. Bernstein is such a brilliant expert on the purpose of porches or the means of "creat[ing] a sense of community", I would trust that he'd shared his insight with the Upper Pontalba Building Commission long before Katrina hit. New Orleans' problems are not new.
Does anyone care to wager that Mr. Bernstein's home has a porch? If anyone wants to make a small wager, I'll track his ass down and report. Or would you just contend that New York Times reporters don't need that "sense of community"?
Crid [CridComment @ gmail] at December 6, 2009 1:38 AM
I will say that I like the bright colors.
Amy Alkon at December 6, 2009 1:43 AM
When you receive something, even if you don't necessarily like it, the correct response is "Thank you."
And if a natural disaster has dispossessed you of a home and someone gives you one to replace it, by all that's holy, that house is the most beautiful house in the world, no matter how much electro-shock therapy you need to convince yourself of that.
This isn't some ugly sweater that your aunt Gussy knitted for you that you won't wear outside the house and only when she visits. This is the only thing standing between you and homelessness. This cosmic-scale ingratitude is positively disgusting.
Perhaps Mr. Pitt and other celebrities should withhold their charity the next time there's a natural disaster. After all, I'm certain they wouldn't want to give something UGLY! Screw the fact that you were homeless and didn't even have beds for your kids. Just don't give them an ugly house.
"Not grounded in the history of New Orleans"? The history of New Orleans includes a time in recent history when houses in that area were wiped out. Even a house that resembled the previous one would not be "grounded in the history of New Orleans."
The complaint seems to be that they don't look like the houses that used to be there. Is there a reason they should? Those houses no longer exist. Why maintain the pretense that your house is 150 years old, when it's not even 15 minutes old?
Another is the stilts. Well, excuse Brad Pitt all to pieces, I'm sure he thought it was a good idea, in light of what happened.
The only thing "insulting" in this picture is Mr. Dart's profound ingratitude. Perhaps certain displaced residents of NOLA who now have a home thanks to Mr. Pitt's compassion would like to point this out to him.
So, NOLA has a new look? Tough shit. It's better than the desolation that occupied it before. Let's call this new architectural style "Ungrateful Shit."
Bernstein is a thoughtless and tactless bastard.I wonder how many houses he built for people who lost their homes due to natural disasters.
Patrick at December 6, 2009 4:47 AM
>When you receive something, even if you don't necessarily like it, the correct response is "Thank you."
Precisely. Especially when you have just received shelter for you and your family for free, no strings attached.
Alison Dennehy at December 6, 2009 4:55 AM
Let me get this straight-they get free, well built, cool-looking houses that will be worth a mint in resale by well-known architects, and they're bitching?
Let those who don't like what Pitt is doing put up millions of their own for houses there. Or, if they're the recipients, don't live there, and let people who will be grateful have them. Otherwise, STFU and learn your manners. Maybe the 9th ward needs free copies of Amy's book!
momof4 at December 6, 2009 6:00 AM
I adore New Orleans, go there yearly or more (they have a great zoo!) and I think those houses are awesome. I'd live in one! They fit in better than the McMansions people are putting up elsewhere there.
momof4 at December 6, 2009 6:05 AM
This makes me more and more mad. Why doesn't that ungrateful lazy shit get off his ass and set up a food stand, or little gift shop, if he wants those tourists to "give to his neighborhood"??? A free house isn't enough giving? Asshat. Lazy worthless ingrate.
momof4 at December 6, 2009 6:13 AM
I think it's great he gave them houses -- simply fantastic. I also think they're ugly as hell and don't go with the place.
Amy Alkon at December 6, 2009 7:18 AM
I've stayed in one fo the old shotgun houses near there, preKatrina. Old BF's grandma lived there. They were ugly and bright colored too. So did they not go with the place?
momof4 at December 6, 2009 7:40 AM
I saw those houses and the rest of the 9th Ward t his past April. Those houses don't fit in because they are too nice! The people want porches? Let them build their own houses then. They want quick and affordable? Again, build it yourself. Here a man took money out of his own pocket and tried to build a nice house for someone who lost everything. He tried to anticipate future flooding, make it enviro friendly, etc, and people are complaining. Brad Pitt should have done what those people and our government did and just left it to rot.
As far as those houses not fitting in with the New Orleans atmosphere, those houses aren't in the Garden District where the beautiful houes are, or the Quarter. They're in slummmy areas that nobody seemed to be fixing up all these years after Katrina. So tell Mr. Pitt, thank you but no thank you. You'd rather live in those really nice trailers that had been provided.
Kristen at December 6, 2009 7:56 AM
I agree with Patrick and Kristen, totally. I've been to NOLA a coupla times, once, pre-Katrina, once post. It's still a beautiful place to visit, and to live. Those people don't like the houses that Pitt built? Hell, I'll take one!
Flynne at December 6, 2009 8:34 AM
I remember hearing Pitt on NPR about his work in New Orleans some time back. I was really unimpressed by how unpolished he sounded - I don't want to say dumb 'cause I generally like him - but it was obvious he gave a crap and was actually there making stuff happen. There are worse ways to employ celebrity.
