HOME… A Reflection of Comfort and Well Being
By Louise B. Girard ASID
Domestic well-being is a fundamental human need
that is deeply rooted in all of us, one which
continually yearns to be satisfied. If this need is
not fully met in the present, it is not unusual to
look for comfort in tradition, and this is reflected
in the decisions we make in defining our living
space. In doing so, however, we should not confuse
the idea of comfort with decor – the external
appearance of rooms – nor with behavior – how these
rooms are used.
Decor is primarily a product of fashion, and its
longevity is measured in decades or less, such as
the Queen Anne style lasting about 30 years, or the
Art Nouveau craze which endured barely more than a
decade. Social behavior, which is a function of
habits and customs, is more durable. The male
practice of withdrawing to a special room to smoke,
for example, began in the mid-nineteenth century and
continued well into the twentieth. Cultural ideas
like comfort, on the other hand, have a life that is
measured in centuries. Domesticity, as an example,
has existed for more that three hundred years.
During that time the “density” of interior
decoration has varied, rooms have changed in size
and function and have been more or less crowded with
furniture, but the domestic interior has always
demonstrated a feeling of intimacy and hominess.
Throughout the centuries we have borrowed bits
and pieces from past cultures to accommodate our
contemporary customs. But one cannot recapture the
comfort of the past by copying its decor. The way
that rooms looked made sense because they were a
setting for a particular type of behavior, which in
turn was conditioned by the way that people thought
about comfort. We can appreciate the interiors of
the past but if we try to copy them we will find
that too much has changed. What has changed most is
the reality of physical comfort – the standard of
living –largely as the result of advances in
technology.
All the “modern” devices that contribute to our
domestic comfort – central heating, indoor plumbing,
running hot and cold water, electric light and power
– were unavailable before 1890, and were well known
by 1920.
If the current trend of borrowing elements of
traditional looking ornament without adhering to any
particular historical style, such as putting a
stylized strip of molding or a symbolic classical
column or neo-Palladian windows, is an attempt to
create comfort, it is missing the point. What
today’s large homes with double storied ceilings and
wide open floor plans are missing is a sense of
domesticity; an atmosphere of coziness and a sense
of privacy.
We need to re-examine past traditions, not past
styles. We should look back in time not from a
stylistic point of view, but regarding the idea of
comfort itself. This means returning to house
layouts that offer more privacy and intimacy than
the so-called open plan, in which space is allowed
to “flow” from one room to another. This produces
interiors of great visual interest, but there is a
price to be paid for this excitement. The space
flows, but so also does sight and sound. What is
needed is a greater number of small rooms which
conform to the range and variety of leisure
activities in the modern home.
It also means a return to furniture that is
accommodating and comfortable; not chairs that make
an artistic statement, but chairs that are a
pleasure to sit in. It means returning to the idea
of furniture as a practical, rather than aesthetic,
object; and as something enduring rather than a
passing novelty.
What is comfort? A simple response would be that
comfort concerns only human physiology – feeling
good. But that is too simple. Scientific research
from the past 50 years has shown that the visual
qualities of one’s surroundings – decoration, color
scheme, carpeting, wall-coverings – were not felt to
be of major importance. Physical aspects – lighting
quality, ventilation, conversational and visual
privacy, and chair comfort – were all included in a
list of 10 most important factors describing
comfort. But having these qualities does not
automatically produce a feeling of well-being.
Dullness is not necessarily annoying but it is not
stimulating either. However, when we open a door and
think, “What a comfortable room!” we are reacting
positively to something special, or rather to a
series of special things.
Domestic comfort is a simple concept that can be
complicated in its execution. It incorporates many
transparent layers of meaning, some buried deeper
than others. Privacy as in reading a book or having
a talk; convenience, a handy table; efficiency, a
modulated light; domesticity, having a cup of
coffee; physical ease, deep chairs and cushions; and
visual intimacy. All these characteristics together
contribute to the atmosphere of interior calm that
helps define comfort.
At various times throughout the centuries and in
response to various outside social, economic, and
technological forces, the idea of comfort has
changed, sometimes dramatically. However, what is
striking is that the idea of comfort, even as it has
changed, has preserved most of its earlier meanings.
New ideas about how to achieve comfort did not
displace fundamental notions of domestic well-being.
Each meaning added a layer to the previous meaning
involving a range of attributes – convenience,
efficiency, leisure, ease, pleasure, domesticity,
intimacy, and privacy – all of which contribute to
the experience.
When people say, “I may not know why I like it,
but I know what I like,” they recognize comfort when
they experience it. This recognition involves a
combination of sensations, many of them subconscious
– not only physical, but also emotional as well as
intellectual, which makes comfort difficult to
explain and very tough to measure. But it does not
make it any less real. Domestic well-being is, as
has always been, the business of the family and
individual. Let us each re-examine for ourselves the
mystery of comfort, for a richer appreciation of our
lives at home.
Questions or comments? Contact 281-798-2631 or
Girard-int.design[at]sbglobal.net
|
