Below are images of two different luxury hotels. Which do you find more appealing? Which would you find more relaxing?

The first is the Proper Hotel in San Francisco, with interior design by Kelly Wearstler. The second is the Park Hyatt Kyoto, with interior design led by Tony Chi in collaboration with Takenaka Corporation.

Honestly, I almost feel bad writing this because it’s like shooting fish in a barrel. Look at the Proper Hotel and tell me: where can your eyes rest? They can’t. You’re overwhelmed at every turn. There’s no visual respite—ever.

You might object and say that I’m being unfair, that the two hotels have different purposes—and that would be true, at least to some degree. The Park Hyatt Kyoto is urban, but meant to be an oasis of tranquility. The Proper Hotel is urban and meant to be a place where, I don’t know, stuff gets done? But they’re both hotels, right? A hotel is literally a place we go to rest, whether between days or within them.

This looks like a case of maximalism versus minimalism. It’s a debate I don’t wish to fully wade into, and to each their own.¹ But I’ll say this: when we look at something old—an object, a place, an image—and think, wow, that was ahead of its time, it’s not because it was maximalist. For example:

By the way, I came upon this line in the article from which I took the images of the Proper Hotel, writing about Wearstler’s design for the hotel’s restaurant Villon: “With its lush, inviting banquettes and deep hues, it has luxe written all over it.”

This article is titled, “The luxury of ma”. What exactly is ma?