Getting a bunch of overdesigned architectural houses made was probably not as efficient as getting a bunch of craftsman houses built on pilings, but at least, he got some places built.
Whatever at December 6, 2009 9:04 AM
Over the last few years I've noticed a trend, a fad if you will, of building small efficient houses rather than big sprawling residences. The trend is towards energy efficiency, low cost building materials and construction techniques, and a striking appearance.
It could be that Mr. Pitt hired architects to design and build these buildings and left all of the design decisions up to them. The firms putting the buildings up knew that they would attract attention, and used them as a showcase for their work, perhaps at a reduced rate to Mr. Pitt.
That's how I would have done it, anyway.
Steve Daniels at December 6, 2009 9:18 AM
I still find it mouth-breathing stupidity to build there.
It's going to flood again, and soon.
And somehow, it will all be "the government's fault".
Radwaste at December 6, 2009 9:29 AM
Amy Alkon
http://www.advicegoddess.com/archives/2009/12/06/the_best_of_int.html#comment-1680882">comment from WhateverAgree, Whatever - I think it's great he built houses there. Super-great.
Amy Alkon at December 6, 2009 9:30 AM
There's an overwhelming sense of gratitude from those that were "affected" by Katrina to the tax-payers of this country, and an overwhelming sense of sarcasm in this comment. I certainly applaud Brad Pitt for putting his money up instead of just flapping his jaws, however the statement that he has done more than the Government is simply laughable.
jksisco at December 6, 2009 10:02 AM
They don't really suit the architectural style associated with New Orleans, but I can't believe they're complaining about the houses being on stilts. Almost every house where I live in FL is on stilts. That's because we're in a hurricane zone! And we're higher elevation than they are. This city needs to wake up.
lovelysoul at December 6, 2009 10:46 AM
> I still find it mouth-breathing
> stupidity to build there.
> It's going to flood again, and soon.
Word. I've had dear people in my life speak with pride about their weeks in the punishing sun of the summer in New Orleans as they donated time to rebuild. And I love them and admire their compassion, but could only sit mute.
Crid [CridComment @ gmail] at December 6, 2009 11:02 AM
The Goddess writes: I think it's great he gave them houses -- simply fantastic. I also think they're ugly as hell and don't go with the place.
Well, perhaps NOLA is in for a new look, and those houses will go with the place.
I simply can't believe you're letting aesthetics blind you to things that you should be appreciating. At least if you hate SUVs as much as you say to.
For one thing, these houses are designed to withstand flooding. That's damn thoughtful of Brad Pitt to think of that. Can you imagine how much those failsafes would have cost?
For another, they're green houses, and I don't mean they're made of glass and are used to raise plants. Not only do they have some kind of protection in place to keep them from losing everything they own, but maybe homeowner's insurance will cut them a break for having flood protection. To say nothing of the money that they'll save on fuel and electricity for air conditioning. And this was undoubtedly at greater expense to Mr. Pitt.
Don't you give him any props for that? Someone as environmentally conscious as you are? You don't seem to. You seem to be focused on how ugly they are. Correction: you think they're ugly.
As for the houses not going with what's there, with that, I agree...since nothing was there.
Radwaste, how the hell would you know it's going to flood again, and soon? You ask your Magic 8-ball?
If Brad Pitt gave me a house that was environmentally friendly and had flood protection, I would buy a commercial to thank him on national television. Who cares if it's ugly? Those are damned good houses.
Patrick at December 6, 2009 12:54 PM
"Who cares if it's ugly? Those are damned good houses."
But they didn't need to be ugly. The same protections and environmental factors could've been incorporated while still creating beautiful houses. We do it here in FL all the time. Our houses are built to withstand storms and flooding - complete with impact-resistant windows and doors - yet they're still attractive.
Like a lot of architects and architectural buffs, it seems Pitt was more interested in being progressive and "artistic" than addressing the needs of the people he was designing for (I say this after 20 yrs of marriage to an architect - they tend to care more about design than functionality. Frank Lloyd's Wright's "Fallingwater", though genius, was barely inhabitable).
lovelysoul at December 6, 2009 1:38 PM
Damned Hollywood porch-hating liberals.
Gog_Magog_Carpet_Reclaimers at December 6, 2009 3:55 PM
Lovelysoul: But they didn't need to be ugly.
As I said to Amy, they're ugly by your standards.
Speaking for myself, I can imagine that if a flood destroyed my home and everything in it, I would be bitterly resigned to having to rebuild from scratch. That would be especially hard if my place of employment was also destroyed.
If someone built me a house that I couldn't have otherwise done on my own, taking care that this house offers the very latest in flood protection, and is saving me money by making the house fuel efficient, I would dumbstruck with amazement. I could thank the person enough for this.
And you're worried because it's not pretty by your standards?
I can tell you this: if I did for someone what Brad Pitt did for these people in their destitute state, and they had the fucking nerve to tell me that the house I built was too ugly, I would give the house to someone else and tell the scumbag ingrate that he can go find a vacant lot, gather some sticks and build himself a lean-to.
Patrick at December 6, 2009 4:05 PM
lol. Patrick, I agree that Pitt was extremely generous. It would be hard to complain if it was your house being given. However, I'm not sure what the deal is - are these completely free houses or something like Habitat for Humanity, where the homeowner pays less? Certainly, if this is a house given for free, the homeowner should thank him and be eternally grateful, even if it's God-awful ugly.
