House hunting appears to have a fairly typical process. Especially first house hunting.
Decide you want to own a house.
Figure out how much you can spend.
Look at houses in the price range.
Look at houses slightly above the price range.
Decide you want a house slightly better than you can afford, so wait a while.
Find a house you love. Put an offer in. Lose.
There are two options from here.
Buy the next house you like. No matter what.
Drill down and figure out the necessities, rank them, and buy the next house that fits well enough.
A few observations on what seems to be significant in this process:
The visual appearance of a house features strongly.
Our expectations are set by the price bracket.
A few more observations on what seems to be (generally) lacking:
Our knowledge of how we like to live in a house.
What we need to be happy.
The implications of price on our lifestyle. Or happiness. Or anything other than what we can get for the money we (don’t actually) have.
Here’s an alternative way to approach house hunting, draw from the highly unrelated (but potentially connected) field of comparative mythology:
Step 1: Consider who you are. What you need. What is important. How you live in a space. How you share the space. And how these things might change.
Step 2: Consider the opportunities in front of you. Where you can find employment and therefore can live. What your income is (or could be).
Step 3: Figure out the match between who you are, and what the opportunities are.
Perhaps, if we change our approach, we might end up in homes that fit our life, instead of just maximise our budget. We might find our fit, rather than fitting in. We might live our lives and be happy, rather than present smiling faces at dinner parties.