DOI Heft:
No. 37 (April, 1896)
DOI Artikel:The revival of English domestic architecture, [3], The work of Mr. Ernest George
DOI Seite / Zitierlink: https://doi.org/10.11588/diglit.17296#0162
The Revival of English Domestic A rchitecture
PincY M*r quoin ft*.
ornament in very ample quantity is permitted, if from Mr. George's designs are strikingly rich in
not actually required as part of the effect. One their effect, yet, if you compare them with the
can conceive a Greek temple absolutely devoid of average treatment of houses of similar character,
an inch of carving or other applied decoration, but you will be struck, not by their wealth of ornament,
it is impossible to imagine a Gothic cathedral but by its extremely reticent use.
equally restricted. Yet, there are styles developed The private office of the architect himself might
from the classic ideal which are sumptuously well be taken as a typical example of a room that,
ornate, and instances of Gothic buildings might at first glance, seems as sumptuous as carving,
be cited where the decorative features are limited marble, and stained glass could make it, but on
to their most simple expression. closer acquaintance reveals merely a few touches
In Mr. Ernest George's work we find a liberal use of actual ornament. The views of interiors illus-
of applied ornament, but we also find that it in- trated herewith, may be studied as evidence of Mr.
variably decorates the structure; so that, despite Ernest George's mastery of ornamental detail,
the rich effect of the whole, it is gained by most The true art of the decorator is surely to seize on
legitimate means. To be simple and yet not the accented parts of his design, and make them as
meagre is hard, but it is equally difficult to be beautiful as the material permits. Then, if he be
sumptuous without being florid. The interiors wise enough to leave plenty of unadorned surface
to act as a foil, he has
gained the applause both
of those who love rich-
ness and those who ad-
mire restraint. Unfor-
tunately, the reputation
of an architect, so far as
the general public is con-
cerned, is too often based
upon the pictures of his
work, and not upon the
work itself. We all know
dozens of famous houses
—or think we do—from
their drawings in the
Royal Academy, or the
architectural papers. Yet
buildings are peculiarly
likely to be misrepre-
sented by pictures, par-
ticularly as regards inte-
rior views. In black-and-
white, details that are
scarcely evident in the
actual fabric assume quite
disproportionate promi-
nence. The various
textures which in them-
selves fall together har-
moniously, so that they
scarcely disturb the effect
of the plane, become
arrogant in a pen-draw-
ing. Take, for instance,
a panelled oak dado,
enriched by slight carv-
from the original drawing by ernest george ing, surmounted by a dull
148
PincY M*r quoin ft*.
ornament in very ample quantity is permitted, if from Mr. George's designs are strikingly rich in
not actually required as part of the effect. One their effect, yet, if you compare them with the
can conceive a Greek temple absolutely devoid of average treatment of houses of similar character,
an inch of carving or other applied decoration, but you will be struck, not by their wealth of ornament,
it is impossible to imagine a Gothic cathedral but by its extremely reticent use.
equally restricted. Yet, there are styles developed The private office of the architect himself might
from the classic ideal which are sumptuously well be taken as a typical example of a room that,
ornate, and instances of Gothic buildings might at first glance, seems as sumptuous as carving,
be cited where the decorative features are limited marble, and stained glass could make it, but on
to their most simple expression. closer acquaintance reveals merely a few touches
In Mr. Ernest George's work we find a liberal use of actual ornament. The views of interiors illus-
of applied ornament, but we also find that it in- trated herewith, may be studied as evidence of Mr.
variably decorates the structure; so that, despite Ernest George's mastery of ornamental detail,
the rich effect of the whole, it is gained by most The true art of the decorator is surely to seize on
legitimate means. To be simple and yet not the accented parts of his design, and make them as
meagre is hard, but it is equally difficult to be beautiful as the material permits. Then, if he be
sumptuous without being florid. The interiors wise enough to leave plenty of unadorned surface
to act as a foil, he has
gained the applause both
of those who love rich-
ness and those who ad-
mire restraint. Unfor-
tunately, the reputation
of an architect, so far as
the general public is con-
cerned, is too often based
upon the pictures of his
work, and not upon the
work itself. We all know
dozens of famous houses
—or think we do—from
their drawings in the
Royal Academy, or the
architectural papers. Yet
buildings are peculiarly
likely to be misrepre-
sented by pictures, par-
ticularly as regards inte-
rior views. In black-and-
white, details that are
scarcely evident in the
actual fabric assume quite
disproportionate promi-
nence. The various
textures which in them-
selves fall together har-
moniously, so that they
scarcely disturb the effect
of the plane, become
arrogant in a pen-draw-
ing. Take, for instance,
a panelled oak dado,
enriched by slight carv-
from the original drawing by ernest george ing, surmounted by a dull
148