I've always wanted operable shutters, and now moving to a small ranch-style house, wonder if they would look ridiculous......????

But no, they aren't designed to do that. They WERE designed to do that in the past. A lot of the things that are done now are relics of old construction techniques, like fake brick/stone foundations.

Even brick facades on new houses should be just as repellent as mis-sized shutters. They are OBVIOUSLY using that brick as decoration and those homes don't look like they're made of bricks.

When the function of something changes from useful to decorative, the rules change too.

Little faux shutters on a midcentury ranch ARE authentic details. They're just authentic to something else.

Really, and absolutely ... since you are asking.

To people who care about such things, small shutters are unattractive. I would go a step further and say that personally I don't like shutters that are plastered against a facade, ie clearly not operational. A quality shutter that is well sized, operational, with beautiful hardware, is really lovely. Small flat shutters with no hardware make me think of things builders do to save money that most people don't notice. For most people, it's fine, yes. But for people care about design, it grates.

What type of ranch is it? If the windows are big, then I don't think shutters are architecturally appropriate. For instance, my sister's house (designed by an apprentice of Frank Lloyd Wright) is MCM and would absolutely ridiculous with shutters. But a different type of 50's ranch may be able to carry them off... but not on the large picture window most have.

I will buy the phony shutters on certain styles of mid-century houses.

I do happen to think that a layer of thin brick or thin stone on one surface of a house is pretty repellent, but I don't think that brick or stone houses have to be old fashioned masonry construction--just that enough of the veneer is present on the house to make sense...not like a sticker on a package. If you go to the extreme that it's only supposed to look like the material it is, lots of houses would look like concrete and plastic and metal. --And maybe there shouldn't be anything the matter with that.

But with a *new *build, most of which are some sort of "traditional", if your house needs mis-sized shutters to give it "interest" I think you need to analyze what is so lacking that you need to stick doo-dads on it to make it look better. I think one of the things that has been lost sight of is that there is nothing the matter with a nice, simple, plain, house. A lot of new construction is analogous in my mind to cars from the late fifties, the more colors and details and chrome and fins and continental kits and fender skirts and extraneous c--p that can be piled on to one car (or house) the better it must be.

This post was edited by palimpsest on Tue, Jun 24, 14 at 22:33

Yes, because this is inappropriate.

This looks silly.

This even worse.

As is this...

These are right sized and appropriate for the home.

As are these.

Well, yeah, but in your bad examples, Annie, the whole fenestration is bad. Removing the shutters isn't going to help any of those houses a whole lot, because the much bigger problems are still going to be there.

Certainly, wb, the wee shutters don't improve the facade. It's sloppy lipstick on a pig....

It's like a hanging basket full of fake flowers. Sure it's an accent, but it's still fake. And it is not fooling anyone.

i doubt that too many people with properly sized, working shutters regularly use them... they are decorative in most cases.

a similar analogy i think would be 'decorative' fabric panels that some people hang up to the ceiling, well above the window and not approprately sized for the window or designed for use... one of the real purposes of curtains before well insulated windows (or any windows at all) was to keep out light and drafts, etc... but, even though some drapes aren't necessarily functional or 'properly' sized, they can still add style to a home. some look great, some not so much. imo, shutters are the same- not all have to be sized appropriately for the window or 'working' to look good--

Form follows function - or should at least appear that way.

But the properly sized ones don't function, so they are just as fake and frivolous as the too small ones. Both are only decorative accents. How often do any of you close your shutters?

Ack! While I realize shutters were created with a purpose it's not something I ever bothered to think about...until now. *sigh* LOL Oh well.

I'm not sure exactly what would be considered correct for my house, but I'd much rather look at it the way it is than without the shutters. They're like mascara.

