Redstart
20-11-2007, 04:55 PM
When in the UK I bought several magazines and one of them , I think it was Period Living, contained a booklet on country cottages. One of the houses featured was an old farmhouse that had been carefully restored; the owners didn't insulate or install central heating because they didn't think it was appropriate for the old house and said that wearing more sweaters, and suffering draughts and dust was all part of living in an old house.
I wish to disagree. It makes ecological sense to insulate our houses and make them low in energy use. I also think it's wrong to try and live in what is effectively a museum. If you look at how people really lived in the past, these period home "fanatics" would not want to copy the hens in the kitchen along with the beds and all the family members, all near the single source of heat. They wouldn't want the dirt, the non-flushing loos outside, the gazunder under the bed, having to boil up the water on wash day one day a week, and having to get washed in the kitchen sink.
I personally think we owe it to the original builders of the house to maintain the property and improve it (as they surely would were they here today) by insulating it, adding heating to dry out the old timbers and stop dry rot getting hold, painting the wood to make life uncomfortable for wood worm and adding inside, installing modern sanitation to remove the source of disease to the sewers or cess pit.
When we started taking the inside of this house apart to add the insulation (walls, ceilings, floors) we discovered it was much older than we thought, that the front had been added on later, that it used to have a really deep roof, almost to the ground, that it had had a smoke kitchen (for smoking hams and sausages) - the house told a story of it's existence since it was built in the early 1700s, modernised in the mid 1800s, and so on. By adding heating, insulation and modern bathrooms we are adding to that story, writing another chapter in the house's long history. I don't see anything wrong with this.
We have kept what was valuable, such as original beams, wall panels, the old wood burning stove, the old covered balconies, the old tiled ovens and even the barn door hinge that is now in the entrance hall - it certainly makes a talking point - because it is a lovely old house; however, most importantly, we have added a concrete "anchor" to stop the house continuing its slide down the hill and ensure that the house will last another 300 years. Without that modern technology (greatly frowned on in period house circles in the UK) the house would not have lasted even another 100 years, so we don't feel guilty about using concrete.
What do the rest of you think about period houses and how we should treat them?
I wish to disagree. It makes ecological sense to insulate our houses and make them low in energy use. I also think it's wrong to try and live in what is effectively a museum. If you look at how people really lived in the past, these period home "fanatics" would not want to copy the hens in the kitchen along with the beds and all the family members, all near the single source of heat. They wouldn't want the dirt, the non-flushing loos outside, the gazunder under the bed, having to boil up the water on wash day one day a week, and having to get washed in the kitchen sink.
I personally think we owe it to the original builders of the house to maintain the property and improve it (as they surely would were they here today) by insulating it, adding heating to dry out the old timbers and stop dry rot getting hold, painting the wood to make life uncomfortable for wood worm and adding inside, installing modern sanitation to remove the source of disease to the sewers or cess pit.
When we started taking the inside of this house apart to add the insulation (walls, ceilings, floors) we discovered it was much older than we thought, that the front had been added on later, that it used to have a really deep roof, almost to the ground, that it had had a smoke kitchen (for smoking hams and sausages) - the house told a story of it's existence since it was built in the early 1700s, modernised in the mid 1800s, and so on. By adding heating, insulation and modern bathrooms we are adding to that story, writing another chapter in the house's long history. I don't see anything wrong with this.
We have kept what was valuable, such as original beams, wall panels, the old wood burning stove, the old covered balconies, the old tiled ovens and even the barn door hinge that is now in the entrance hall - it certainly makes a talking point - because it is a lovely old house; however, most importantly, we have added a concrete "anchor" to stop the house continuing its slide down the hill and ensure that the house will last another 300 years. Without that modern technology (greatly frowned on in period house circles in the UK) the house would not have lasted even another 100 years, so we don't feel guilty about using concrete.
What do the rest of you think about period houses and how we should treat them?