Are Trendy Fractured Mirrors Too ‘Psycho’ for the Home?
Some interior designers appreciate the artful, sliced-up look of split mirrors. Others find them difficult to integrate into décor, and as creepy as the fragmented opening credits in Alfred Hitchcock’s horror classic.
3 min
For the recurring series That’s Debatable, we take on a contentious issue of the day and present two spirited arguments—one in favor and the other emphatically opposed.
Are fractured mirrors cool or creepy? Stylish or sinister? We asked pros for their takes on this interior design trend. Plus, five picks for split mirrors worth considering.
No, their slices and shifts make them art objects
FOR KELLY WEARSTLER, mirrors with intentional slices or shifts in their glass offer uninterrupted pleasure. The interior designer hung Lee Broom’s “graphic and playful” Split Long Mirror in the dining room of her Beverly Hills home (left). Large chunks of its capsule shape slip out of line, and its simple black frame follows. Ms. Wearstler said she likes how the mirror refracts light and remixes the reflection of the room and its inhabitants: “Fracturing a mirror into segments immediately alters how you perceive yourself in it, shifting its basic function into an experience.”
Any object that breaks from its traditional form adds a “cool” element of interest and texture to a room, said Suki LaBarre, vice president of merchandising and e-commerce at New York-based ABC Carpet & Home, which sells similarly constructed looking glasses. “The style transforms what is typically a utilitarian object into a statement décor piece.”
Peter Spalding, an interior designer in Portland, Ore., and co-founder of design trade marketplace Daniel House Club, points to a celebrated precedent, the “glamorous” wall of alternating angled strips of mirror in British Art Deco designer Syrie Maugham’s 1930s London apartment. It’s an idea he’d gladly borrow. “A wall of fractured mirrors behind a banquette to define a dining area would be pretty dreamy,” he said, noting that such elements of surprise “elevate [design] from the mundane.”
Instagram and Pinterest have catalyzed interest in fragmented mirrors in recent years. As Los Angeles interior designer and social media influencer Dani Dazey points out, the mirrors “make for a great outfit selfie. The more unique the photo, the more your content is going to stand out.”
Yes, it’s creepy to look at your fractured self
THE SUPERSTITIOUS among us believe broken mirrors bring bad luck—or worse. “There are stories of fractured reflections capturing your soul in very early Roman history,” said Kara Phillips, an interior designer in Fort Worth, Texas, who prefers her mirrors retiring and intact. Ominous mythology aside, these designs create an unwelcome dark and edgy mood, said New York City designer Emma Beryl Kemper, who avoids the style because of the “hardness” and “sharpness” it brings to a space. Another detractor, Sydney interior designer Kate Nixon, agrees. “I seek to create homes that feel warm and inviting, not jarring or uncomfortable,” she said.
It’s this disturbing quality that turns off many naysayers. Think of the opening credits sequence of Alfred Hitchcock’s “Psycho,” where fragmented typography portends a psychotic break. While no one is suggesting such mirrors will lead you to over-identify with your mummified mother, “it’s creepy to look at your fragmented self,” objects Steffie Oehm, an interior designer in San Francisco. They irk Toronto designer Rivki Rabinowitz for different reasons. “For something as benign as a mirror, I am inexplicably irritated by them,” she said, adding that she can’t help but feel they’re “reminiscent of a closeout sale where rows and rows of overly gilded mirrors are featured alongside…literally fractured ones.”
Others reject the specificity of the design. Said Ms. Nixon, “They’re difficult to install in a sophisticated way and to mix-and-match with other styles and eras.” But for San Francisco designer Tay BeepBoop, the bottom-line is that such mirrors can’t even perform their core function: competently reflecting one’s image. “If I need a mirror, I don’t want to look into something wonky,” she said.
IMAGE SPLITTERS
Five more mirrors that break with tradition
Massimo Mirror, $1,250, ArteriorsHome.com
John Richard A Tale of Two Exotic Gold Mirror, $2,363, GraysonLiving.com
Seletti Double Sense Mirror, $699, Lightology.com
Hidden Mirror, $7,315, PoruStudio.com
Revne Mirror, $2,530, JohnRichard.com
The Wall Street Journal is not compensated by retailers listed in its articles as outlets for products. Listed retailers frequently are not the sole retail outlets.
Copyright 2020, Dow Jones & Company, Inc. All Rights Reserved Worldwide. LEARN MORE
From making unpopular decisions to learning when to listen, leaders from five businesses reveal what nobody prepared them for — and how running a company has challenged their expectations.
Technology and semiconductor shares fell sharply as investors questioned the debt financing the AI infrastructure boom and confronted higher rates and Chinese competition.
Elon Musk is exploring a potential merger between Tesla and SpaceX, a deal that could reshape the future of AI, robotics, autonomous vehicles and space technology. With a combined valuation potentially reaching $3.5 trillion, the move could bring Musk’s vision of an interconnected technology ecosystem closer to reality, although a deal remains uncertain.
5 min
Elon Musk has engineered ties between Tesla TSLA 3.41%increase; up pointing triangle and SpaceX SPCX 7.79%increase; up pointing triangle that are hard to break, and now he wants to fuse them together permanently.
Musk has run both Tesla and SpaceX concurrently over the past two decades, using a schedule that dictated which days he spent focused on each business.
