Featured in

Featured in: Tiny Buddha, Halifax Media Coop, Fine Fit Day, Simplify the Season, La Presse, Filles, Le Canada-Français
Showing posts with label house. Show all posts
Showing posts with label house. Show all posts

Sunday, July 5, 2015

The Less is More Project: Week 27 - The faces of minimalism

massmarrier, Flickr


By an interesting twist of fate - or, more aptly said, because I took advantage of my summer vacation to visit my mother, who lives 1500 km away - I ended up spending a few days in a house that, at first glance, is the epitome of anti-minimalism.

Not counting the mud room, workshop, attic, loft, basement and garage, my mother's house is over 5000 square feet, with ceilings 11 feet high and windows taller than me, and boasts 6 bedrooms, 3 bathrooms, formal living and dining rooms, 2 sun rooms, 1 library/music room, a sauna, a large kitchen with walk-in pantry, 4 fireplaces + 1 cast iron stove, 2 stairways (one of which leads to what was originally the servants' quarters), many alcoves, built-in bookshelves, tons of storage space, and lots of architectural wonders. I'm not even mentioning the spacious decks and garden (and wooded area). 

Two people live in there, namely, my mother and her partner.

Without being overwhelmingly cluttered per se, the house is also filled with massive furniture, antiques, works of art, paintings big and small, mirrors, sculptures, figurines, fine books, porcelains and crystals, beautiful rugs, all gathered during numerous travels around the world. When my mother's good friend called the house "a museum", she was at least partly right. (As for me, I am seriously considering writing a story based on the fascinating building, its contents and its surroundings.)

Surely, this looks and sounds like a life of luxury, and in some ways, it is. Past the first impression, however, there are many ways in which the two inhabitants of that house embrace at least some aspects of minimalism, perhaps not in terms of dollars spent and objects owned, but definitely in terms of healthy, environmentally-friendly choices.


  • They bought an already existing house and piece of land, as opposed to building on a new lot.
  • They upgraded it with energy efficient roof, windows, heating/cooling system, lighting, etc.
  • They both work from home, so the house doubles as an office for the two of them. Consequently, they do not commute, they only need one vehicle, and don't use it daily. They also do not need work clothes.
  • They rarely go "to town", avoiding most consumerist temptations.
  • They are very mindful of electricity use and water use, don't watch TV, and dry their clothes on the line.
  • They cook from scratch 95% of the time, using almost exclusively organic fruit and vegetables from their garden, and organic eggs and meat from small local producers.
  • They make their own bread, yogurt, preserves, and canned goods. They don't buy packaged foods, prepared meals or bottled water.
  • They compost, reuse and recycle everything (including seeds from the previous years).
  • They use natural cleaning products.
  • They play an active role in local matters, advocating for environmentally-friendly practices throughout the community.
  • They both quit demanding and high-paying careers (one in finance, one as a physician) to refocus on something they actually love to do and requires less hours per week, albeit being significantly less lucrative.

All in all, it might still not qualify as a frugal life, but some conscious choices are made. Minimalism has many faces: you can live in small quarters and own few things. You can aim for self-subsistance and the smallest footprint possible. You can be mindful of what you do with your money and time. Minimalism is also a process: you start where you are, and you make your way toward simplicity.

Where are you at, simplicity wise? Where do you want to get?



WEEK 27 IN REVIEW


Observations and cogitations

Being on vacation has been the ultimate test for consumption. Especially when strolling through big cities in which wonderful stores filled with wonderful things abound, and in which people dress and drive with style. Most of us will probably never be able to afford the Maserati I saw, but we might still want to indulge in quality clothes, objects, food and drinks - at least occasionally. Doing so would be okay... especially if it's a treat, and as long as it's done mindfully. It all comes down to the concept of choice: what am I going to obtain from the purchase of goods and services? Is it worth my money and, if it's an object, is it worth the space it will take in my house and the dust it might gather? Is it worth the environmental impact?

This year, instead of walking in stores thinking "If I see something I like and/or a good bargain, I will buy it", I kept in mind the things we really needed, such as new shoes for the kids, a few specific items of clothing for us, and a new air mattress for camping. Those are the only things we bought. We saw many other beautiful objects, but instead of acquiring them, we simply admired them in passing. It was a nice opportunity to explain to the kids that "just because you like something and can afford it, doesn't mean you should get it".



Your turn to share about your struggles and victories of the week! What did you resist? Did you donate or get rid of anything? Did you face any challenge? Please comment below! And...