But, I'm in the process of building a house, so, I've been learning quite a lot about the process, and I see no need why he had to make the houses that unattractive. You have to admit, those are some really ugly houses.
lovelysoul at December 6, 2009 4:27 PM
Amy Alkon
http://www.advicegoddess.com/archives/2009/12/06/the_best_of_int.html#comment-1680946">comment from lovelysoulYou have to admit, those are some really ugly houses.
Finally! Thank you, lovelysoul! I thought all of you had gone blind.
I live in a hotbed of modernist architecture and a lot of it is seriously ugly. And I really love some modernist places. When I first came to town, I lived in a loft in one designed and built by Simon Mondry and Jan Groene, who did interiors of some of the Frank Gehry-designed restaurants. It was whimsical and fun and not ugly at all, and there was a fire pit suspended on a steel cable between the two houses...nice touches like that. (I guess that makes it not a fire pit but a fire hanger.)
Amy Alkon at December 6, 2009 4:50 PM
"But they didn't need to be ugly. The same protections and environmental factors could've been incorporated while still creating beautiful houses. "
I like them. We have a lot like them here in Austin. And they go for a mint here. "Cookie cutters are for kitchens" after all, or some such. I like them much better than the shotguns and shacks that no doubt used to be there preflood. And considering this is a city where slave quarters-yes, actual tiny slave quarters of old-rent for over $1000 a month, these people got a steal.
momof4 at December 6, 2009 5:07 PM
I think you're missing the point. Brad Pitt very generously put a great deal of his own money to help rebuild the 9th Ward. He built homes that were environmentally friendly and also anticipated future problems with flooding. I seriously doubt that he thought the houses were ugly and I couldn't blame him if he were to be insulted by reading an article gently claiming that he did not heed the wishes of the residents or that he built what appealed to him and not to them.
Again, I've been to the 9th ward and its a slum. The houses there were not charming old homes that were a little beat up or old homes with old world charm. He didn't come in with visions of making his own little town and damn what the peasants want. He put a lot of thought and care into helping people who were in very unfortunate circumstances. Considering all the slamming of people on welfare on this blog, I'm amazed that these residents are being forgiven their disgusting lack of gratitude to someone who did something very generous and got criticism in return. These people are not out rebuilding on their own. They are taking help and then spitting in the face of the person helping them.
Kristen at December 6, 2009 7:52 PM
I think you're missing the point. Brad Pitt very generously put a great deal of his own money to help rebuild the 9th Ward. He built homes that were environmentally friendly and also anticipated future problems with flooding. I seriously doubt that he thought the houses were ugly and I couldn't blame him if he were to be insulted by reading an article gently claiming that he did not heed the wishes of the residents or that he built what appealed to him and not to them.
Again, I've been to the 9th ward and its a slum. The houses there were not charming old homes that were a little beat up or old homes with old world charm. He didn't come in with visions of making his own little town and damn what the peasants want. He put a lot of thought and care into helping people who were in very unfortunate circumstances. Considering all the slamming of people on welfare on this blog, I'm amazed that these residents are being forgiven their disgusting lack of gratitude to someone who did something very generous and got criticism in return. These people are not out rebuilding on their own. They are taking help and then spitting in the face of the person helping them.
Kristen at December 6, 2009 7:52 PM
"I seriously doubt that he thought the houses were ugly and I couldn't blame him if he were to be insulted by reading an article gently claiming that he did not heed the wishes of the residents or that he built what appealed to him and not to them."
I'm sure he didn't think the houses were "ugly", but he's an art snob. They think calf blood or feces on the Virgin Mary is "art". This wasn't what the people of the ninth ward needed, which is unfortunate, because, as the realtor said, if he had just built normal homes, he could've built 4 times as many. The population wanted nice homes, with porches and southern-style architecture that anyone would expect in New Orleans. This was a nod to his architect friends, giving them an opportunity to experiment and build whatever they wanted.
Unfortunately, the houses are ugly. I can't believe anyone can say they're attractive. It's like "The Emperor has No Clothes". Honestly, most of us wouldn't live in those hideous houses, and you know it.
lovelysoul at December 6, 2009 8:42 PM
Amy Alkon
http://www.advicegoddess.com/archives/2009/12/06/the_best_of_int.html#comment-1680967">comment from lovelysoulAgree with lovelysoul here.
Amy Alkon at December 6, 2009 9:15 PM
Amy Alkon
http://www.advicegoddess.com/archives/2009/12/06/the_best_of_int.html#comment-1680968">comment from Amy AlkonThese are the Katrina temporary houses that were built. Very small, but expandable, and very cheap, and fast to build.
http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2006/03/04/HOG86HFNDU1.DTL
Amy Alkon at December 6, 2009 9:21 PM
lovelysoul: I'm sure he didn't think the houses were "ugly", but he's an art snob.
How do you know?
lovelysoul: They think calf blood or feces on the Virgin Mary is "art".
