4 hours ago
3
The prosecution: Rupi
The old fittings are works of art – replacing them with dull modern ones would be blasphemous
My boyfriend Raf and I have just bought our first home and we love it. We found a two-bedroom Victorian house with original features, including the fireplace and geometric tiles in the hallway. I’m of the opinion that the original features should all be kept because they are beautiful. It’s so rare to find period homes and we shouldn’t be ripping everything out.
Raf disagrees. He’s all about the bottom line and his taste is more modern. We have stained glass windows which are lovely but Raf says they’re bleeding heat and should be replaced. He says our heating bills will come down by 45% if we get double glazing. I’m gutted. I looked at a way to encapsulate the stained glass instead of getting rid of it, but it’s more expensive and we’re on a budget.
We’ve also got stunning wooden parquet floors which need a lot of care. But Raf wants to steam clean them, which can damage them. When I saw him steaming them one Saturday, I shouted: “You can’t do that!”
We’ve also argued about replacing the geometric tiles and whether to rip out the fireplace in the front room. I love the colour of the tiles and ripping out the fireplace would be blasphemous, but he wants a sleeker look. The previous owners had modernised the rest of the room but left the fireplace, so Raf says it doesn’t fit aesthetically, as well as taking up too much space (it is rather large and juts out slightly). But my dream is to restore other features in the room, such as the exposed brick, and take it back to its original vibe.
Raf and I have different tastes, but as our last place was rented we couldn’t change the decor. We did talk about some of this before we bought the house, but I was convinced I could make Raf come around, at least on the fireplace. Now I’m realising how different we are. I want to pay homage to the house’s history but Raf wants to put our own stamp on it.
I think original features are works of art and should be preserved but Raf says I’m getting overly emotional about it. I need to convince Raf that my interior tastes are superior.
The defence: Raf
The fireplace is too big, the windows leak heat and the floor doesn’t go with anything. Let’s fix them
It’s not that I don’t like period features in a home, but I just believe that unless something has a practical purpose, it should be scrapped.
If stained glass windows serve no function other than being pretty, and double glazing will cut our heating bills in half, then of course we should get double glazing. Encapsulation was a more expensive option but I am open to it if it keeps Rupi happy.
The fireplace is a bigger point of contention. I can’t wait to rip it out. It’s an eyesore and it’s very big – I want the space in our living room to actually live in. Rupi says that once we take out these features we can’t go back, and that people would kill for some of the period features in our home.
Yes, the house is gorgeous and we bought it because we both liked its character, but I do want to modernise some things. The ugly blue and red Victorian tiles in the hallway just don’t go with the colour scheme we’ve agreed on. We agreed to rip them up when we made an offer on the house, but now she’s going back on her decision.
I made a joke that Rupi was being “emotional” about everything because she’s acting as if the house will put some sort of curse on us if we swap the windows or take out the fireplace. She is treating me as if I’m a murderer!
In our last place we had a disagreement or two over cushion colours and lamp choices, but nothing like this. I can compromise on the tiles. I can even come around to treating the old floors (although in an ideal world I would like to lay carpet in most rooms) but I definitely want to rip out the fireplace. It is too large and doesn’t go with the room or any of our furniture. I think that’s a good enough reason to scrap it.
It’s a house not a museum, and we should decorate it in a way that best serves our needs in 2025. Energy bills are expensive and space is scarce. We can’t keep features that take up space and cost us money just because one of us likes them. It just doesn’t make any sense.
The jury of Guardian readers
Should Raf have more sympathy for Rupi’s Victorian values?
Why buy the house just to rip out most of its interesting features? Rupi is right to want to preserve its history, as previous owners have done.
James, 26
Raf seems willing to compromise, whereas Rupi isn’t at all. Actually inhabiting a space can change how we see it, so maybe both of them need to live in it for a while and then see how they feel about those features they think they hate.
Molly, 56
The main attraction of a period home is the original features; removing these unique components destroys both character and value. Stained glass lamination or encapsulation could help with insulation. Keep the fireplace (but maybe put in a stove).
Ronan, 37
I agree that it’s rare to find period homes nowadays and these features make your house unique – they don’t deserve to be simply replaced by a piece of furniture that everyone else owns. Sorry Raf but the modern aesthetic is overdone, and it will probably reduce the value of the house too.
Holly, 19
The joy of living in a period home is embracing its quirky features. Removing stained glass windows is tantamount to sacrilege. In terms of the floors, rugs are your friends. If he just wants to be warm, Raf should buy a soulless new-build next time.
Laura, 34
Now you be the judge
In our online poll, tell us who you think is in the wrong?
The poll closes on Thursday 20 March at 10am GMT
Last week’s results
We asked whether Peter should be more tolerant of his friends’ children.
77% of you said yes – Peter is guilty
23% of you said no – Peter is not guilty