Become a follower of the blog/subscribe by email (top left corner of this page)!


Follow me on Facebook (click here)!


Follow me on Twitter (click here)!

Monday, April 27, 2015

The Less is More Project: Week 17 - One of each

andrechinn, Flickr


Our culture of abundance and consumerism makes it possible (and "normal") to own more than one of the same object. 

For many reasons, I want to be an advocate of owning only one of each thing. 

In ascending order of size and/or value:

Own only one of each beauty/hygiene product. I'm like everybody else. I do find little jars of beautifully scented lotions, powders and other "beauty products" to have an uncanny appeal. Especially when said jar (or any other type of packaging - think individually wrapped soap bars) is pretty. Like everybody else, I also like a good bargain: whenever possible, I buy those items on sale. The consequence? Well, open your pharmacy cabinet or pull your shower curtain: you'll see. Most of us are "bathroom pack rats" in one way or another. How many bottles of shampoo, conditioner and shower gel do you really need at one time? Do you sometimes have to throw sunscreen away because it's expired? Do you know how many tubs of lip balm/lipstick you own and where they are located? I don't know for you, but I'm tired of that kind of clutter. Right now I am gradually using up all those accumulated bottles, jars and tubs... and will not replace any product until it's drops from being all gone. Also: I will only replace the products that I really need. I will live my everyday life like I do when I travel: with only the products I use daily, and with only one of each.

Are you dealing with a similar "beauty product overload" situation?


Own only one couch, kitchen table, TV set and the like. This is mostly for family-bonding purposes. The more couches, tables and TVs you own, the less time you will end up spending with your family members. 

Do you notice a correlation between the amount of time your family spends together and the number of those items you own? Is it any different when you go on vacation?


Own only one vehicle. Okay. Some couples and families have jobs or activities that take them in opposite directions. But that is not always the case. I have seen people go to pretty much the same area at approximately the same time (you know, within 30 minutes of each other) with two separate cars. With some planning, some optimization of our time, and the willingness to sometimes have to wait a little bit, it is more than possible to function with only one car in a lot of cases. I know some people who will rent a car for the very rare instances in which they really need one. It is also perfectly acceptable to ask a friend for a ride (you can pay them back in wine bottles). Not to mention the wildly overlooked options that are called, respectively: carpooling, public transport, bicycles and your own feet. Slow down, look around, actually engage with your surroundings and the people, be kind to the Earth, avoid the stress of driving and parking... and save thousands of dollars each year. (What are you gonna do with that money?)

Are there any situations in which you could ditch the car and travel differently?


Own only one house. Meaning no cottage or summer home in the country side, and no pied-à-terre in a bigger city. To many, owning more than one property is not even an option, but to those who can (or think they can) afford it, please give it some thought. A second property means cleaning, maintenance, repairs. It doesn't matter that you are paying someone else (assuming you can afford that too) to do all the work. The responsibility is still on your shoulders. Plus, consider the alternative: the freedom of going to a different, new place with different, new sights, activities and people every time you travel. The wonders of discovery, the surprises, the excitement.

If you own a second property... do the advantages exceed the disadvantages? And are you getting outside of your comfort zone (as you should)?


Exceptions. Some things you might want (need?) to own two of (maybe):


  • bathrooms: if you are a family of 4+ and especially if you have teenagers, 2 bathrooms will make your life more comfortable. It might not be a fundamental need, but it's nice.
  • sunglasses: one sturdy, flexible, aerodynamic pair for sports, one trendy pair for dressier outfits
  • watch: same as above
  • purse: one for spring-summer, one for fall-winter
  • bed sheets: same as above (if you live in a country that has very pronounced seasons - I like flannel in the cold months!)
  • PJs: same as above
  • towels: so that you can use one while the other one is being washed
  • sets of workout clothes, favorite bras, bathing suits, etc.: same as above
  • sets of dishes: same as above - for a family of 4, that would mean 8 of each item - I know I rarely use all 12 of my plates, forks and glasses at the same time!

Do you have any other examples I might have overlooked?


Please share any thoughts, no matter if you agree or disagree with the above!


