Co-living essay urges loosening preferences to fight loneliness

Melissa Kirsch reflects on a guest essay in The Times by Elizabeth Oldfield, who is 41 and lives in a London house with her husband, their two children, a couple with a baby on the way, another woman and a cat. Kirsch and friends say they often fantasize about living in groups for practical benefits — a perpetual dinner party, shared household expenses, someone to drive you to the airport or sit by your bed when you’re ill.

Oldfield goes beyond those perks and holds up communal living as one answer to loneliness and social division, writing that we increasingly “avoid ties of mutual obligation in favor of frictionless transactions,” which she says leads to “relational decay.” Oldfield offers habits she has picked up in co‑living that might help regardless of where someone lives.

Chief among them is her suggestion to “loosen your grip on your preferences.” She says communal life has required compromises on décor, how to store cheese and cleaning up after using the kitchen, and she acknowledges the frustrations and conflicts that come with shared living. Kirsch writes that people are drawn to the idea of being able to share and compromise rather than remain what she calls “hothouse flowers.” Oldfield warns that “the relentless enhancement of experience does not usually bring inner peace,” and argues avoiding minor annoyances can lead to a solitary, preference‑optimized life.

Key Topics

Culture, Elizabeth Oldfield, Co-living, London, Melissa Kirsch, Loneliness