This paper explores the tensions between the representation and planning of the modern dwelling and the patterns of inhabitation of its domestic interiors, providing a more nuanced reading of culture and the past in the context of domesticity. In fact, the visionary blank space of modernist minimalism, once the bearer of a new idea of living, has lost its revolutionary purpose, representing today a conflict between planning and cultural memory. This tension is reflected in the way in which these domestic interiors are appropriated today. An ethnographic enquiry recently conducted on European modernist dwellings has proven that there is a discrepancy between the modern lifestyle originally proposed and the manner in which these architectures are occupied nowadays; the traditional figurative code of interiors seems to persist within the domestic layout as the appropriation of its interiors replicates traditional structures, rituals, and forms. The inhabitants, therefore, still occupy their home in a traditional manner accumulating and collecting fittings, furniture, and objects of any kind that recall past styles and represent inherited values. This opens up a new discussion around the design and representation of domestic interiors. The paper will also challenge conventional built heritage values by exploring the importance of “intangible” factors such as culture, memory, identity, traditions, rituals, social and above all representational practices. In specific, domestic objects are seen as the elements of connection between the architecture and the individual, bridging the gap between material, architectural heritage and immaterial, cultural values. This paper will ultimately position itself within the current debate around the heritage value of modernist housing, proposing new criteria for the assessment of significance of modernist heritage and its interiors.