wattle

I grew up in a house built out of 'wattle and daub', with a thatch roof. I wouldn't have called it a mud hut, but it was definitely a mud cottage.

In the wattle and daub huts they had thin logs for pillows, somewhat like firewood. Couldn't find an image in a quick web search.

In fact, there are many wattle and daub structures still standing - there's one around the corner that's protected by law.

In the past they might have been made from wattle and daub, or you could use studs, paper, whatever you want since they're not structural.

Most houses are of wattle and daub construction, but the shrine rooms of the more wealthy are walled with stone. Poorer families imitate the rich by applying pottery plaques to their shrine walls.

I've a friend who has just added to his 17th century thatched cottage with like materials: oak timber frame, timber cladding and wattle and daub, which is dirt and wood/hay/hair. It's lovely and solid.

I would pay for a version that had an Australian bush option with occasional kookaburras and bell birds, maybe lyre birds and wattle birds too.

Sausages are a much safer diet than being forced to eat Acacia compounds each day Many times a day here means probably less wattle poison to deal in each meal.

> In much the same way there's no sensible reason for thatched cottages, tipis, wattle and daub, or other different ways of building in 2017, it doesn't have to be for a logical reason. Of course, and if someone wants to build a house out of shipping containers, I don't care.

If you look at the architecture of most residences from the medieval era: thatch, wattle-and-daub and not a lot of hinges or nailed together things.

Non-toxic, solvent free; used in 'traditional' building, along with other wonderful materials like lime plaster and wattle and daub.

Unless you want to go the Reagan wattle route, a route which which a stylish, aristocratic, polysyllabic gentleman like yourself would surely eschew.

It's not his fault; it's just that technology compounds, and no amount of individual skill can ever make a skyscraper out of wattle and daub. Only in software, the most questionable of all the engineerings, do we build the processes and tools we depend on while we're using them.

In Uganda, it is legal to use cheap construction methods, like wattle-and-daub using cow dung, and thatch roofing. Appropriate technology there is a hand-press for making TIB-style mortarless interlocking bricks from local dirt.

I suppose at some point we'll have waste-free nano-replication, and the idea that things are built and stay built will seem as quaint as comparing a wattle and daub hut to modern architecture.

It's not how homes have normally been constructed in the UK. We have a few ancient wattle and daub houses which are no doubt hell to insure, but anything Victorian and newer was generally brick-built or concrete other than some prefabs from the inter-war period which are definitely hell to mortgage or insure. Modern timber-based construction methods are completely different from all those things.

Which make a noticeable difference to quality of life compared to growing up in a wattle and daub shack with a dirt floor. On the other hand, having an extra 6 miscellaneous rooms to store random crap, giant walk-in closets, 4 bathrooms, a huge home theater, or supersized bedrooms makes only a very slight difference to anyone, except insofar as it signals to the neighbors that you‘re rich and gives you 3x more cleaning to do.