Look, it boils down to what someone upthread said about details. Choosing the correct shutters for your home is one of hundreds of small detail choices that are made when building or renovating. Some people want authentic, architecturally correct details on their home. And some people don't care at all. And that is perfectly fine! This is America...you can stick vinyl shutters all over your house if you want, you can paint each shutter a different color if you want, you can do whatever (unless you have an HOA, lol) but why question someone's choice to use correct detailing on their home? Architects spend a lot of time in school learning about form and scale, and what makes a house or building look "right." So I trusted my architect, but I also trusted my own two eyes. And I don't like the way inappropriately sized shutters stuck to the facade look. You don't have to agree.

Not adding to the debate, but an interesting side note on working shutters.

My parents owned an 1880s Victorian. Every window except the half-moon one in the attic had working shutters. Even the three windows in the bay windows. Those had what looked like very skinny shutters, but the shutters had been made in two parts and hinged, so that they were narrow enough to fit between the windows, but could be unfolded to cover the entire window.

So in their closed position, they looked too narrow to cover the window. I know, I had to paint them enough times.

I fall into the camp of "If the shutters are in proportion to the windows, they are okay." I'm not getting out there with a measuring tape to see if the shutters are an inch or two too narrow for the windows.

But shutters such as the pictures that AnnieDeighnaugh posted, where they are too short for the window, or half a foot away from the window--those are mistakes and should not have happened. We can only suspend disbelief so much.

Of course, this would also mean that shutters should be operable and have those little metal brackets that keep them open. I would love to have operable shutters, or in a shutterless house, those Rolladen (rolling shutters/hurricane shutters?)

Shutters now fall into the category of wall art, as opposed to function. Annie's "yikes" pic is not a yikes to me. It's a vestigial nod to the icon "traditional home" - an homage.

Radiators have gotten smaller and sleeker and you don't hear anyone complaining about that.

It's ok to bring back an inauthentic farm sink to conjure up warmth and love, why not a little board on the sides of your windows?

"I think one of the things that has been lost sight of is that there is nothing the matter with a nice, simple, plain, house."
I absolutely agree with this. I also think that decorating, as a concept, allows for adding, subtracting, changing.
From decorative house numbers to the ornate trims on some old houses, to shutters, add-ons can be positive.
The very fact that there is a debate here means that people's opinion on the subject differs and there is no one 'right' way or ironclad rule.

This post was edited by lucille on Wed, Jun 25, 14 at 8:08

I like decorative shutters on a house, unless the windows are decorative enough so they can stand on their own.

Never understood why some people think we should only have working shutters. Maybe if we lived in a million dollar home where the windows are spaced just right to allow shutters that fit. A million dollars where I live would buy a mansion.

The last two pictures Annie showed where the shutters are appropriate proves my point.

Annie, the "inappropriate" houses with shutters really are bad examples. Really bad. Sorry.

I'm also finding this topic to be a bit snobby. Not everyone has a home that will take wide shutters. When I see a house with regular square windows with no shutters, it looks dead and bare to me.

I think that sometimes putting shutters on as decoration is because people want to do something to boost the color or decoration on the front of their house and only think about doing shutters. Much can be done to enhance the front of the home by beefing up the window trim without adding shutters.

The other advantage of looking at trim is that, as in the first example, there often isn't even room to add a shutter if you wanted to. Picture this house with the trim painted out in a stronger color...it would add even more emphasis to the trim.

Certainly the kind of shutter treatment used below was very common for this era house and the house clearly looks attractive, the shutters are at least of appropriate height and are mounted near the windows where they belong. The shutters afford the opportunity to add an additional color to the front of the house. It's a look. If you like it, go for it. AFAIK, there are no "shutter police."

This post was edited by AnnieDeighnaugh on Wed, Jun 25, 14 at 8:39

I don't agree that shutters that are never closed are equally fake and frivolous on all houses. Properly sized shutters whether they actually operate or not, (but appear that they *do or *could) add appropriate authentic details to the right sort of house. And I suppose I will agree that the purely decorative open slat and cut out sorts of things give an authentic detail to certain 20th century houses. They were "wrong" then, but it's historical now, so I give it a pass.

