WRITING about health and houses provides a perfect opportunity to explore the
overlap between social and environmental issues, technology and architecture.
But Sydney and Joan Baggs show no interest in architecture and are dismissive
about science. They prefer to rely on what they call
鈥減arascience鈥濃�攁ctivities such as dowsing, which they acknowledge are
鈥渟ubjective and difficult to measure鈥�, and 鈥減rotoscience鈥�, a term they use to
refer to 鈥減rimal or ancient knowledge鈥�.
The Healthy House (Thames & Hudson, 拢19.95, ISBN 0 500
27920 9) is the latest in a 鈥渘atural house鈥� publishing outbreak that appeals
more to the imagination than the intellect. Illustrated with colour photographs
of private houses in open countryside, and with a whole chapter on 鈥渃hoosing a
healthy location鈥�, it appears to be aimed at those wealthy enough to build their
own houses on greenfield sites. These are the last people in the world to need
advice on 鈥渉ealthy living鈥�.
The book is a bizarre mix of subject matter. There is an idiot鈥檚 guide to the
Chinese art of Feng Shui and a discussion of the ideal form for a healthy house.
It鈥檚 a pyramid, in case you were wondering: 鈥渟uch a strong roof shape may not
appeal to everyone, though it is an ideal shape for generating a relaxing
atmosphere conducive to alpha and theta brain rhythms鈥�. Non sequiturs and
generalisations litter the text, and its frequent references to termites will
not be of much use to European readers.
Advertisement
鈥淗eal thyself鈥攈eal the planet鈥� is the underlying message of The
Healthy House. But this simplistic approach is an active distraction from
the real challenges of achieving sustainability. It is a misdirection of
energy鈥攁way from rational understanding, towards simplistic emotional
response.