WEEK 17 IN REVIEW


Temptations

I was early for an appointment. Did not feel like waiting in the car. Walked into a store. Spotted a very nice pair of boots, price 25% off, my size. Tried them on. Liked them. Looked at my other pair of boots on the floor (the ones I had walked in with), not the same style but definitely the same kind: not too warm, laced, earth tones, ankle height, perfect for mild spring or fall days. Would the new boots serve a different purpose than the ones I already own? Absolutely not. Walked out in my old (but still perfectly fine) boots without buying a new pair.

My friend S, on the other hand, has been questioning her recent purchase of a short faux leather jacket. Her argument: she already owned a soft shell jacket that she used for similar temperatures (again, spring and fall). She therefore questions whether that purchase fits a minimalist lifestyle. However, she did not own a stylish jacket to wear when she dresses up. I think her new purchase was justified.

How do you determine whether an item qualifies as a need or as a duplicate of something you already own?


Donations (good riddance)

Small, gently used toys my kids are not using anymore are becoming the "prizes" I use when playing Bingo with my students. Up to now nobody has complained.

How are your children, parents or partner reacting to the idea of getting rid of things they don't use anymore?


Observations and cogitations

A reader commented that she hides things from her family, and that if no one has noticed or asked for those things in a month, it means they can be donated. If you are not ready to "play that game" with your loved ones, why don't you play it with yourself: hide things you don't really use in a box. Tape it shut. Don't list the contents anywhere. Wait a few months. Did not need anything that was in the box? Don't even remember what you put in it? Donate the box "as is".

Does that sound scary to you? If you decide to try it, tell us what happened!



What did you resist this week? Did you donate or get rid of anything? Did you face any challenge? Please comment below! And...

Become a follower of the blog/subscribe by email (top left corner of this page)!


Follow me on Facebook (click here)!


Follow me on Twitter (click here)!



Tuesday, February 17, 2015

The Less is More project: Week 7 - Your biggest investment

JulieSaintMleux, 2012


After I mentioned the cleaning chores I had accomplished on a certain housebound day (winter storm number 259!), along with the time it had taken me, my friend S remarked: "you do have a big house".

Funny... I don't think I have a big house. Granted, it's not small, but it certainly does not qualify as a McMansion. 

Upon verification, our house is around or slightly above the US national average and median in terms of total square footage. According to the American Enterprise Institute, in 2013, the average size of new houses was 2679 square feet, whereas the median was 2491 square feet. The United States Census Bureau gives numbers a touch smaller for 2010: an average of 2392 square feet and a median of 2169 square feet for single-family houses. (As some of you know, we live in Canada, where the numbers seem to be inferior, a 200 square feet difference or so.)

For an interesting comparison, the site Shrinkthatfootprint has put together the numbers for other countries (based on 2009; the numbers might be higher now):

Honk Kong: 484 ft2
UK: 818 ft2
Canada: 1948 ft2
US: 2164 ft2
Australia: 2303 ft2

The interesting thing about those numbers - the North American ones anyway - is that they have increased significantly over the past decades. Houses have been getting bigger. I assume my house's size is "just right" for a family of four, but truth is, we do not need all that space. Before we bought the property, we lived in an apartment that was significantly smaller. We did fine. The kids have grown, but we could still live in the same apartment, even if I would probably miss, although only temporarily, the 2 full bathrooms we have right now, as well as the formal dining room (currently used as my home office). (We also have a third toilet in a powder room that really we don't need - how often do 3 different people have to use the bathroom at the same time?) As for the storage (right now I benefit from generous closets, including a walk-in almost big enough to be used as a nursery), you suddenly don't need as much when you cut down on stuff. The only real issue would probably be the following: where to store 4 bikes and all the camping equipment? 

If you currently have small living quarters, how do you make it work? I'm specifically interested in knowing where you store your sports/outdoor equipment.

So. "Big" houses are nice. And what's wrong with them if you can afford them? The question is: what does it mean, exactly, to be able to "afford" a big house?

Let's say you would like to work less. Or do something else that you are passionate about, but pays less. Or maybe you would love to travel more. Yet you don't, because "there are bills to pay". The biggest of which are most likely house related: mortgage payments, insurance, maintenance, heating, electricity. You are stuck working more than you want and/or in a job you don't really like in order to pay for that house. Feeling resentful yet? 

Big houses usually come with land as well. We opted for countryside/forest living, and have close to 2 acres (or 75 000 square feet) of greenery around the house. Surely I appreciate it: tons of space for the kids to play, for the dog to run around, for us to make a big garden. Unfortunately, big spaces also mean lots of work: just mowing the lawn or shoveling the driveway is a Herculean task here. Luckily a good part of our property is wooded, which requires very little work. Still, all that maintenance - house and yard - takes time and/or money (depending on whether you do it yourself or hire someone).