(But even the cutouts on panel shutters originally had a function. They let a bit of daylight in while closed but were more secure than louvered shutters).

But if you are going to start getting into purist arguments that whatever is not truly operational and used, and is only a decorative detail (and all equally fake) --that all this should be eliminated from houses, then most building details should be eliminated (and this is where modernism started):

Doors should be slabs or have real panels, Moulded doors that look like they have panels are out.

Any window that does not have true divided light should not be divided at all, it should just be a single sheet of glass.

If you take this to it's next level, only the windows that are needed for emergency egress or supplemental ventilation should open, all the rest should be sealed.

Any brick, block or stone used on the house should be the real thing, and function at least as the cladding of the house. No thin veneers of any material that is supposed to be "heavy"

Houses do not need masonry chimneys unless they have an actual woodburning masonry fireplace.

And to take form follows function to it's Corbusien conclusion: Houses should not have a front door. Everyone arrives by car so the entry door should be in a carport or garage.

I live in an area where it is culturally appropriate for many women to wear wigs. Because so many women wear wigs, it is pretty obvious that they are covering their own hair: their own hair would not be that color or texture and it would not change so drastically from one week to the next.

So, some women are of the opinion that since it is not their own hair, why not wear something that is obviously fake? With obvious exceptions all around, who do you think looks better (most of the time) a) the woman who is wearing a wig that is compatible with 1) the actual appearance of real hair, 2) is a length, style, and color, that is appropriate to her age and complexion, or b) the "anything goes" wig that does not have a basis in reality?

Pal, I was recalling the other day how my Grandmother's hair used to sometimes be pink. It looked so cute on her.

I guess it's more expensive to plan for and install generously-sized trim around a window than to add fake shutters.

Here is a bit of irony: I live in an historic district with hundreds of houses with correctly sized and placed shutters. There is one house, though, whose shutters were apparently removed at one point and placed outside the trim, nailed to the face of the house. And wouldn't you know it, that house is directly across the street from me, and I see it every day. Ugh!

Full disclosure: I gave my architect free rein on exterior and interior trim and I think he did a fabulous job. No need for shutters, fake or not. He got me out of the shutter thing by showing me what a difference good trim can make.

This post was edited by AnnieDeighnaugh on Wed, Jun 25, 14 at 9:21

People have gotten accustomed to seeing skimpy shutters tacked on in a perfunctory manner merely as a color accent, so they don't really think about how ridiculous it looks.

Shutters that are sized & placed properly give windows more graceful proportions. Skimpy shutters never look graceful, nor do shutters on big picture windows or shutters on multiple windows mulled together.

Again, if a house looks "bare" without small, colored rectangles tacked onto it, I think one should think about what's wrong with the design of the house, particularly if one is building or remodeling anyway.

But here is the Fletcher house, by Hugh Jacobsen, neo-traditional, very plain, no shutters, and doesn't need them.
If you think it *does many experts would disagree: Jacobsen has received much recognition, and many awards for his work, and monographs of his works have been published--he's achieved things only a small fraction of architects have.

I live in an area that is probably 80% or more tract colonial homes with aluminum or vinyl siding. All have vinyl shutters, probably for reasons stated above...easier and cheaper for builders to stick shutters on than trim out the windows. These houses would look awful without shutters, even though they are fake. And my guess is those with authentic,operable shutters never go around and close them at night and reopen in the morning. If I were building my own house I would go shutterless like Annie's house.

I consulted on a project where the original façade had shutters but to put operational shutters back on would have been cost-prohibitive, and we picked shutters that were vinyl and very slightly too narrow. We hung them "upside down" so the louvers faced Up when they were against the wall (another detail that people get wrong) and they were close enough that they looked right, especially on the second floor.

I think that being close enough to look correct can be okay too. Annie's bad examples may be bad, but I wouldn't say that they are so bad as to be uncommon. There are examples all over my neighborhood. And since they can be compared easily to the real thing, which is very common as well, the differences are striking.

