I found the Sept. 3 tiny house article fascinating.

My wife and I live in an expansive, “fancy” 1879 Queen Anne abode. When I married her (and this house) in 1999, I’d just relocated from California. I reckoned it would take three or four years to get the place shaped up. Today, I’m still shaping – and almost 20 years older.

Back to tiny houses. I was reminded of a concept called “cocooning” that futurist guru Faith Popcorn coined some 25 years ago (when folks took her name seriously).

Cocooning was the choice to drop out of the (corporate) rat race and live within one’s (domestic) confines: “staying inside one’s home, insulated from perceived danger, instead of going out.” Unfortunately, life requires most of us to “go out” and face perceived danger – to put a roof over our heads, and food on our tables.

These diminutive domiciles are a sign of the times. I see communities of tiny (and tidy) homes the likes of the Richmond structure shown in the article as a harbinger of the future. To be sure, tiny-homeowners’ associations would need to set up rules and regulations with folks living in such close proximity. Community clubhouses or common areas could be scheduled for (larger) groups. Can’t you just imagine (the late) Don Ho singing: “Tiiiiii–ny houses …” for family and friends at gatherings?

Let’s keep track of these folks opting for smart, simplistic living. Older folks like us have little need for the kind of grandiose space we now inhabit (and heat). We could more easily, comfortably and efficiently live in a far smaller environment. Hold on – let me ask the wife if she’d agree … ooops, “when hell freezes over,” said she.

Nonetheless, this is a trend worth watching – and applauding.

Buddy Doyle