I shot a casual photo of Lucy in front of our house this afternoon. She was happy in the warm summer sunshine. And I liked the perspective of the house behind her. It made her seem like the world’s friendliest guard dog.
After I posted the photo in a couple of places, a friend called me to say how much she loved it. Then she asked if I could take the same sort of picture of her dog in front of her house. I hesitated.
My house is an inexpensive old home in a mixed neighborhood. It was built in 1927. It originally didn’t even have running water. (I don’t know when the kitchen and bathroom were added.) I bought it six years ago as a cheap foreclosure. It’s nothing fancy.
My friend’s home is in a high-end suburb in a much nicer part of town. It’s worth about half a million dollars. The house has all the features that modern consumers want. But to anyone who understands symmetry and principles of design beauty, her house is a monstrosity. It’s an ugly crime against design.
How could I explain to my friend that her fancy house would look terrible as a background for her dog? How could I say that without insulting her taste?

Step in the right direction: U.S. ad group bans cosmetic photoshopping
Conservatives don’t understand liberal groups — and vice versa
Theft is biggest problem with customers not tipping gay server
Identity politics is the cancer behind Elizabeth Warren’s lie about ancestry
With space shuttle finally dead, free market can do better job in space
OK, morons, we’ll finally admit it: We really are smarter than you
To become a ‘runaway slave,’ you have to free your own thoughts
Past feels like blurry watercolor, not like the history of real people