The companies have often shared resources and personnel, signaling their close ties. Last year, SpaceX looked into creating a spacesuit for Tesla’s humanoid robot Optimus, a person familiar with the matter said. Tesla last week showed off its new Roadster, a vehicle featuring SpaceX rocket thrusters that it hopes to soon bring to market.
And in recent months, Musk has repositioned both companies by expanding beyond their core operations toward a shared mission centered on artificial intelligence.
The world’s richest man on Tuesday signaled his interest in tying up SpaceX and Tesla, marking what would be the biggest corporate merger of all time. Because he serves as chief executive of SpaceX and Tesla, Musk said committees of independent directors at both companies are evaluating a possible deal, adding that a transaction might not come to fruition.
The committees will likely evaluate, with lawyers and bankers, how each company would fare in a potential deal and how a deal might best be structured. They then present their conclusions to their respective boards, who typically vote on whether to proceed.
“It’s an odd Kabuki dance where two groups of people are talking and I can’t be in the conversation,” Musk told SpaceX investors on Tuesday in response to an analyst’s question about a potential deal.
For Musk, the merger supports his vision of a world full of autonomous cars, humanoid robots and weekly rocket launches, as well as the data centers and satellites required to keep the whole thing running.
Some investors and analysts said they expect a transaction would be structured as an all-stock deal, with SpaceX potentially paying a modest premium for Tesla shares.
SpaceX, which has a market value of about $2 trillion, said it is seeing sharp growth in revenue across its businesses, which include operating data centers, launching rockets and operating satellite networks such as the internet service Starlink. Tesla is valued at about $1.5 trillion and is expanding its operations beyond its automotive and energy business. Shares in both companies traded higher following the news Tuesday.
Musk’s substantial ownership stakes in both companies, along with voting control at SpaceX, has enabled him to set the deal in motion. Analysts and investors said the deal will probably face regulatory scrutiny internationally, though some see Musk’s close relationship with the Trump administration as an asset to getting approval.
Blurred lines
The companies haven’t said which directors are on the special committees evaluating a potential deal. Several SpaceX and Tesla board members have either personal or business ties to Musk. And like Musk, venture capitalist Ira Ehrenpreis sits on both boards.
In a filing this week, Tesla outlined millions of dollars in business agreements with SpaceX and its subsidiaries last year, including $143 million in car sales to SpaceX, $3.3 million in advertising that it bought on the social-media platform X and $430 million in revenue from the sale of Megapack batteries for SpaceX’s data centers.
The companies also split the cost of resources including the use of Musk’s SpaceX jet and the bill for his personal security, which he runs through a private company.
Employees at both companies routinely move between companies to work on special projects, and some executives have dual roles, including Charles Kuehmann, vice president of materials engineering at both SpaceX and Tesla, and Ashok Elluswamy, the vice president of AI software at Tesla who runs a joint venture with SpaceX called Digital Optimus.
Over the years, Musk has launched new startups within his empire, including brain-implant company Neuralink, underground-tunnel developer the Boring Company and xAI, the AI startup that merged with SpaceX in February.
It is that AI business that Musk thinks can serve a market worth tens of trillions of dollars, justifying the need for a merger.
The business case goes like this: Tesla is developing robotaxis and robots, which it calls “physical AI.” SpaceX is working on the back end of physical AI: the data-center capacity and internet connection required for those robotaxis and robots to operate continuously.
“I don’t see what the value of Tesla is if it’s not merged with SpaceX,” said investment adviser Ross Gerber, a former Tesla bull turned critic invested in both companies. “If they don’t merge, the brains of everything that runs Tesla is owned by another company.”
On top of it all, both companies face constraints on the supply chains they need to make this world a reality, particularly when it comes to chips. To address this, Musk earlier this year announced a joint venture between Tesla, SpaceX and Intel to design and manufacture chips in Texas. “The most epic chip-building exercise by far,” he has said.
Musk at the wheel
For Musk, a merger would also solve two problems: demands on his attention and his lack of control at Tesla.
Tesla for years was Musk’s only public company, a status that came with greater scrutiny. There, Musk reports to a public board, as well as individual investors who make up around 30% of Tesla’s voting power, according to FactSet.
The question of Musk’s attention became a particular focus for investors and the board in recent years after he acquired Twitter in 2022 and launched xAI in 2023, and again in 2025 as he spent time in Washington, D.C., running the Department of Government Efficiency in the early months of President Trump’s second term.
As Tesla’s car business suffered in 2025, Musk threatened to take his AI ambitions outside the company if he wasn’t granted 25% voting control. Last November, Tesla shareholders approved a new pay package for Musk, which created a path for him to vastly expand his stake.
As of Sept. 30, Musk owned a roughly 20% stake in Tesla, according to the company’s proxy filing.
The SpaceX IPO gave Musk a different path. When SpaceX went public in June, the deal’s structure enabled him to have more than 80% voting power at the company—so much that he can’t be fired and decisions can’t be made without his support.
If SpaceX acquires Tesla, he will likely stay in control.
Porsche’s Cayenne Turbo Electric produces up to 1,156PS and reaches 100km/h in a claimed 2.5 seconds.
Micro-needling promises glow and firmness, but timing can make all the difference.
