DOI Seite / Zitierlink:
https://doi.org/10.11588/diglit.29898#0076
40
HISTORY OF ARCHITECTURE.
Pajrt I.
It is not difficult to discover, at least to a certain extent, that the
cause of this is that no number of separate units will suffice to make
one whole. A number of pebbles will not make a great stone, nor a
number of rose-bushes an oak ; nor will any number of dwarfs make
up a giant. To obtain a great whole there must be unity, to which
all the parts must contribute, or they will remain separate particles.
The effect of unity is materially heightened when to it is aclded uni-
formity : the mind then instantly and easily grasps the whole, knows
it to be one, and recognises the ruling idea that governed and moulded
the whole together. It seems only to be by the introduction of uni-
formity that sufficient simplicity for greatness can be obtained, and
the evidence of clesign made so manifest that the mind is satisfied that
the building is no mere accumulation of separate objects, but the
production of a master-mind.
In a palace irregularity seems unpardonable. The architect has
there practically unlimited command of funds and of his arrangements,
and he can easily design his suites of rooms so as to produce any
amount of uniformity he may require : the different heights of the
different storeys and the amount of ornament on them, with the
employment of wings for offices, is sufficient to mark the various pur-
poses of the various parts ; but where the system is carried so far in
great public buildings, that great halls, libraries, committee-rooms, and
subordinate residences are all squeezed into one perfectly uniform de-
sign, the building loses all meaning, and faiis from the opjjosite error.
The rule seems to be, that every building or every part of one
ought most distinctly and clearly to express not only its constructive
exigencies, but also the uses for which it is destined ; on the other hand,
that mere utility, in all instances where architectural effect is aimed
at, ought to give way to artistic requirements; and that an architect is
consequently justified, in so far as his means will admit, in producing
that amount of uniformity and regularity which seems indispensable
for anything like grandeur of effect. In villas and small buildings
all we look for is picturesqueness and meaning combined with ele-
gance; but in larger and more monumental erections we expect some-
thing more ; and this can hardly be obtained without the introduction
of some new element which shall tell, in the first place, that artistic
excellence was the ruling idea of the design, and in the next should
give it that perfect balance and symmetry which seems to be as
inherent a quality of the higher works of nature as of true art.
XY.—Imitation of Xature.
The subject of the imitation of Xature is one intimately connected
with those mooted in the preceding paragraphs, ancl regarding which
considerable misunderstanding seems to prevail. It is generally as-
HISTORY OF ARCHITECTURE.
Pajrt I.
It is not difficult to discover, at least to a certain extent, that the
cause of this is that no number of separate units will suffice to make
one whole. A number of pebbles will not make a great stone, nor a
number of rose-bushes an oak ; nor will any number of dwarfs make
up a giant. To obtain a great whole there must be unity, to which
all the parts must contribute, or they will remain separate particles.
The effect of unity is materially heightened when to it is aclded uni-
formity : the mind then instantly and easily grasps the whole, knows
it to be one, and recognises the ruling idea that governed and moulded
the whole together. It seems only to be by the introduction of uni-
formity that sufficient simplicity for greatness can be obtained, and
the evidence of clesign made so manifest that the mind is satisfied that
the building is no mere accumulation of separate objects, but the
production of a master-mind.
In a palace irregularity seems unpardonable. The architect has
there practically unlimited command of funds and of his arrangements,
and he can easily design his suites of rooms so as to produce any
amount of uniformity he may require : the different heights of the
different storeys and the amount of ornament on them, with the
employment of wings for offices, is sufficient to mark the various pur-
poses of the various parts ; but where the system is carried so far in
great public buildings, that great halls, libraries, committee-rooms, and
subordinate residences are all squeezed into one perfectly uniform de-
sign, the building loses all meaning, and faiis from the opjjosite error.
The rule seems to be, that every building or every part of one
ought most distinctly and clearly to express not only its constructive
exigencies, but also the uses for which it is destined ; on the other hand,
that mere utility, in all instances where architectural effect is aimed
at, ought to give way to artistic requirements; and that an architect is
consequently justified, in so far as his means will admit, in producing
that amount of uniformity and regularity which seems indispensable
for anything like grandeur of effect. In villas and small buildings
all we look for is picturesqueness and meaning combined with ele-
gance; but in larger and more monumental erections we expect some-
thing more ; and this can hardly be obtained without the introduction
of some new element which shall tell, in the first place, that artistic
excellence was the ruling idea of the design, and in the next should
give it that perfect balance and symmetry which seems to be as
inherent a quality of the higher works of nature as of true art.
XY.—Imitation of Xature.
The subject of the imitation of Xature is one intimately connected
with those mooted in the preceding paragraphs, ancl regarding which
considerable misunderstanding seems to prevail. It is generally as-