Excuse me, but do you have a single instance of Brad Pitt praising such things?
lovelysoul: This wasn't what the people of the ninth ward needed, which is unfortunate, because, as the realtor said, if he had just built normal homes, he could've built 4 times as many.
You know, a friend of mine from another message board is a native of NOLA, and when I posted this article on the message board in a thread called, "Cosmic-scale Ingratitude," he offered this suggestion.
lovelysoul: Unfortunately, the houses are ugly. I can't believe anyone can say they're attractive. It's like "The Emperor has No Clothes".
I find it ironic that you would accuse Brad Pitt, someone you don't even know, or being an "art snob," but would presume to speak for everyone else on matters of taste. "I say they're ugly, therefore the entire world thinks they're ugly," sounds a little snobbish to me.
The Emperor's New Clothes, the metaphor which Amy also invoked, is a poor comparison. The fact that the Emperor wasn't wearing anything was simply a matter of objective fact. Whether or not the houses are ugly is a matter of subjective taste.
Honestly, most of us wouldn't live in those hideous houses, and you know it.
And if you would truly refuse to move yourself and your family into a brand new house that you consider ugly when the alternative is homelessness, you're a fool. Worse, I think a person that would consign her children to homelessness over a free house (and yes, they are free, not Habitat for Humanity bargain prices) because she happens to think it's ugly is an unfit mother.
Patrick at December 6, 2009 9:25 PM
The Goddess writes: These are the Katrina temporary houses that were built. Very small, but expandable, and very cheap, and fast to build.
http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2006/03/04/HOG86HFNDU1.DTL
What are you going to cook in that kitchenette? There isn't a single square inch of counter space, no microwave and no place to put one.
Is there a bed? Perhaps a hide-a-bed sofa? It might work for one or a couple, but I can't see moving a family in one of those.
Patrick at December 6, 2009 9:36 PM
I have to agree with a number of commentators here.
To get the gift of a home, and complain that it isn't the style you wanted...
That is rather like the man dying of thirst in the desert, complaining to his rescuer that he only drinks bottled water, or is driving him out of the desert in something other than a prius.
Ingratitude is one of the most disgusting flaws possible in the human character.
Perhaps the houses don't "Go" but I think that may have something to do with the fact that it is just not what people are used to seeing there. Give it 50 years, people will remark on its unique look.
And be quite dry when the flood comes again to boot.
---------------------------
And Patrick, we know its going to flood again, because it is in a zone that floods frequently enough that they have to build levies to keep it from happening. And guess what, they built the same type of levies that failed last time.
As far as coming soon, that is rather like asking Floridians how they know they're going to see hurricanes soon.
I will agree with you on the second statement though, if someone doesn't like it, letem build a damned leanto.
-----------------------------
lovelysoul, it may have escaped your notice, but he didn't have to build them ANY homes at all. Complaining that he could have built more if he'd built differently is rather like a child complaining to her father, "But daddy, if you'd just put in some more overtime you could have bought me a porsche with LEATHER interior!"
--------------------------------------
Personally, I do think the houses are rather hideous. Those things would blind a fucking smurf.
But that or homelessness, I'll take that, and pay for a new paint job or exterior modifications myself.
The people want porches? Let them pay for them on their own. That in and of itself could be a neighborly thing, get together like the bloody Amish do for barn raisings, and build each other's porches.
Betcha they won't!
I do have toadmit I rather like Kiernan Timberlake's design, I can't quite explain why. Maybe it reminds me of the things I built with my constructs sets as a kid.
I have to find myself agreeing with Patrick again on several points. Anyone who chooses homelessness for themselves and their families over a free brand new house is a fool.
He's dead on about the emperor's new clothes statement, its not even proper metaphor in the most elastic sense, because in that story all the people were in agreement as to the quality of the "clothes" whereas here we see broad dissent as to the quality of design, as if those who liked them are somehow foolishly pretending to be fond of them.
Sad possibility though...anyone want to lay odds that those perfect new homes will look as much like the "old" ones in the worst way in less than a year?
Robert at December 6, 2009 9:40 PM
Amy Alkon
http://www.advicegoddess.com/archives/2009/12/06/the_best_of_int.html#comment-1680974">comment from PatrickWhat are you going to cook in that kitchenette? There isn't a single square inch of counter space, no microwave and no place to put one. Is there a bed? Perhaps a hide-a-bed sofa? It might work for one or a couple, but I can't see moving a family in one of those.
These were small because they were temporary homes, but an example of a way to build housing for many, probably for not much more money, and fast. I don't think residents are complaining about free housing -- and the one giving the gift is free to do as he or she wishes, and it's very nice that Pitt did this. And I do appreciate that there was thought given to making these flood-worthy.
But, apparently the goal here was an architectural jaunt as much as anything else. And hey, his dime, his prerogative. Regardless, I think they're ugly as hell, except for the bright colors.
Amy Alkon at December 6, 2009 9:53 PM
Robert: And Patrick, we know its going to flood again, because it is in a zone that floods frequently enough that they have to build levies to keep it from happening. And guess what, they built the same type of levies that failed last time.
I think you don't understand what I'm saying. The levee system had been in place for exactly 40 years before it was hit by a hurricane of sufficient power to breach it. To suggest that it will flood again soon is to ignore the fact that the levees protected NOLA for 40 years and is anticipating another Katrina, although it to forty years to be hit by the first one.
