You don't see any pretentiousness in driving around judging a bunch of people on their houses and just ragging on how terrible they are? Really? You might want to look harder.
It'd be pretentious to just arbitrarily say "Those houses are ugly". But she says "Those houses are ugly, and this is why". While I don't agree with her opinion on all the houses she features, but the vast majority -- yeah, they're pretty bad, and for the reasons she states.
* Odd proportions and asymmetry.
* Strange roof lines (the "nub" - it's like a Mansard that didn't know when to stop).
* Bizarre bump-outs, because the exterior was wrapped around an interior designed to have crazily large rooms.
* Columns that hold up nothing.
* And my personal favorite - shutters that don't have a prayer of covering the window when closed. Except they can't close, because they're glued and/or screwed to the wall and have no hinges.
No, but I don't like it when people do in a very public manner as a way to pressure people to conform.
How would you feel about a blog that openly criticizes workplace clothing (I bring this up as lots of people in my office wear things like toe shoes and some males even where quilts)?
I try and be accepting of other people's personal tastes and don't want to enforce through rules/laws/social pressure some common clothing standard that people have to conform to. Same goes for houses in that I don't like publicly mocking them for how they look in order to socially pressure people to build their houses so that they conform to some standard.
*edit: obviously this shouldn't be taken to the extreme as houses do emit externalities on those that surround them which can decrease the value of the surrounding houses. Thus, I think some conformity in a town by town basis is good. However, I find blogs like this and some home owners associations (HOA) to be ridiculous with how far they try and enforce their rules and opinions on how homes/town should look.
I don't think it's meant to pressure the owners to confirm. The owners have a relatively small likelihood of ever realizing that their home is on the blog. I think it's to try to diminish the trend, and get builders to focus more on making smaller, higher quality houses that consider the climate in which they're built. Just my guess, though.
There are design rules for a reason. They're not just arbitrary things that someone just made up out of nothing - the human brain has preferences for visual stimulus so things like the "rule of thirds" are based on how people prefer to see things.
So yes, her opinion has more value because it's backed up by proven design rules. It's not as subjective as you're implying.
You gotta look up the word pretentious. Critiquing bad design isn't pretentious if you know what you're talking about. Living in a poorly made house designed to look more expensive than it is the embodiment of pretentiousness.
pre·ten·tious - adjective - attempting to impress by affecting greater importance, talent, culture, etc., than is actually possessed.
The irony here is that her blog rags on the pretentiousness of houses designed to look like better built/designed houses. McMansions are by definition pretentious.
She explicitly pointed out in multiple posts that she is judging the houses themselves, not the people who own them. How is it not ok to criticize an object?
That's a critic. Those who find her criticism speaks to them, are allowed to run with it and hoover up her pronouncements with delight, especially as they're snarky and funny pronouncements. There's very little point in being a critic and then saying 'but you know, your mileage may vary'.
Remembering that is YOUR responsibility, and if a bunch of people seem to prefer the critic's point of view and it clashes with yours… perhaps you have things to learn, even from the arrogant. :)
