Monday, 9 February 2009

Still Loving...


It seems I still adore Kelly Wearstler's trellis wallpaper. My heart skipped a beat when I stumbled across this gorgeous, understated stairwell {belonging to Beautiful Living}covered in KW's well known paper.

8 comments:

tales from an O.C. cottage said...

Ohhhh, how cool!

M ^..^

A-M said...

Hasn't she done a beautiful job with her home. I have been drooling over her progress for some time! A-M xx

Beautiful Living said...

Anna, I must say, MY heart skipped a beat when I saw my stairwell in your fabulous blog! And you should know that my selection of wallpaper was partly inspired by your blog :)

hugs from dagny

Paul Pincus said...

i completely agree! in my opinion, it's now officially a classic.

cheers.

The Norwegian said...

I agree. Here is where my heart skips a beat...gentle, subtle color. This pattern will ALWAYS be fresh! Thank you for sharing.

LindsB said...

What a beautiful stairwell, I love how the trellis paper looks here...its just so pretty!!

Tobi Fairley said...

I LOVE this too! And I hope Paul is right that it is a classic because I have used it in 4 different colors in recent projects and still not tired of it yet!

Jenny said...

I agree with Paul Pincus. I've seen this pattern (and its knock offs) all over the place since the very beginning. And I've seen people start to poo-poo it, as it has endured. Sometimes ubiquity is not a sign of being played out. Sometimes it's a sign of being a classic. This seems to be the case here. It's sinuous and angular at the same time. Wonderful.

The only issue I have with this, as I have with much of design, is the class exclusion of price. I wholeheartedly embrace design--interior and elsewhere--as art. And I grant the artists the right to profit. But, sorry if this is distasteful to say, I find it equally distasteful when such design is withheld from so many people who cannot afford it. There is a lot of art--I'm thinking of music and writing here, especially--that is available to everyone. For irreproducible artworks, say, original paintings, the astronomical price seems somehow reasonable to me. For works that are reproducible (again: music recordings, writing; in addition: fabric, wallpaper, and others), I am disturbed that people are excluded by prices far, far beyond the cost of production.

I apologize if this seems obnoxious. I just finished the leftover Valentine's champagne!