Patrick at December 6, 2009 10:27 PM
Robert: Sad possibility though...anyone want to lay odds that those perfect new homes will look as much like the "old" ones in the worst way in less than a year?
Sigh. I fear you may be correct.
It's depressing, but sometimes the indigent are that way for a reason. I was mentioning this story to a woman in her eighties, and she commented that it's human nature. She recalled a time when nice apartments were built in NYC to shelter the homeless. And they expressed their gratitude by peeing in the hallways and other acts of vandalism.
In my native state of Vermont, there were laws on the books the required hotels to house the homeless (I have no idea if these laws are still on the books), but they would complain and scream bloody murder if their rooms didn't have color TV, Cable, HBO with all the amenities. Disgusting.
They're perfectly free to brave the elements in a New England winter if they don't like it.
Patrick at December 6, 2009 10:49 PM
Has anybody been to the Make It Right website? It shows photos of more designs for the homes that were completed. Some of the designs strike me as more appealing than others. I'm curious to see what the interiors of the homes look like to glimpse at the layout and flow of the spaces.
Different scenario, but similar debate: remember when the Louvre Pyramid by I.M. Pei was built in the late 80s? It sparked a huge controversy. Traditionalists hated that it was too modern and felt out of place against the historical architecture of the Louvre. 20 years later, critique against it has lessened considerably.
Some of you may choose to call the homes ugly. But the spirit in which they were built is altruistic. I'll focus on the beauty of that.
It's the old saying, "Beauty is in the eye of the beholder."
Jen Wading at December 7, 2009 12:07 AM
Thanks for sharing the site, Jen. I think this one is my favorite design. I'd go with a different color, though.
Others I think could be fixed made much nicer with minimal changes. The Graft Phase One (the blue and yellow one in the first picture of the Bernstein article), would be nicer without that section of wall that runs from the roof down the side of the steps descending from the front porch.
Like Robert, I like the Timberlake design and for the same reason. Makes me think of the Lego and erector sets I used to play with when I was little.
Patrick at December 7, 2009 2:44 AM
I saw these homes in person and will state again that these don't fit in with the neighborhood only because they are nicer than anything that's been there in a long time. The people want porches. Their wishes weren't heeded. Blah, blah, blah. Beggars can't be choosers or at least in this case shouldn't be. How lovely that in this day and age, Pitt will probably feel some kind of public relations pressure and go build the ingrates custom homes that they design at his expense of course. Sickening!
Kristen at December 7, 2009 5:36 AM
"That is rather like the man dying of thirst in the desert, complaining to his rescuer that he only drinks bottled water, or is driving him out of the desert in something other than a prius."
I didn't mean to imply they shouldn't be grateful. But that's kind of what is a little insulting about it. When the giver knows the receiver has no choice but to accept something that they really wouldn't have chosen if they HAD the choice.
And I've read about Pitt and his strange art purchases for years. He recently spent hundreds of thousenads on some modernistic coffee table and dabbles in architecture. Nothing wrong with that. It's his money, and he's being generous, but I also think this was as much about experimenting with architecture as it was helping people. Otherwise, he would've built more ordinary, yet desirable, homes for them.
lovelysoul at December 7, 2009 5:38 AM
The Lower Ninth was always a disaster waiting to happened. The disaster happened. Trying to replicate the neighborhood exactly the way it was is a recipe for another disaster.
From an environmental point of view, probably the best thing to do would be to buy out all of the existing homeowners and turn the place into a park. For various reasons, it would be enormously hypocritical of me to advocate this solution. What are some other alternatives? Elevating the entire area to be above sea level is one. (And if you're going to tell me it can't be done, I have some people on a little island in Texas you need to talk to.) Building houses designed to resist another massive flood is another. Pitt went with that option.
Do I think the houses are the height of beauty? No. But I think they represent experiments -- experiments that provide people with free housing. Pitt, unlike many, seems to have grasped the idea that replicating the old Lower Ninth -- the highly dysfunctional, dilapidated Lower Ninth, which was itself the product of economic and legal racism that kept black New Orleans residents from being able to live above sea level -- will not work. I think these houses are designed to shake things up while also helping out people who need help. Perhaps if the people who lived there admitted to themselves that they're going to have to deal with permanent changes one way or another, they could work with Pitt's architects to modify the houses to reflect local color a bit more. I don't see that happening. Lower Ninth residents did not tend to be good at looking at the big picture or planning ahead -- that's why we ended up with thousands of evacuees in the Astrodome. These houses represent an opportunity. I hope the local residents take the opportunity, but I am not overwhelmingly optimistic.
marion at December 7, 2009 5:59 AM
Boy, do I wish someone would come build me a porch. Wait, I'd like a house too. Maybe then when I get done with school, work, and three kids, I could sit around and bitch with my neighbors about the ugly architecture that was provided for me. In fact, I think that I'll quit school and work and do nothing but complain about how unfair it is that some stranger provided me and my children with a place to live and hang out while I decide to sit home unemployed and feel sorry for myself.
