Ladies and Gentlemen of the Jury:

I’d like to offer a rebuttal to Scott’s blog from last week. In said blog, he made a case for why our new office design could end in divorce court. I’d like to offer a different perspective, and argue that this is less of a case for divorce court, but one that could lead to a murder case where I am pleading temporary insanity.

First, let’s start by setting the Way Back Machine to 4 years ago when we were designing our current office. In those days, the office was in a former bank building in Myersville, which was two stories and had a LOT of storage space. I didn’t insert myself into the design process much. I thought I’d leave it to the professionals. However, I did take the time to point out that the storage space was inadequate. I also insisted on a coat closet, since we didn’t really have one. Time after time, I was told by my loving husband that there was plenty of storage. Fast forward to move in day. It quickly became clear that our storage was inadequate. Oh, and the coat closet morphed into a fish room, which wasn’t quite what I had in mind.

Fast forward to the beginning of our fire station adventure. Since Scott and I are purchasing this building, I’ve decided I must be more intimately involved in the design. A design that must include a coat closet. Since I’ve only mentioned the lack of closet space a few thousand times, I’m hoping no one forgets. Of course, Scott advised me early on that Architecture would be happening during this process. Just so we are clear, that is architecture with a capital A and pronounced with a snooty upper-class New England accent. It was also implied that Architecture was probably more than my feeble brain could process. I persevered.

During our first attempt at Architecture, they cut a large hole into the center of the second floor for a stairwell. I didn’t like that idea since it removed a good amount of square footage, which directly correlates to the building’s value. There were other examples where I was a stumbling block to Architecture, but I was trying to keep an open mind since I understand that this is a process. On the day Scott mentioned, I was trying VERY hard not to freak out about a large, triangular shape in the design. However, I was having difficulty imagining the space without it, since the drawing had some very bold lines. As we all know, bold¬†draws the eye. So I mentioned I was having a hard time seeing past the bold lines. Scott told me it was because I didn’t understand Architecture.

After that, I called an immediate timeout. Otherwise, I would be telling¬†this story like Velma Kelly did in Chicago (around the 4:50 mark in the video below). “…I completely blacked out. I can’t remember a thing. It wasn’t until later when I was washing the blood off my hands, that I even knew they were dead.” I had to leave the office for a moment. Ok, the moment was really 45 minutes where I walked around outside in 38-degree weather without a coat. A coat that was probably on the back of my chair instead of in a closet.

And so, Ladies and Gentlemen, I put it to you. Am I too practical? Possibly. But when faced with Architecture, I’m not sure if it’s going to Divorce Court or if it’s going to be the Trial of the Century. One thing I can say without a doubt–there will be a good spot to hang our coats in the new office.