Here is something that happens with genuine, operational shutters that may affect your decision to choose something that *looks like it will fit, but may actually be too narrow:

Real shutters will sometimes overlap each other, will sometimes hit other obstructions or sometimes be too close to each other to be esthetically pleasing in the modern sense. In these cases it may make sense to cheat a bit on the narrow side if you want shutters:

Shutters hitting cornices, gutters, or the house next door:

Shutters overlapping with windows close together:

Shutters overlapping or touching on the entire façade:

how funny -- I've never given a thought to shutters or noticed them. I don't think I've ever lived in a house that had them. I'll have to look at houses in my area to see if they're there.

That said, my first reaction would be to say -- if there's no functional need for them, why put them. After reading the comments above, I understand about the decorative items analogy, but I still think that form should follow function.

I think this is a "builder" thing -- I don't think good architects would design nonworkable shutters unless it's a period style home which always, always has them.

No, it's not just a GW "meme". Fake shutters look bad to anyone who cares about architecture or design. Doesn't mean you won't find them, though, because fake shutters were a mid-century go to in cheap building. There's a lot of it around, and its still being built. Sorry if that sounds snobby, but it's the truth.

'fake' shutters??? have to say, i have never seen a fake shutter! (decorative doesn't make them fake!)

My next post will be "Should men wear neckties?"

Enjoying the informative posts and interesting opinions. I went out to look at my neighbors' houses and my black shutters. Guess what, I don't even have shutters!

They're fake shutters if they're screwed into the siding & don't operate. Fake and decorative.

I don't mind the fact that they're unnecessary in our modern age. Nicely scaled, properly attached shutters, whether made of wood or quality vinyl or the new composite materials, are an authentic detail on a good historic replica or can be a beautiful touch on a fine house. I like that they give depth to a house's facade and add shadow lines as well as color -- something the plastic tacked-ons can't match.

We live in a 60s/70s tract house development. There are only five styles of houses and all share the same exterior materials, so the 170 houses here look the same whether they're a ranch, a center hall colonial, a side hall colonial, a contemporary, or a Dutch colonial. All have the plastic, screwed-in shutters abutting the window frames. It looks okay if you drive around the neighborhood because the shutters are just part of the ersatz colonial style in our little piece of suburbia. But when you drive out of the neighborhood, there are many genuine historic homes and beautiful newer homes with gorgeous shutters -- then you realize how poor the fake ones look. We took ours off & never replaced them when we remodeled -- only one of two houses in our development to go shutterless.

I really want to go paint my shutters all different colors now!

I posted about siding for my house awhile back and I think I got mixed opinions on my shutters. Every house in my development has them. I wonder how far off they are from the correct size. I think my house will look a bit funny without them but I am going to give it a shot when we reside. I wonder how much it will cost to beef up the trim and if taht will make sense if we don't take off our horrible fake brick ( :p )that was to Pal - funny for years I said I will NEVER live in a house that has that awful fake stone or brick, especially if it is only on the front. Never say never I guess. :)

What I love about threads like this is all the history that I learn. I knew the reasoning behind "proper" shutter sizing but now I also have all kinds of things to ponder like brick, siding, etc.

FWIW, I do not see this as snobby at all. A question was asked and answers were given and everyone supported their position (for and against) in a nonjudgmental manner. Shutters are not appropraite for my house and location but man, do I ever love those blue ones that Annie posted, be still my heart.

Five points to Sheesharee!

You are right, Shee, shutters ARE like mascara!

I am firmly planted in the middle ground.

I love the look of 'accurate' shutters and understand the historical background. The current use is different but there is still nothing like the shadow lines created by properly sized and mounted shutters and the dimension they add to a house. Real shutter hardware is also beautiful and adds to the visual interest.

