International studio (53.1914)

Architecture and Imagination

never sorted out, and it is because we have mis-
takenly failed to recognise that the architect is an
artist that we have not been given artistic archi-
tecture, or architecture reflecting imagination and

The case of the private house is different. The
initial elements there consist of a sheaf of usually
ill-assorted ideas and prejudices entertained by the
prospective builder, together with another sheaf


art.
Who does not know better than the architect
how the house should be designed? Knowing
nothing of architecture, we set ourselves up as
critics of a man who has made a life-study of it.
We accord greater courtesy to
the painter who is doing our
portrait—and certainly show
greater faith in the professional

of ill-assorted ideas (entirely and bitterly at vari-
ance with the first) entertained by the “friends”
of the prospective builder, and over all a firm con-
viction that the entire undertaking is far too
important in general and far too delicate in detail
to entrust to an architect.
The question, then, narrows down to the exact
nature of the task confronting the architect.
Unfortunately he is not a free agent even in the

VIEW SHOWING ORIGINAL TREATMENT OF ROOF AND BALCONY

men who prescribe our medicines in the sick-room,
or patch up our quarrels in the law court.
By all means, if we interfered less with the
architect we would get better houses. That the
house represents an investment of our own money,
and should therefore be botched to suit ourselves,
is a silly enough excuse for meddling with the
work. If a man owns a lake it would be reckoned
little enough reason for him to drown himself in it.
These general observations are more important
than they might appear, for they strike at the
bed-rock of American architecture—especially of
American domestic architecture. Churches, pub-
lic buildings, banks, club houses and the like are
generally given over to the architect by a commit-
tee of men who have selected him because they be-
lieve that he can do the work better than they can.

exercise of his stipulated functions. He is often
not allowed even to design the house. His prob-
lem more often takes the form of the task of pro-
ducing for his client as good a house as his client’s
restrictions and interference will allow him to,
faithfully attending to every smallest detail, and
suffering the perfection of these to go unnoticed
while quietly taking the blame for whatever mis-
takes may have been forced upon him.
Quite apart from these aspects of the vicissi-
tudes of the country-house architect in America,
the development of anything like a national style,
or even a strongly individual personal style, like
that of Voysey in England, has been retarded and
made nearly impossible by the ever popular de-
mand for adaptations of English, French, Swiss or
Italian architecture, and while many such adapta-

XL