[ 70S ]

CLASS XXX.

SUPPLEMENTARY PE POUT ON DESIGN.

By RICIIA1U) UKDGIIAVE, II.A.

[The figures after the Names (between parentheses) refer to the Exhibitors’ Numbers and to the Pages in theOfficial Descriptive ani> Illustrated Catalogue.]

It was the original intention of Her Majesty’s Commis-sioners that all exhibited “ Designs ” should be referredto the consideration of the Juries of the respective classes,to whose award the fabrics to which such designs wereapplied, or intended to be applied, were submitted. Itwas subsequently determined that it would be moreadvisable that this duty should be undertaken by theJurors of Ctass XXX., assisted by associated Jurors fromthe various classes of manufactures designed for. Theawards on Design will therefore be found among those ofthe Jury of Class XXX.

With a view to the pennanent record of the opinions !formed on the careful examination entailed by their duty,Her Majesty’s Commissioners directed a Report to bedrawn up by one of the members of the Jury, whichshould not be limited to the merits of the “Designs”exhibited, hut should have regard to the general state ofdesign as applied to the various fabrics and manufacturesin the Great Exhibition .

Such then are the objects to be embraced in this Report,and they form an extensive and onerous duty to befulfilled by any one individual. When the varied appli-cations of design and ornamental decoration called for bythe different uses, materials, and modes of manufactureare considered, and the vast multitude of objects to whichthey are applied (all more or less requiring examination'),the task of the Reporter will be seen to be one of greatdifficulty and labour, in the execution of which he trustspeculiar indulgence may be claimed.

The desire evinced by the rudest as well as the mostcivilized mtions for the decoration of their buildings,utensils, aad clothing, almost raises ornament into anatural wart, and must render its proper application ofthe utmost consequence to the manufacturer, since uponit the value of his manufactures in the various markets ofthe world greatly depends. It can hardly be possible,therefore, that any one should doubt, on the presentoccasion, tie importance of a careful review' of the unionof design and ornament to manufacturing skill, since allthat the incentive powers, the fancy, and the handicraftof man caa do, has this year been gathered into oneplace, and the world been invited to consider and examineit. Rut without some critical guidance, some judicialcanons, or some careful separation of the meretriciousfrom the Teautiful, it is to be feared that the public tastewill rather be vitiated than improved by an examinationof the Exhibition, as it will readily be allowed that themass of ornament applied to the works therein exhibitedis of the ferrner character, and from that very cause morelikely to inpose on the uniuformed taste of the multi-tude than die simpler qualities of real excellence to im-press ns with a just sense of their worth. Such con-siderations were, doubtless, among the reasons whichinfluenced the determination of the Royal Commissionerson this subject.

We hav; spoken of design and of ornamental decora-tion. Thtse are two essentially different things, and it ishighly' necessary that they should, from the first, be con-sidered as separate and distinct. “ Design ” has referenceto the construction of any' work both for use and beauty,and therefore includes its ornamentation also. “ Orna-ment” is nerely the decoration of a thing constructed.

Ornament is thus necessarily limited, for, so defined,

it cannot be other than secondary, and must not usurpa principal place; if it do so, the object is no longer awork ornamented, but is degraded iuto a mere ornament.Now the great tendency of the present time is to reversethis rule; indeed it is impossible to examine the works ofthe Great Exhibition , without seeing how often utilityand construction are made secondary to decoration. Infact, when commencing a design, designers are too apt tothink of ornament before construction, and, as lias beensaid in connexion with the nobler art of architecture,rather to construct ornament than to ornament construc-tion. This, on the slightest examination, will be foundto be the leading error in the Exhibition, au error moreor less apparent in every' department of manufactureconnected with ornament, which is apt to sicken us ofdecoration, and leads us to admire those objects of abso-lute utility (the machines and utensils of various kinds),where use is so paramount that ornament is repudiated,and, fitness of purpose being the end sought, a noble sim-plicity is the result.

The primary consideration of construction is so ne-cessary to pure design, that it almost follows that,whenever style and ornament are debased, constructionwill be found to have been first disregarded; and thatthose styles which are considered the purest, and the bestperiods of those styles, arc just those wherein construc-tive utility has been rightly understood and most tho-roughly attended to. A dissertation upon difference ofstyles would be out of place in this Report, as well as anexpressed preference for any particular one, since each,doubtless, contains some qualities of beauty or excellencewhich will justify its use when restrained and regulatedby fixed principles. It may not, however, be improperto illustrate by’ a few remarks the opinion expressedabove, since it involves important principles connectedwith a proper consideration of works coming within thescope of the Report.

To begiu with the ecclesiastical architecture of themiddle ages: when the style was purest, the construc-tion was most scientific, the arches were best formed forresistance, the groining elevated and simple, the orna-ment modest and applied to the forms of constructiononly. As the style progressed with time, it departedfrom its primitive simplicity: it became more ornamental,it is true, but at the sacrifice of some of its constructivetruth: the use of the arch was partly obscured by itsbeing placed under an horizontal arrangement, and sup-ported by perpendicular mullions, and it was graduallyflattened to the worst form for sustaining pressure.. Thegroining, at first simple, became a most elaborate systemof reticula ion, by its numerous lines reducing the ap-parent height of the roof, to the entire loss of the sublimeeffect produced by its elevation and simple groining inthe earlier period. At the same time the enonnous pen-dants seemed ready to fall on the heads of the beholder,and to bring with them the fiattened arch of which theywere the key-stones. The exterior was everywheredecorated, effecting the ruin of the building by the dustand moss which this humid climate soon engendered. Inits last period, decoration could be carried no further,and Gothic architecture, which had grown into gloryand beauty, from its just and scientific construction, wasthrown aside when a florid ornamentation had taken the