Miss-sized shutters generally do no favors to a house but I have seen some, particularly 50's and 60's ranches where they are used and add a bit of charm. There is no attempt to fool anyone and I think shee's analogy to mascara in those cases, is spot on. And then there are others, like a couple of the examples above, that are just head scratchers and it's hard to understand why someone thinks that's a better option than no shutters.

Perhaps I'm only defending my own situation, but I think there are gradations of offense in using shutters that are not right sized or placed, or as a means to dress up a house that otherwise would be boring. My house has nice trim but we still used vinyl shutters "shudder!!!> - which are appropriately sized but **inappropriately** placed. They're OUTSIDE of the trim and plastered against the facade because I didn't have the heart to cover it back up after my DH painstakingly stripped 60 years of old chipped, peeling paint off. They're purely decorative (to my eye) and probably quite offensive to some people. Oh, well.

Our home is new construction but it is English Tudor inspired. I have resisted the urge to add shutters as that would be inappropriate for a Tudor. When we first moved in, I was very tempted but as the landscaping has filled in, I don't even think about it any more. Just wanted to reiterate that there are many ways to enhance curb appeal and shutters are just one of them. Landscaping, trim, front door, light fixtures, etc all can add a great deal to the exterior.

We just spent the weekend taking the fake vinyl shutters off of our new-to-us 1973 Ugly Duckling on the lake ... only to paint them and put them back up. Sigh. The siding was discolored where the shutters had been and no amount of scrubbing would fix it. My new mantra = shutters are mascara ;)

Gee...I have been preparing a thread for a couple of days about my house and it's new look...added shutters and paint on the front of the house, and a decorative change for the back.

I was very excited to show the before and after of something that my house has needed. I have been bothered by the lack of shutters since we built the house 8 years ago. Sorry to say that I have shutters on a triple window, too!

This post was edited by newhomebuilder on Wed, Jun 25, 14 at 18:38

Newhomebuilder,
I can hear the pride and excitement about the changes you have made, I know your house is beautiful and I look forward to the thread.

Aside to pal...how did Jacobsen keep water from collecting in all those valleys on that roof. Yikes!

I removed the shutters on the last 2 houses we owned in the northeast. I called them "wasp condos". Our current house in CA had no shutters when we bought and I don't plan on adding any. I don't think the houses looked naked or plain without them.

Sometimes less is more!

There is probably a certain amount of engineering that takes place for water management with drains and internal gutters and scuppers and such.

The series of four attached houses, one of which I live in, have roofs like this and the houses have large drains that run through the house, gutters and scuppers, and we've had problems twice: once when there was an ice dam that caused water to back up and it leaked around another roof penetration, and once when renters had been drinking on the roof >:-(, and left a beer cup up there that basically suction cupped over one of the drains causing a water backup. (Maybe a foot of water trapped in the valley)

Most of the time it works really well and this is an older roof that should probably be replaced soon. With newer roofing membranes and such it should be even better.

If you notice his houses tend to have no visible gutters or soffits or anything, so all of the functions related to that stuff must be heavily designed to be nearly invisible.

The Hugh Jacobseb houses do have gutters and downspouts. They're just not visible in the picture.

I am so in love wiht that house! I have such a regular house. Sigh. location really does trump all in real estate sometimes.

If I never had to worry about resale I might do creative things. Besides painting my shutters different colors look at this!!! :)

Boop - that is so YOU!

I think it is definitely a personal choice. Some houses look better with shutters, others don't. I agree with Shee - on some houses, shutters are mascara - or - the icing on the cake!

After all, it's YOUR home! If you want shutters (or don't) - so be it!!

Boop, I think that is a school or pre-school ... so not something that most homeowners would do to a spanish style house!!!

It's true that most shutters on new homes aren't functional. And it's also true that functional shutters always look better. It's subtle, but it adds a level of quality. Most people probably wouldn't consciously notice the difference, but they would notice something is different. It's the same as using fake plastic plants to decorate your home versus real plants. Both technical work, but there's a difference.