By Deborah Yaffe, Sep 11 2017 01:32PM
We all have our own idea of Pemberley, the quintessential Jane Austen estate. On film, it’s been played by gorgeous Lyme Park, in Cheshire (15-acre garden, 1,400-acre deer park), and even more fabulous Chatsworth, in Derbyshire (126 rooms, 105-acre garden), although it’s likely that Mr. Darcy’s £10,000 a year would not have sufficed to maintain such palatial properties.
Still, even if Darcy contented himself with a more modest stately home, it seems likely he never had to make do with the 460 square feet of the Pemberley, a portable house-on-wheels recently built for a family of five by Colorado-based Rocky Mountain Tiny Houses.*
Tiny Houses are intended to be more affordable and environmentally sustainable than the sprawling McMansions of suburbia, but this particular model is hardly austere: The kitchen features cherry cabinets and granite countertops, the electronic hookup allows for a giant TV, and the appliances are high-end.
Personally, I can’t imagine raising small children in a space this, um, tiny -- not to mention that our books alone would take up all the available surfaces. But check out those beautiful poplar-wood walls! It’s enough to make a girl change her mind about a marriage proposal.
* Thanks to AustenBlog’s Maggie Sullivan for bringing this item to my attention via Twitter.
It is beautiful and the name made me laugh, but I can't help thinking the "gooseneck" tiny homes, of which this is an example, defeat the purpose of tiny homes. That being said, the name is absolutely on point.
I don't really know enough about the philosophy of tiny homes to parse these distinctions! I consider our house reasonably modest, at least by suburban standards -- i.e., our kids complained that we couldn't fit a big-screen TV and a ping-pong table in the finished basement , let alone the pool table that some of their friends had -- but I don't think I could live with a family in one of these really tiny homes. I'd get claustrophobic at the lack of privacy.