<p>To preface, I’ll mention that I just submitted my admissions depost, so I’m not one to make life decisions over matching drapes.</p>
<p>I’m wondering which dorms look the nicest inside. Neo-gothic architecture is great, but paleo-chaotic interior design isn’t very appealing. During my stay (at Breck, including a visit to BJ) I encountered mismatched furniture on a regular basis, and a consistant lack of interior renovation (exposed electrical boxes, rusty bath tubs, etc.)</p>
<p>What I’m wondering is whether other dorms are better kept than these two, and, if so, which ones. </p>
<p>I’m sorry to make my first post as a Chicago student so finicky, but this topic has been on my mind since I visited.</p>
<p>Lots of older dorms- Breck, Broadview, Snell-Hitchcock, BJ, Maclean- have older (ahem, “more antique”) furniture, which is often mismatched or worn looking. I live in Snell-Hitchcock, and ours errs on the antique side of life, as the room sets tend to match, although our lounges tend to have a smattering of old and dying couches and chairs (quite comfortable, though!)
For new furniture or consistency of style, Max, Pierce, and South Campus will be your best bets- modern furniture for the most part, highly consistent from room to room and lounge to lounge. Pierce is highly dormish in appearance (basically, your mental stereotype of an OK normal college dorm), while Max tends to look as friendly, welcoming, and sterile as a children’s hospital, and South Campus’ interior is TBA.</p>
<p>lasermouse9,
Breck was actually closed for a couple of years and was going to be renovated for office space. When the University decided to increase the class size a few years ago, Breck was put back into service. While some think it looks kind of decrepit, it is well-loved!</p>
<p>I had read all the horror stories last year, and expected it to be terrible, but I found Breck charming. The bathrooms, though, could definitely use some love.</p>
<p>I saw Max Palevsky, Shoreland, and Maclean while I was staying overnight. Maclean is beautiful outside and completely run-down inside. Max P is hideous outside and very nice and clean inside (I’m guessing South Campus will be similar). With the ones I saw, the dorms that looked the nicest on the outside seem to be the most worn.</p>
<p>Let’s see. New elevators. Check. New fire-sprinklers. Check. New windows. Check. Nice, wide hallways. Check. New AC/heating. Check. New insulation/sound-proofing. Check. New faucets and bathroom fixtures. Check. New carpets. Check. New hardware in all the doors. Check. New kitchens. Check. New matching furniture. Check. Close to Quad. Check. Close to food services. Check. Close to gym. Check. Hideous looking (eh, could be worse). Check. Philosophy: A good tradition can start any time. Check. Lived in a third world country already (actually, 2). Not as pleasant or quaint as you might think. Hideous is easier to handle. S chose out of his own volition. Happy enough to stay for another year. Guess where.</p>
<p>Sorry if I came off as bashing Max Palevsky. Although I hated its outside look, I put it as my second choice for all the reasons that J’adoube listed.</p>
<p>You railed against Maclean as run-down, and I’m wondering about Broadview as well. My goal is to find the best compromise between modern interiors and non-party atmosphere. I don’t mind the transport time: I’ll read.</p>
<p>The Maclean dorm didn’t inspire awe, but it was functional. Most of the students there seemed pretty happy with it, though I wouldn’t be. I guess I have to remember to use less inflammatory language in the future, sorry =/</p>
<p>The only really modern dorms interiorwise are Max-P, the new south campus, and I-House (recently renovated). Other than that they may look nice on the outside, but they are crap on the inside. The thing bear in mind though is that they are college dorms, and most college students are just not that cleanly. As a result, the whole “my bedposts are black steel and my desk is faux oak tends” class of issues tend to get lost amongst the “why the hell does my roommate never do laundry” or “could you please try to use the trashcan on a semi-regular basis” element. If you are really super anal about housing or cleanliness, I suggest you emphasize this strongly in your housing preference form or whatever.</p>
<p>Uchicagoalum has this spot on- really, the interior of your dorm is what you (and your roommate) make of it. A note, though, that I-House is not a housing office available to first year students.</p>
<p>Is it likely that the South dorm, containing former Shoreland residents, will be as sociable and party-prone as that dorm is supposed to be? Are there any factors preventing a Shoreland-spawn-syndrome in the South dorm? I thinking of possible architectural layouts, or possible other dorms entering South campus that I haven’t heard of.</p>
<p>The factor 100% certain to damp down the Shoreland party atmosphere at the new dorm, at least somewhat, will be that the University will actually care about keeping the new dorm in good condition.</p>
<p>Having seen the inside of the new dorm, I would say that it is not conducive to partying like the Shoreland. The new dorm is filled with tiny singles. While there are some really nice quad-apartments style rooms in the new dorm, there are not even half as many as there are in the Shoreland. The new dorm will have proportionally more RA’s than the Shoreland. The layout of the new dorm is not the best for partying… There are more reasons.</p>