All that time and money, you don't have it for other things. There are days in the summer when I have to pick between weeding the flowerbeds and going to the beach. Frustrating. I know it's the ultimate "first world problem", but why can't I have a nice front yard AND a nice relaxing day with family and friends?

If you are lucky enough to have the time and/or money for a big house, take a moment to think about your environmental footprint: is your choice of property kind to the Earth?

Even if we don't need to move (we still made a reasonable choice with that house), some days, I do wonder: would we be better off (and would Mother Nature thank us) with a smaller property? I know it's a dangerous thought: I might like it a little bit too much, become addicted to the sense of freedom and simplicity, keep downsizing, and end up in a tiny house (nothing wrong with that, you might say). I thrive when we go camping, and our camping style is rather minimal: a tent, some basic gear, no water/electricity/electronics. No car access either, meaning we have to carry everything on our backs. I love that way of life. (My only questioning is whether I would take to it 12 months a year - it does get pretty cold around here.) 

I have dreamed of moving into a "treehouse with a view" or even a sailboat. What's so special about those kinds of places? Mark Boyle, author of The Moneyless Man - A Year of Freeconomic Living, has experienced the joys of living in a smaller, closer to nature dwelling: 


"My favorite times were when it rained heavily. I'd listen to the rain crashing on the roof with a real appreciation for the shelter that was keeping me dry and protected [...] Such gratitude increases as you get closer to nature and the things that you use; the more degrees of separation you have, the less you appreciate them.


This is exactly what I like about camping. And so I have a feeling that if we moved to something smaller, I would quickly embrace it. Despite all that, there is something about living where we live that is hard to renounce... what is it called? Oh yeah, I got it: it's called status.

To be honest, I don't even know if status is something that bothers me all that much - but I can't come up with any other reason why moving into a smaller house would be problematic - unless we have to leave the neighborhood... and what I like most about the neighborhood is not the status, but rather the close-knit community, the peaceful atmosphere, the nature that surrounds us.

Any thoughts?




WEEK 7 IN REVIEW


Temptations 

Once again, I had to go to the pharmacy for one small purchase (medication for a family member), but almost got sucked into buying more. Did you notice how big most pharmacies have become? If you wanted to, you could probably do half of your groceries and buy half of your clothes there! That on top of acquiring cosmetics, candy, toys, books, school/office supplies, decorative items, gadgets, etc.  


Donations

This week I tackled my hutch. I filled 3 boxes with various plates, glasses, bowls and vases I haven't used since we moved here in 2007. (Don't worry mom, I still have the one vase you told me to keep!) 

This wasn't as easy as one would think. As I cleaned the shelves, I was tempted to simply move the things around. When I got to the shot glasses, I thought "What if I want to do shots with friends?" (D doesn't drink). Then it occurred to me that I don't remember the last time I had shots with friends (other than one random time in a bar 2 years ago). We are grown-ups. We drink wine. Okay, and beer. But shots? I don't need those glasses.

Come to think of it, there are very few things that you should keep in your kitchen if you don't use them at least on a weekly basis. One exception is the fondue set (we love fondue in this family). Other than that... toss it!

Good news: I found the screwdriver I had been looking for! (Please don't ask me what it was doing in the hutch.)



Observations

The Less is More spirit also applies to the projects we take on, and in my case, one of them is reading. When I go to the library, I take too many books, and then have to rush reading them all before they are due back (they cannot be renewed when somebody else places a hold on them). I need to get into the habit of taking only 1 or 2 books at a time.


Cogitations 
 

Just because you can afford something is not a good enough reason to buy it. I cleaned my pharmacy this week. I keep all medications in a high cupboard in the kitchen (the bathroom is not a good place as it gets too hot and damp), but it's been kind of messy, and I though that a small, inexpensive basket would help me keep all the little bottles organized. Problem is, I am on the Less is More project, and not supposed to buy anything. All my baskets are already put to good use. What to do? Well, I was inventive. I found a rather sturdy and empty shoe box, cut the top off, and filled it. Who cares if it doesn't look pretty. It's gonna be inside a cupboard! And now I can say that I did a good deed for the environment: reused something that was perfectly fine instead of acquiring something new.



What did you resist this week? Did you donate or get rid of anything? How did that make you feel? Please comment below! And...