Kristen at December 7, 2009 6:31 AM
lovelysoul writes: And I've read about Pitt and his strange art purchases for years. He recently spent hundreds of thousenads on some modernistic coffee table and dabbles in architecture. Nothing wrong with that. It's his money, and he's being generous, but I also think this was as much about experimenting with architecture as it was helping people. Otherwise, he would've built more ordinary, yet desirable, homes for them.
This statement doesn't infer that he supports what you implied earlier, such as feces-covered Virgin Marys. I mean this in the most constructive way possible, but unless you have some kind of proof that Brad Pitt has supported art that consists of calf blood or feces on the Virgin Mary, I'm starting to think you have a problem making snap judgments. I'm not going to dig up past exchanges, but you do level pretty serious charges on people when you have no evidence.
I'd be pretty disgusted if Brad Pitt was into defiling religious icons, even if he doesn't share their views. Disgusted enough not to watch another one of his movies. (I can't sit through anything with Tom Cruise in it any more, and I'm not alone in this. His conduct hurt his own career...and I personally think he deserved it.) But as it is, all I've seen is a spurious accusation. I think people should be more responsible than that when it comes to hurling defamatory charges. As you yourself noted, one charge of child molestation, true or not, is sufficient to ruin a man's life. Circulating a rumor that Brad Pitt defiles religious icons could seriously harm his career.
I wonder if Brad Pitt actually approved these designs to begin with. In his place, I might simply go with giving out the money and stipulating "Environmentally friendly, and top-of-the-line flood protection, two baths, three bedrooms, etc." He might not have even known what the final product would look like. Some things might look better as a floor plan.
By the way, speaking for me personally, I do see a problem with spending hundreds of thousands of dollars on a coffee table. With all the problems of people that we ourselves encounter in our daily lives, we could do more useful things than that. If I had hundreds of thousands of dollars to throw away, I think I'd buy both you and Amy a house just like the ones in the article. It would teach you both and Amy much-needed lesson about what is truly important. Concerns being what they are, with the economy, with pollution, with the difficulties of affording homeowner's insurance and the things they will and won't cover, and just how hard it is to find a good, safe, secure, comfortable, inexpensive to maintain home, complete with brand new appliances with warranties, focusing on the house's looks is pettiness to the tenth power. After you both lived there in your houses for about six months, secure in the knowledge that you have protection from natural disasters, and after you see how inexpensive it is to maintain an environmentally friendly home, then you can both tell me how ugly it is. I think you would both start to see how small-minded it is. And you wouldn't even have to be rendered destitute and homeless by a natural disaster to recognize that. And your burgeoning bank accounts, complete with resale value of that house would suddenly make that house seem palatial. "I called this 'ugly'?" you would say. "I must have been out of my fucking mind."
Tastes, by the way, are malleable things. What you find cool today could have seemed monumentally uncool in the past.
Patrick at December 7, 2009 6:33 AM
I would live in them. And no, the population doens't get to specify what free house they get. If Pitt wanted to let his architect friends go hog wild, that's his choice. They can politely turn them down, if they hate them so much.
momof4 at December 7, 2009 7:02 AM
Given the amount of whining and pissing and moaning that New Orleans has done about how the rest of the country isn't doing enough for them, I rapidly find myself not caring.
Cousin Dave at December 7, 2009 7:03 AM
Patrick, I said Pitt was an art snob, and THEY consider some pretty ugly and offensive stuff "art." I don't know if Pitt personally likes all of it, but he's definitely in that crowd. I went to art school (Pratt) in NY, so I'm familiar with that crowd too.
I admire Pitt and Jolie very much. I just wish he'd gone with something reflecting the unique flavor and southern tradition of the city more. The houses still could be safe, environmentally-friendly, and beautiful.
I have pretty much all the same concerns in the home I'm building - hurricanes, energy efficiency, and environmental impact - but I'd be disappointed if that's the best my architect could come up with aesthetically - a bright colored box. I'd tell him to experiment artistically on his own, not on me.
These poor people obviously can't do that. They have to graciously accept the gift, no matter how ugly. Free is free.
lovelysoul at December 7, 2009 7:42 AM
I really don't get this thread. He built some houses. For free. He can build 'em how it wants. Fussing about the appearance is unbelievably petty. If the grousers are unlucky, he'll learn his lesson. Next time, he may save himself the grief and build nothing at all.
Of course, that might actually be better. As Radwaste said: building below sea level is dumb; re-building below sea level is breathtakingly stupid.
bradley13 at December 7, 2009 8:00 AM
I could use a free house.
If you'd like to give me one in modern style with green construction, or an old Southern colonial, a Frank Lloyd Wright-esque squarish type, an L-shaped rancher, a midwestern farm house, a Northeastern salt box, an Adobe home from New Mexico or a California bungalow, then THANK YOU.
In any case, cheap or free housing dumped into slums usually turns into a slum. The house isn't the problem. It's just a house.
Gog_Magog_Carpet_Reclaimers at December 7, 2009 10:13 AM
Y'know, part of the problem is that the oh-so-sophisticated readers of the New York Times will have with these houses is that they've never seen houses on stilts. This violates everything they've seen in the Hamptons and Archietctural Digest about what a tasteful, elegant home is supposed to be.
