1839.] 



THE CIVIL ENGINEER AND ARCHITECT'S JOURNAL. J(i 



been seen over it in siicli manner as to produce a strilting arcliitectiiral 

 scene. In fact, so niucli novilty, so many coniliinations, miglit be tluis 

 produced, tliat althongli not at all difficult, it would be tiresome to 

 point them out more particularly. 



That any one will be induced by what I have said to take th se 

 suggestions into deliberate consideration, is what I do not expect : 

 well am 1 aware that i might all this while just as well have been 

 "whistling jigs to the moon." Most people turnup their noses at 

 "advice gratis,"— arcliitccts among the rest : tlierefore they must go on 

 to tlie end of the chapter, witli their single row of copied columns in 

 front, which constitute their classical porticos. All I have to remark 

 is, that the sooner they come to the end of that very dull chapter, the 

 better. 



C A N D I n U S ' S NOTEBOOK. 

 FASCICULUS IV. 



1 must have liberly 

 Withal, as larffe a charter as the winds, 

 To blow un whom I ploasc. 



I. Most persons seem to think that they have a right, wlien building, 

 to commit whatever vagaries they pleasf, and that it is excessively im- 

 pertinent in any one to impugn tlieir taste, be it ever so absurd. 

 Certainly the legal right cannot be disputed : legislation, which touches 

 every tiling else in this country, where freedom consists in the liberty 

 of making some new shackles for ourselves every day, has not as yet 

 laid its hands >ipon taste. In building, a man has a most unquestion- 

 able right to please himself — if he can, whether he so pleases his neigh- 

 bours or not ; yet so has he a right to wear either his own nightcap or 

 his wile's bonnet instead of a hat ; and other persons have the riglit to 

 laugh at him as much as they please in tlieir turn. 



II. For an experiment in polychromy on such a scale as should 

 satisfactorily determine how far it is really valuable, how far consistent 

 with good taste or the contraiy, we have nothing so suitable as the York 

 Column. In fact, it could not have been more so had the architect ex- 

 pressly intended it to be so finished up, for at present it strikes quite as 

 much bv its bareness, and the utter absence of all decoration as by any- 

 thing else. There are several circumstances which recommend it — I 

 might say, plainly point it out as a fitting architectural subject for such 

 purpose : its being insulated in such manner, and its being of such form, 

 that the effect which might be produced could not possibly violently 

 interfere with any thing else ; further, its being precisely the kind uf 

 structure to ornRiiient which may be applied unsparingly, with the great- 

 est propriety, or, rather, one which absolutely demands it. Yet, although 

 I am of opinion that the experiment might be made with perlect safety 

 as to the result, by no means v.ould I advise that it should be a hap- 

 hazard one : on the contrary, if it was intended that it should succeed, 

 the utmost study should be given to it beforehand. A model, at least 

 ten or twelve feet high, ought to be prepared, — one capable of showing 

 the minutest details of every piece of ornament ; and this should not only 

 exhibit the precise colours, but the same pigments which are employed in 

 polychromy. So, then, I actually propose that the poor York Column 

 should not be wiiitewashed — as some have fancied Westminster Abbey 

 ought to be — but daubed over of as many colours as a Harlequin's 

 jacket displays, by way of introducing the outlandisli architectm'al 

 fashion termed polychromy'? To be sure I do; — though, of course, 

 the "daubing" and the " Harlequin's jacket," would be re-echoed from 

 all sides against such a scheme. It is hardly worth while to discuss 

 how far painting and daubing are one and the same operation ; besides 

 which, it might lead to some excessively odorous comparisons ; but, as 

 for tlie Harlequin's jacket, I enter my solemn protest against that 

 comparison, which, were I to fling it any where I should fling at some 

 of Turner's blue and brimstone pictures — daubings, 1 liad almost said. 

 No, I am of opinion that greys and warm ntnitral tints, with an inter 

 mixture of light bronze-colour, sparingly lelieved by touches here and 

 there of dift'erent brilliant hues, would be most suitable ; if properly 

 managed wotdd produce soberness without dullness, and sufficient 

 eneray and vivacity, without either crudencss or garrish glare. The 

 positive colours ought perhaps to be applied to the grounds of the orna- 

 ments, rather than the ornaments themselves, in such manner as that 

 these latter would appear a rich broidery of figures, foliage, and other 

 embellishments, through whose interstices differently coloured surfaces 

 would appear. As to tbe arrangement of the ornaments, they should 

 be in horizontal zones, wliethei with plain spaces between them or not ; 

 but certainly not in a continuous spiral from top to bottom. My pro- 

 ject is a very excellent and a very feasible one, and would certainly he 

 realised to-morrow, were I but lucky enough to pick up Fortunatus' 

 wishing-cap to-night. 



