Ci .ass XXX.]

SUPPLEMENTARY REPORT OX PESIGX.

713

construction, lit* just, it will be apparent that it is hardlypossible to judge of the one without the other. In workswherein the decorator makes his own sham constructionin order to ornament it, as well asiu those multiplied ma-nufactured “ parts” which form the staple ornament of alarge class of workmen in this line, we may admire theskill of the execution, the cleverness of the details, theexcellence of the manufacture, or the imitation of earlyworks of acknowledged merit; but to appreciate “ decora-tion” we must view it as a whole in the place for whichit was specially designed, and in harmony with the build-ing whose construction it ornaments. Moreover, it mustmainly originate in local circumstances, and ought tohave an individual significance. Here, however, themoment we enter upon the varied inspection we becomesensible how impracticable it is to lay down any generalcanon for works which differ almost as widely as thebeginning and end of time. In other ages of the world,nations have been fortunate in so adapting design to pre-vailing wants, and in sympathy with existing feelings, asto produce a national style. But in the present day menno longer attend to such considerations; they are whollywithout such guiding principles, and consequently aretotally without a characteristic style. They are satisfiedwith the indiscriminate reproduction of the architectureof Egypt, Greece, and Koine , or of Christendom in any,or all, its marked periods. Originality they have none.One man delights in a Gothic, villa; another prefers thestyle of Italy : even India and China have their advocates,who never consider that climate and use should rule thechoice, rather than fantasy and whim, and that theremust be conditions arising from the present state of society,from fiscal regulations, modern habits, &e., which, dulyattended to, would, in addition to utility, be likely toresult in novelty and beauty.

It is this merely imitative character of architecturewhich has so largely contributed to decorative shams , tothe age of putty, papier mache, and gutta percha. Thesereact upon architecture; and, from the cheapness withwhich such ornament can be applied and its apparent ex-cellence, the florid and the gaudy take the place of thesimple and the true. A popular writer describes thewearer of cheap finery as having his jewellery “ a sizelarger than anybody else;” and so it is with the cheapfinery of imitative ornament: it is always “a size larger”than it should be—bolder, coarser, and more impudentthan the true thing ; it excites our contempt by its iiashytawdriness, so incongruous with the meanness and vul-garity it is intended to adorn.

From this manufacture of ornament arises all that mixtureof styles, and that incongruity of parts, which, perhaps,is itself “ the style” of this characterless age. Throughit, also, the plasterer and the paper-hanger too often •usurp the place of the architect, to the certain dismissal \of the mason and the wood-carver; and ornament, per- ’chance in itself unobjectionable, is sure in such hands to sbe grossly misapplied. I

The “designs” for architectural decorations exhibitedare few in number, and are very open to the foregoing jcriticism. i

Those on the foreign side are in the French depart- iment: they seem the very vagaries of a fantastic imagi- 1nation, full of fancy, it must be owned, and skilfully 1executed, but without the slightest sense of utility or ofconstructive truth. Everywhere ornament is in excess; ,the architectural construction obscured and overlaid with ;figures, fruits, flowers, &c., so that they seem more fitted !for the scene of a theatre than for any sober purpose of'every-day life. Crowded together in such capricious ;abundance, the ornament can only be that of those cheapimitative manufactures we have above referred to. The :“designs” on the English side consist of a few reproduc-tions and adaptations of early styles, on which inventionis as much wanting, as in the others it is in excess. Ofthe works themselves exhibited in this section, the reasonsalready given will dispose of a large number, since it isimpossible to view them otherwise than as specimens ofskilful execution, or the reverse; thus, for example, whatcan justly be said of the ceiling exhibited by A. Monta-naui, -of Milan? (Austria , 738, p. U144). The room

which is fitted up for its reception is badly lighted, andotherwise unsuitable, and the reverse of what is requisitefor a library, for which the decoration is intended ; butthat matters little, since, under the best circumstances, itcould be truly appreciated only in connexion with anarchitectural reality. It may deserve praise for its ex-tremely dexterous and skilful execution; but this is quitea separate thing from exhibiting any just principles onwhich it has been designed. It may be said, however,that, as a ceiling, the decoration is too heavy, both inform and colour. This, which would be even moreapparent in a lighter apartment, is a great error in aceiling decoration, having the effect of depressing it, anddiminishing the height of the room—a fault often seen inthe richly gilt and massive ceilings of the continentalpalaces. It may, indeed, be laid down as a rule, that thedecoration of a room should diminish in heaviness, instrength, and in gorgeousness as it passes into the ceiling.Then again, as to the numerous ceiling decorations be-neath the galleries on the English side : from the samecauses it is only possible to speak of the skill of the deco-rative workman, since to judge of their local adaptationis out of the question : the light and graceful decorationsbeing necessarily placed at the same height as the heavierand more richly treated ones, and of course their dueadaptation judged of equally by that height, although,perhaps, the one may have been designed for a muchlower ceiling than the other. The like difficulties,arising from causes before enumerated, prevent the properconsideration of the various specimens of wall-decora-tions. The principles, however, which are given underthe head of Paper-hangings, eminently apply to suchworks.

The restoration of parts of existing buildings calls forlittle originality in the designer, since it almost whollyconsists in the careful study of the decoration whichremains, aided by a knowledge of the traditional orna-ment of the period. Such are the carefully restoredspandrel for Hereford Cathedral by X. J. Cottingiiam(03, Main Avenue West, p. 85*2), part of the tomb ofQueen Philippa by S. Cundy (60, Main Avenue West),and the wood-carving for the dining-room at East SuttonPlace, designed by C. J. Richardson (Class XXVI.,207a, p. 751). In such works tfie taste of the designeris shown in excluding the coarser characteristics of thestyle, and making use of those only which, if less markedare also less extravagant, adopting its general spiritrather than copying its individuality. Thus in the sisterart the unskilful portrait-painter seizes on the most salientcharacteristics of his sitter, and dwells upon all the indi-vidual defects of form and feature: the result is a like-ness indeed, hut a caricature even upon the homelyoriginal. The painter more skilled in his art avoids suchcoarse renderings, and under his hand even the plainestface is refined and generalised. In the same way a stylebecomes degraded. The decorators who adopt it overlookthe spirit of its general idea, and exaggerate its peculiarcharacteristics, until at length it is likely to become amere distorted caricature. Thus it was that the Renais-sance degenerated into the Tudor, and the ornament ofLouis XIV . was further degraded into the rococo andbizarre style which now goes by that name. A work,otherwise of much merit, may serve as a slight illustra-tion of these remarks: it is the decoration, carved inwalnut wood, for the end of a room, in the style ofFrancis I., exhibited by Messrs. Holland and Sons(Class XXVI., 161, p. 745). This skilful work isdetracted from, in a degree, by want of due selection :thus the large shell-forms, used in the blocking courseabove the cornice, are heavy and out of place in such asituation, and should not have been so used, howeversanctioned by traditional authority. The ornament ofthe pilasters also, otherwise well designed and skilfullyexecuted, ought in wood-carving to have been kept inlower relief, so as to have been within the surface of thepilaster itself, instead of projecting beyond, by which it isat once evident that the ornament is applied, and not, asit should be, carved from the solid wood.

Space will not permit, even if it were necessary, tospeak of the numerous carved and other works in stone,