I took the photo because I fell for the architecture.

but you did get one thing wrong: it is a very small house, and the glass space is the main space of it. the photos are taken from a low angle and standing close to the building. thus, the image above is a composite of three photos. this has a tendency to make size and scale difficult to read.

anyway, the sunroom is beautifully proportioned and must be lovely to live and work in, especially given the setting in the trees. (studying the photo closely it looks like there is an artist’s workspace downstairs and something else, perhaps sleeping space?, upstairs). but (getting old and practical here) my instant thought about the place was “must be freezing in the winter and boiling in the summer. i wonder how many of those windows are openable? and how much heating costs?”

to generalize my point into something (perhaps) more relevant to others, this sunroom is a thing of beauty, but preserving it (as speculated by the person you quoted) is kind of a weird idea in that this particular sunroom/building is a fairly ephemeral thing as far as architecture goes. it’s gonna have broken windows & (looking at those foundation timbers) structural problems and other problems real soon. if it was ‘preserved,’ made into a museum or a disneyfied dwelling (which would improve it to meet all the codes, of course), it’d just be a stage set, like those historic forts you can visit, not a place that someone actually lives and works. It wouldn’t represent those hippie values anymore.

a better revival of this kind of spirit would be to keep doing “architecture without architects” and “architecture without codes” on our own, to show how it’s relevant now, to show how it meets needs now. i fully support your beer drinking pavilion project — especially if it’s in the FRONT yard.

happy new year!