Paradigim Shift

7/30/2019 Paradigim Shift

1/8

Schlenk

Rosalie Schlenk

Dr. Haspel

ENGL 137H

November 2, 2012

Another McMansion

Anyone who has traveled through the average suburban neighborhood has undoubtedly

encountered what has been christened the McMansion. Other deprecating names include Faux

Chateaux, Garage Mahal, or, if you are from California, Persian Palace. However labeled,

the housing style, or lack thereof, is unmistakable. Broadly defined, a McMansion is a large

house in a suburban location, usually considered to be oversized an overly extravagant (Weir).

On a more critical level, these houses are generally a mixture of clashing architectural styles on

land plots far too small for the size of the house. They often come in clusters; entire

neighborhoods of the same few models. Greenfield McMansions are groups of McMansions

build on large plots of land in previously undeveloped land (Nasar 1). The proliferation of

McMansions is often considered to contribute to urban sprawl. Other times McMansions are

built in existing neighborhoods, after the original house is torn down (Nasar 1). While they seem

to be such an entrenched feature of modern suburban life, these houses only came into fashion in

the late 20th century. This popularity was actually a reversal of the previous trend that prevailed

during most of the 20th century when houses were actually getting smaller (Dwyer 286). Since

then, they have grown into a dominating aspect of suburban neighborhoods across America.

McMansions became a popular housing option starting in the 1980s because of socioeconomic

conditions allowing their perpetuation. McMansions have recently proceeded to falter in

popularity due to opposing socioeconomic circumstance of the present day.

1


2/8

Schlenk

Architectural development and building came to a near standstill during the World War II

era. As a result, the end of the war saw an outburst of experimentation in design. The trend at this

point, however, was one of economizing, exploring new materials and reusing the old, and

maximizing space to create a good living environment. Among the most notable examples are

the Case Study Houses in Los Angeles, California. The first Case Study house built was

minimalist; the government allowed only 1100 square feet maximum in this early stage of the

program. In fact, six houses were entirely completed in the first three years of the program, as

were visited by 368,555 people (McCoy 8-13). Their popularity was an enormous success for the

program in its early development. So how did the direction of developments change so

drastically during the late 20th century?

The loss of cultural tradition as a regulating system is one possible answer offered by

Amos Rapoport, a cultural geographer. He believes the loss is due to a larger range of building

types unable to be built traditionally, as well as the loss of a share value system of the world.

These factors result in a loss of respect and cooperation among members of the public (Szold

12). There has certainly been a social change coinciding with the increase of McMansions. The

large, flamboyant houses do seem to be disrespectful, especially with infill McMansions. They

are a looming intruder on an otherwise peacefully inhabited community. The bold houses also

flash wealth in an almost inappropriate manner for a residential area. Of course, the attempt to

portray wealth is another reason for the spread of McMansions.

Economic allowance certainly acted as a vehicle for the trend. The early 1980s saw an

economic recession due to oil price increases and restrictive monetary policies by the Federal

Reserve. While the United States was coming out of the recession in late 1982, there was a

critical escalation of stratification of income between the classes. The difference in income

2


3/8

Schlenk

between the upper and middle class increased greatly at this point, creating a growing divide

between the two social classes (1980-82 Early 1980s Recession). One outlet for this increase in

wealth was the successive rise in standard of living, namely housing. Theories vary on the scope

of the standard of living increase, whether it encompassed only the wealthy or all classes by

means of filtering, but overall there was certainly a parallel between the increase in national

prosperity and the growth of standard house size.

Data from the U.S. Census of Population and Housing supports the theory that the influx

of large houses was greatest in the upper class as a reflection of their larger increase in salary

compared to lower classes. While there were still increases in large house ownership among

lower income families, the top quintile of per capita income consistently had a larger proportion

of large house ownership. This difference continued to increase, with the greatest divergence

from 1980 to 2000. In fact, the top quintile was responsible for 50% of large houses every year

(Dwyer 292-294). It makes sense that the portion of the population with the largest income

would be purchasing the largest houses. When the time is taken to consider why this conclusion

is natural, the social and psychological causes of this McMansionization of America should be

called into consideration.

When a survey of the 50 largest cities in America results in 60% reporting the

development of McMansions, it becomes apparent that this shift is national (Devlin 4). It can be

assumed that there is a social aspect as well as an economic aspect to this change, as the spread

of culture is inevitable in the modern world. One interesting realtors suggestion is the security

these homes offer for those previously living in McMansions. Upper management people are

comfortable and accustomed to this scale of house and, moving frequently because of the job, are

looking for a familiar space (Devlin 58). This reasoning would explain the sustaining drive

3


4/8

Schlenk

behind McMansions. There is, however, an even deeper possibility that goes back to human

nature.

The need for a publicly accepted status is arguably a driving motivation in human

behavior. In a study testing the effects of visible high-status brand names on clothing, people

with these shirts on received more assistance and donations for charitable causes (Dubois 1048).

Society does have a tendency to aspire to a higher status as a means of security and elevation. As

a representation of status and affluence, a larger house logically makes sense for a wealthier

person. When even larger fast food options for large sizes have been found to be associated with

a higher status, its obvious why the economic prosperity resulted in the growth and expansion of

larger houses (Dubois 1047). Therefore it is logical that the average size of house has increased

over the past couple decades. According to a 2002 study by the National Association of Home

Builders, from 1987 to 2001, the average house size increased by 400 square feet (Evans Cowley

340). Even more shockingly, from 1950 to 2004, the average square footage of a single-family

home has increased from 983 to 2349 (Devlin 57). Despite these escalations in size, the average

number of people in the household decreased from 3.14 to 2.57 from 1970 to 2000 (Evans-

Cowley 340). Amazingly, a shrinking nuclear family is finding home in larger spaces.