But in areas with frequent flooding, that's how it's done. The (few) houses that survived in Galveston a few years ago were all built on stilts (or some sort of elevation). My brother just built one in Florida.
This is kind of like the thing a few years ago when the first George Bush was impressed by the barcode reader in a grocery store, whereas the average American had known about it for ten years or so. Who exactly is the naive one here?
Crid [CridComment @ gmail] at December 7, 2009 10:33 AM
No time for spellcheck, babe... My commentary is URGENT!
Crid [CridComment @ gmail] at December 7, 2009 10:34 AM
This is kind of like donating ugly or stained clothes to charity. Yes, you can focus on the fact that poor people need clothes to wear, so they should be grateful for anything anyone gives them. But, it still reflects negatively on the giver.
lovelysoul at December 7, 2009 10:41 AM
Amy Alkon
http://www.advicegoddess.com/archives/2009/12/06/the_best_of_int.html#comment-1681075">comment from lovelysoullovelysoul should be called lonesensiblesoul in this discussion. Stilts/preventive measures for floods, good! Ugly, slow to go up, bad!
Gift, great, wonderful! As Virginia points out, best to give gifts that are what the receiver needs not what the giver is most into.
On deadline, so must run, but I think Brad Pitt is wonderful for doing this -- just could have been more wonderful. Basically.
Amy Alkon at December 7, 2009 10:46 AM
" But, it still reflects negatively on the giver."
Not nearly so much as the lack of gratitude reflects poorly on the receiver. MY kids wear clothes with stains and sometimes holes. You're going to tell me some homeless person is too good to? All part of the welfare entitlement mentality-No, I don't work, or have a home, or clothes. But I DESERVE new clothes and a free home of my personal choosing!
momof4 at December 7, 2009 11:12 AM
Amy, I'm afraid I'm going to have to take up with M4 on this one. I've noticed over the past decade or so that people who expect charity have gotten awfully damned pushy and high-falutin' about it. The Goodwill here will no longer accept used clothing at all -- they only take new clothes, with the tags still on. The local Habitat for Humanity can't be bothered to take a few unopened tubes of roofing adhesive left over from a construction job -- if you aren't bringing them at least a gross, fresh from the big box store, it's too much trouble for them. A local charity that claims to feed the homeless is very picky about exactly what brands and types of canned vegetables it will accept (they prefer organic, thankyouverymuch). My take is, if they are willing to hold out for high-end stuff, then they must not be all that needy after all.
Cousin Dave at December 7, 2009 12:21 PM
Of course, the people themselves have not complained about the houses. They're far better than the ramshackle shacks that used to exist on that spot. The only ones complaining are the architects.
I suspect, having lost everything you own, every prized possession, sentimental piece or memorabilia, I think a house that is a dramatic improvement over the old (including appearances, unless you're nostalgic for rickety bare wood cabins.
You don't even know that the recipients would find the new places unattractive. You're simply presuming to speak for them.
Cousin Dave, if that's the case in your area, I'd write a letter to the editor and do everything in your power to publicize this snobbery of the organizations that are supposed to help the indigent. Perhaps if they turn off enough people, they would reconsider their stance.
Amy, you don't know what Brad Pitt is into. You don't know that he chose the designs. He might have decided to defer to the architects, thinking they know best. I would have.
lovelysoul: This is kind of like donating ugly or stained clothes to charity.
Hardly. That is quite ridiculous. The houses aren't defaced with stains. They're brand new, and of vastly better quality than what used to live there. Even more attractive.
And ugly is in the eyes of the beholder. I've seen many trends of stuff that I've considered downright hideous...wearing pants that are so low, the buttocks hang out, for instance.
Patrick at December 7, 2009 5:54 PM
Just some of my last thoughts on the subject. I'm trying to imagine what it would be like if I lost everything to a natural disaster. Everything of personal and sentimental value. My writings, my computer, my mother's paintings, my beloved cat that I rescued, my clothes, my photographs, my car, my bicycle, etc. Everything I've ever valued gone forever. Including my gym, my grocery store, every place I used to visit, together with the familiar company...it's all gone for good.
No job anymore, since my place of employment was also wiped off the face of the earth, insurance of course won't cover flooding, the government dragging its feet, living in the Astrodome, depending on donated canned goods to eat, donated clothing.
Now imagining hearing the news that some celebrity donated a house for me to live in. I wouldn't be expecting much. Probably one of those tiny mini-houses that Amy linked earlier. But still it's a start and I'd be thanking God the minute I got the news.
Now I'm imagining being taken to see my new home for the first time. Driving up to it, and having whomever drove me explaining to me that this is my new house. The first thing that would strike me, once I was 100% sure that this house was the one they're referring to, was the size.
All this is mine?
Now ascending the steps of the new home, on stilts. "That's certainly a thoughtful touch," I'd be thinking. And environmentally friendly, too, as my guide would explain. "Wow. Someone sure thought of everything," I'd be thinking. "I don't know when I'll be able to find a job, and a fuel efficient home will erode at my savings much more slowly."
Then I get to see the interior. Spacious living room, two bedrooms, two baths, dining room, kitchen complete with brand spanking new appliances.