III. If there be any truth at all in any of the representations I have 

 seen of Ahbotsford, it is but a sad sample of Sir Walter Scott's taste, 

 being a most Urummagem piece of architecture and antiquarianism, 

 hardly a whit superior to Strawberry Hill. In the print he gives of the 

 house, Dibdin makes it a complete architectural scarecrow, such a mot- 

 ley and beggarly jumble of odds and ends, that its look is any thing 

 but inspiring. It is wonderfully anti-poetical in the fancy it exhibits", 

 so much so, that one would imagine it to have been biiilt by some 

 retired cheesemonger, or other vulgarian of that grade. Had such 

 been the case, its ugliness would have been a by-woid to all tlic world. 

 Now, if the public insist upon deifying Sir Walter, well and good ; but 

 as for Ahbotsford, we may surely be allowed to give the taste shown 

 in it, if not the house itself, to the devil. 



IV. The author of the " Original" has some very peculiar notions on 

 tlie subject of dining-rooms ; one or two to which I cordially assent, 

 others from which I as cordially differ. I admiie tlie perfect good 

 sense with which he is satirical at thcexpense of thosewould-be-thought 

 genteel people who make the giving a dinner an affair of fidget and 

 fussiness, and thereby often entertain their good-natured friends very 

 far more than they intend to do. From the very first you perceive the 

 extraordinary state of things : all is masquerade, except the whole 

 absurdity of the business — which stares you in the face wilhoi;t any 

 disguise. But this is a subject I must turn over to Boz — who. I pre- 

 sume, is capable of doing it justice; and who, for aught I can te'l, mav 

 have excercised his talent upon it already — for were I to allow myself 

 to run on upon it, there would be no space for any thing else in this 

 number of the Journal. But all this is merely a scappata. 



Agreeing with Mr. Walker, that dining-rooms in London are in 

 general very tasteless and uninspiring, I do not enter into his notions 

 for rendering them otherwise ; neither do I at all approve of attempt- 

 ing to establish rules, which however suitable they may be in some cases — 

 or even the majority of them — may prove quite the reverse in others. 

 The only rule that ought invariably to be adhered to is to provide a 

 side-board alcove ; for without this, instead of appearing to have been ori- 

 ginally intended for its purpose, the room will appear to be merely made 

 use of for dining in, for want of one better adapted to the purpose. 

 Although preferable to none at all, a mei'e shallow recess for the side, 

 board is little better than an apology for one. The recess ought to be 

 deeper than the side-board itself, so as to have the appearatice of being 

 a space added to the room, capable of containing, besides the side- 

 board itself, whatever it may be convenient to have at hand during the 

 time of dinner. If this be attended to there will always be a certain 

 degree of character and effect independently of any thing else; be- 

 sides which, within a deep alcove there can be a door through which 

 servants can go in and out with less interruption to those at table than 

 otherwise ; and if the recess be wider within than towards the room, 

 so that such door be more or less concealed from view, all the better. 

 But whatever others may think of it, I certainly do not at all approve 

 of the worthy magistrate's whimsical idea of a ' quiet little kitchen' 

 immediately adjoining the dining-room, and communicating with it by 

 an entrance close to the side-board, closed during the process of 

 dinner by a curtain onlij ! I have no objection to his fixing the num- 

 ber of eight as the maximum for a comfortable dinner-party, if nierelv 

 because that regulation would eft'ectually prevent the misfortune of 

 there being thirteen at table ; neither do I quarrel with him for recom- 

 mending the least possible number of attendants, it being anything but 

 agreeable to have a regiment of flunkies ci'owding the room, and recon- 

 noitring the com^jany during the whole of their feeding-time. On the 

 other hand, I certainly see no reason whatever for the ai'hitraiv rule 

 which \^'ould restrict the width of the room to what is just sufficient to 

 allow the attendants to pass round the table without jostling against 

 each other ; in other words, the room ought, according to Mi'. Walker, 

 to be invariably a very narrow one. 



This is absurd enough : and, in fact, all restrictions and positive rules 

 in regard to colour, decoration, and other matters of a similar kind, 

 are not only useless, but worse than useless ; because were they at- 

 tended to they would put every dining-room into a standard uniform, 

 which is anything but desirable for there is at present far more mono- 

 tony and sameness than one would wish to meet with. We rather 

 want variety ; and there is certainly ample scope for it. The only rule 

 which ought to be received as applicable in all cases, without exception, 



is that EVERY THING OUGHT TO BE CONSISTENT THROUGHOUT, TO BE IN 

 EXCELLENT TASTE, AND TO PRODUCE AS MUCH EFFECT AS THE ACTUAL 



DESIGN WILL ADMIT OF. Instead of fettering the artist, and putting 

 his ideas on a Procrustean bed, this rule leaves him at perfect liberty. 

 So far from being required to be invariably sober, modest, chaste, or 

 whatever else of the kind we style it, a dining-room may be as splendid 

 as any other apartment in a house ; with this difference, that its splen- 

 dour must differ in kind from that of the drawing-room and boudoirs. 

 In fact, sumptuousness, rather than the contrary, ought, in many cases, 