Despite its rapid growth at the end of the 20th century, the trend of McMansions seems to

be coming to an end. Recently these has been an outburst of anti-McMansion sentiment across

the nation as people move for regulations of zoning laws in an attempt to curb the growth of this

trend. While it would be extremely difficult to establish a singular set of regulations to address

varying site, volume, and scale issues, certain neighborhoods have been rising up to take action

in preserving the atmosphere of the area. In June 2006, Austin, Texas, passed an ordinance

limiting the construction of certain sized homes in particular parts of the city. Staten Island has

4


5/8

Schlenk

also attempted to regulate the size of houses on small land plots (Devlin 61). Communities are

beginning to pay attention to the buildings around them and take action to curb the construction

of more McMansions.

The question becomes why this reversal in direction didnt happen earlier, especially

when smaller houses in existing neighborhoods were being torn down to make way for larger

McMansions. The houses built in this way are called infill McMansions, and seem to be disliked

by members of the surrounding houses. A study by members of the Department of City and

Regional Planning of Ohio State University and the Institute of Environment Quality showed

that neighborhood communities valued size ratio over absolute size when it comes to infill

McMansions. They also preferred a cohesive style relative to the surrounding houses to increase

the aesthetics of the neighborhood as a whole (Nasar 122). Understandably, a McMansion that

blends in with the existing architecture and is not of a significant disproportion to the existing

houses would be more welcome than an abstract, modern giant that dwarfs the other houses.

There has also been a decrease in McMansion popularity due to the current economic

recession. McMansions did not go unaffected by the housing market bubble and the fall in the

housing market. In 2002, Paine Webber and Company became one of many stock brokerages

offering mortgages for wealthy clients (Weinberg). Mortgages were a crutch for those who

wanted to portray wealth in their lifestyle but lacked the capital to do so. When the mortgage

crisis hit, these people were no longer able to stay afloat in the house they could never really

afford. While this faltering group is only one section of McMansion owners, it is an important

fact in understanding why McMansion growth has declined. Foreclosure has given banks

possession of substantial numbers of homes, especially in cities with high costs of living, such as

Los Angeles. Houses such as one in Scottsdale, Arizona, have dropped by almost half in price

5


6/8

Schlenk

and are now worth less than the mortgage (Hagerty 26). The economic upkeep of a McMansion

has proved unmanageable for some families in the current economic times.

McMansions have become a prominent feature of suburban culture, a process that has

taken place over the past few decades. The social and economic reasons for enlargement of

residential buildings vary, but there are distinctive parallels between the growth and decline of

the economy and the popularity of McMansions. While this trend seems to be dying out, or at

least slowing, the effects of its proliferation will be long lasting. Not only has the construction of

McMansions been responsible for deforestation and increases in urban sprawl, there is also the

tearing down of older houses. The McMansions that take their places are not being torn down,

and we are left with a landscape riddled with the giant, empty houses. Though there has recently

been a new surge for repurposing, McMansions will still stand as representation of this particular

trend.

6


7/8

Schlenk

Works Cited

1980-82 Early 1980s Recession." Regional Oral History Office. University of California

Berkley, n.d. Web. 22 Oct. 2012.

.

Devlin, Ann Sloan. What Americans Build and Why: Psychological Perspectives. Cambridge:

Cambridge UP, 2010. Print.

Dubois, David, Adam D. Galinsky, and Derek D. Rucker. Super Size Me: Product Size as a

Signal of Status.Journal of Consumer Research 38.6 (2012): 1047-1062.JSTOR. Web.

April 2012.

Dwyer, Rachel E. "The McMansionization of America: Income Stratification and the Standard of

Living in Housing, 19602000."Research in Social Stratification and Mobility 27.4

(2009): 285-300. Science Direct. Web. 22 Oct. 2012.

Evans-Cowley, Jennifer S., Jack L. Nasar, and Vicente Mantero. "Mcmansions: The Extent And

Regulation Of Super-Sized Houses."Journal Of Urban Design 12.3 (2007): 339- 358.

Academic Search Complete. Web. 22 Oct. 2012.

Hagerty, James R. "Waiting For the Next Mcmansion To Drop." Current518 (2009): 26-27.

Academic Search Complete. Web. 22 Oct. 2012.

McCoy, Esther. Modern California Houses: Case Study Houses, 1945-1962. New York:

Reinhold Pub. Corp, 1962.

Nasar, Jack L., and Arthur E. Stamps, III. Infill McMansions: Style and Psychophysics of Size.

Journal of Environmental Psychology 29.1 (2009): 110-123. Science Direct. Web. 22 Oct.

2012.

7


8/8

Schlenk

Szold, Terry S. "Mansionization and its Discontents: Planners and the Challenge of Regulating

Monster Homes."American Planning Association.Journal of the American Planning

Association 71.2 (2005): 189-202.ABI/INFORM Complete; ProQuest Social Sciences

Premium Collection. Web. 22 Oct. 2012.

Weinberg, Rick. "McMansion Mortgages."Registered Rep 26.5 (2002): 26-.ABI/INFORM

Complete. Web. 22 Oct. 2012.

Weir, Robert E. "McMANSION." Class in America [Three Volumes]: An Encyclopedia. Santa

Barbara, CA: Greenwood, 2007. ABC-CLIO eBook Collection. Web. 22 Oct 2012.

8

Documents

Paradigim Shift