"This is all mine? Free? No strings attached?...I can't believe this."
I'd be reduced to tears of gratitude. And I'd be weeks recovering from the shock at someone's generosity. It would never even occur to me that the home was less than beautiful. My neighbors and I would be showing off our new free homes to each other, "Oh, that's beautiful!" "I just love that!" "That was a nice touch."
What I'm trying to convey here is that I couldn't even imagine wondering at what the house looks like, and whether or not I personally found it attractive. I couldn't imagine seeing it as anything but beautiful.
But of course, Amy and lovelysoul, in the same situation, would undoubtedly take one look at the house, fold their arms and with a stomp, turn their back on it and snarl, "It's UGLY! How dare you take advantage of my destitution and force me to accept an ugly house."
Or maybe you wouldn't say that. You'd just sit there and think it, reminding yourself that you can't appear ungracious.
It simply would never even occur to me that I have to appear grateful, despite the fact that I'm inwardly complaining that the house doesn't reflect the traditional Southern style and Brad Pitt should have thought of that. The exterior of the house would undoubtedly grow on me, regardless of my personal tastes, and that is the very last thing I'd worry about.
The only people that would ever be so gauche as to look a gift horse in the mouth would be those with an extreme sense of entitlement. "Well, of course the government or some celebrity has to give me a new house. Mine was washed away in the flood. They can't expect me to be responsible for myself when acts of God take away everything I own."
Oh?
Then arriving at a new house, "How dare they just build me a new house without first consulting me about my personal tastes, going around building homes without a thought to the traditional style of this city. Brad Pitt should be sued for this! He's inflicting his own personal tastes on a city with the rich tradition of New Orleans. I'll call a lawyer, that's what I'll do. I'll soak Brad Pitt for every cent I can, and make him build me a new house, plus millions of dollars for emotional distress, making me accept a home that's so antithetical to the area in which I live. That bastard Pitt won't get away with this!"
Patrick at December 8, 2009 1:26 AM
lovelysoul: Patrick, I said Pitt was an art snob, and THEY consider some pretty ugly and offensive stuff "art." I don't know if Pitt personally likes all of it, but he's definitely in that crowd. I went to art school (Pratt) in NY, so I'm familiar with that crowd too.
Lovely, I understand that you mean this not as an indictment of Brad Pitt. But that isn't what you're saying.
Let's just restructure your sentence into syllogistic reasoning.
1. Brad Pitt is an art snob.
2. Art snobs are into calf blood and smearing feces on statues of the Virgin Mary.
See where this is going? I understand and have no trouble believing your rationale, but what you mean and what you're saying are two different things.
It might have sounded better if you said, some art snobs are into calf blood and fecal-stained statues of the Virgin Mary.
Better still, it might have been more appropriate had you not associated the unquestionably generous Brad Pitt with anything like that. Perhaps you might have suggested that art snobs are into neo-deco architecture or something.
Robert: Personally, I do think the houses are rather hideous. Those things would blind a fucking smurf.
Blinding Smurfs is a good thing. I hate those little peckers. Consider it an added benefit if the Smurfs are blinded.
Patrick at December 8, 2009 4:04 AM
I subscribe to Dwell and it featured some of these designs in a clearly self-contratulatory manner. It's amazing how the promote their own "Dwell Homes" competition winners like this
http://empyreanapf.pbworks.com/
and then fete the crap shown here.
I love some of the modern architecture out there, especially those that feature clean lines, open floor plans, and neutral and natural looking materials. But there is a school of garish and tacky designers, like the people who designed an entire community in North Boulder that was, I'm told, supposed to be an homage to a frontier mining town. Instead it lookes.... cheap.
And this stuff for NOLA is awful! Scratch that, it's fugly. There are a lot of architects that are able to blend new design concepts and materials into historical areas. Brad's contractors are not in that category.
As for blinding smurfs.. it's much better to drop a house on the little SOBs... like one of these designs... from 10,000 feet.
Bill at December 8, 2009 3:32 PM
Agree with you at 1:26 Patrick.
A concept as simple as gratitude can too easily be forgotten.
Jen Wading at December 8, 2009 5:23 PM
Amy Alkon
http://www.advicegoddess.com/archives/2009/12/06/the_best_of_int.html#comment-1681383">comment from BillTotally agree, Bill. I even like inventive modern architecture, and whimsy in buildings. The modern place I lived had one outer wall that had roofing shingles on it, and other whimsical touches. These buildings are just hideous.
Amy Alkon at December 8, 2009 5:36 PM
I don't think the houses are ugly, and I'd live in one. Regardless of how ugly they are, their looks a non-issue. Not a minor issue. A non-issue.
Patrick at December 8, 2009 6:40 PM
"There are a lot of architects that are able to blend new design concepts and materials into historical areas."
Again, no history there other than shanties no self-respecting rat would inhabit, and those washed away. What praytell were they supposed to blend with? Too many of you are picturing the Quarter and the District as being New Orleans. That's just not the case. Their slums looked like slums anywhere, but worse than most. No matter how ugly you think these are, they are orders of magnitude better than anything seen anywhere near this area at any time in history.
momof4 at December 8, 2009 7:17 PM
Leave a comment