1830.] 



THE CIVIL ENGINEER AND ARCHITECTS JOURNAL. 



305 



CANDIDUS'S NOTE-BOOK. 

 FASCICULUS VII. 



I must have lilji'r(y 

 M'ithal, as !ai-j,'c a chaiiiT as the « imls, 

 'J'u IjldW on whom I pU-aso. 



I. I was infuniied the other day that I had been severely reproached 

 by one whose name was told to me, for expressing a very mean 

 o()inion of Nash's abilities as an arcliitect, whenever I )iave men- 

 tioned him. In so doing I am so far from being at all singidar, that I 

 only seem to adopt the general opinion entertained of liiin", and there- 

 fore shunld have been very glad to have discovered, if possible, merits 

 which the rest of the world had cnther carelessly overhjoked, or been 

 too obtnse to discover. My reprover is pleased to aftiian that he 

 possessed vm-y snperior talent ; yet that bare assertion without some- 

 thing like proof to snpport it, may very well be set aside as amonnling 

 to nothing, or rather as a proof in itself that it would not be at all dis- 

 creet to attempt to confirm the praise by pointing to any one of his 

 works as a testimony in his favonr. It is possible that he may have 

 succeeded better in some of the tilings he did, but in those b)- which 

 he is most known, — or at any rate with which I am acquainted, he 

 exhibited, if not always the very worse taste — a most insuHtjrably 

 mediocre one, — vulgar commonplace stuH", and most deplorable insi- 

 pidity. Look at the building which forms the east side of Carlton 

 Place ; look at the Regent's t'ark terraces, which Barlholomew terms 

 " mortar skimmings by the mile": they are stamped by littleness and 

 feebleness, which in some of the designs are rendered uiost Hagitiously 

 oHTensive by the coarse and vulgar tawdriness with which the fronts 

 are bedizzened out. Uglier things there may be, but excepting our 

 iiKjdern gin palaces, nothing so flagrantly mcn/nciom in character. 

 Whenever I look at the slatternly finery with which they are (ricked 

 out, I feel that I am standing in the presence of the "Harlotrv'of 

 art." Yet to Nash it wxs that Gecjrge the Fourth intrusted the i.ask 

 of erecting a palace; which, notwithstanding the sinus so extravagantly 

 squandered away ujion it, is little less tlian" actnally disgraceful to the 

 character of art in this coui'liy. Independent of mere size, the build- 

 ing in St. James' Far'^ has nothing wliatever to recommend it. It is not 

 at all distinguished by greatness of manner, — quite the contrary, for 

 there is not a single portion of it that is not stamped by littleness and 

 insignificance. What a singular, and to ourselves, deplorable contrast 

 does it present to the new palace of the Duke of Brunswicdv by Ottmer, 

 engravings of which have reached this country. Thcmgh not free 

 from faults, the Brunswick palace has at least a grand and im|)i)sing 

 air. It looks like the residence of a sovereign, whicdi is unich more 

 than our own does. Asa pahice for the sovereign of Little Britain 



the one in St. James' Park would be reasonably' handsome and stylish 



a smart piece of architectiu-e enough ; but for that of Great Britain it 

 is not so well. However there may be excuse for Nash, poor man : 

 John Bidl is both very poor and very stingy ; whereas, it may be pre- 

 sumed the Brunswickers have pleiity of jwo^Ksses, and can'alfijrdto 

 bnild palaces that look like palaces after they are built. 



II. Greatly will Bartholomew,— who must not be confounded with 

 St. Bartholomew the Great, exult at a damper having been thrown 

 upon competition by the result of that for the Nelson monument. 

 Poor competition, a most woful figure do you now cut! Well may 

 you hang your head; — bettc-r would it be were you to go and han'o- 

 yourself. As for the profession, thev will very quietly go to sleep 

 \qion the matter. No wonder that committees laugh at them to their 

 very faces, when they show that thev may be kicked at and beaten 

 witli impunity, like spaniels. Never were there such pluckless creatures 

 as they show themselves to be-, when, without making the slightest 

 protest against such treatment, they alhnv themselves to be bamboozled 

 iu the mt)st bungling, barefaced manner. The Royal Exchange com- 

 petition is already openly spoken of by many as" being little bettcu- 

 than an arrant hoax. The plans of the committee are it seems all 

 settled, before a single plan lias been sent in by those invited to com- 

 pete for the building. Butler must have been 'thinking of architects 

 when he penned his hackneyed distich, 



Surely tlic pleasure is as gi'eat 

 In bciu^ cheated as to cheat. 



III. Baron Von Klenze has just got a severe thrashing : I do not 

 mean that he has literally been'beaten black and blue, but has been so 

 cut up that he is likely to look veiy blank and blue for some time to 

 come. Has he then, it will be asked, been attacked by some impudent 

 shallow-pated journalist? No: his theory and opiiiirms have been 

 deliberately ridiculed as false and extravagant by Professor Wiegmami 

 of Dusseldorli; who is himself an architect. The Professor's tone is 

 not particularly courteous, nor does he omit the opportunity of giving 



the Baron a hard hit wherever he can. Among other things he ridi- 

 cules his art'ected language, and the solemn obscurity in which he wraps 

 up his meanings or no-meanings in such manner that it requires an 

 CEdipus to luiriddle them. "Architecture," says the Baron, "in the 

 ethic (?) meaning of the term, is the art o( shaping and putting toge- 

 ther natural materials in order to accoimnodate them to the purposes 

 and wants of society, so that the method of applying them according 

 to the laws of strength, durability, and consistency, may secure the 

 greatest possible firmness and lastingness with the least possible cost 

 of labour and material!" Commenting upon which very oracular de- 

 finition, the Professor, — no doubt very rudely — remarks that if such 

 be the case, a boot-jack is upon a par with a work of architecture, and 

 that a tailor or shoemaker can fulfil all the conditions laid down by 

 the Ritltr, just as well as Ritter Von Klenze himscdf, or any other 

 architect. — Kh^nze, it is well known, is the Don Quixote of Grecian 

 architecture, and not a little Quixotic in his notions of it. According 

 to him it is the only positive architecture; the meaning of which (Ex- 

 pression I must confess, I positively do not understand. There is, in 

 my opinion, infinitely more good sense and valuable truth in the fol- 

 lowing remark by Wiegmann himself: " As studious disciples of an- 

 cient art the most important lesson we can derive from it is, to endea- 

 voiu- to work out for ourselves a style that shall be to us what their 

 own was to the tireeks. It is only by being so understood and so 

 applied that the beautifvd art of classical antiquity can exercise a 

 worthy and beneficial infiuence on ourtiuu-s; which it cannot do so 

 long as it shall ccmtinue to be a lifeless model, for slavish — and he 

 might have added, indolent — ^' imitation.' " 



IV. It is possible, nay very probable, or I may as well say, once for 

 all, very certain, that nobody in this country is acquainted with the 

 writings of Gogol, notwithstanding that he is one of the living literary 

 celebrities of St. Petersburg. Beyond that, and that he has the repu- 

 tation of being one of the cleverest authors of his day, Imvselfknow 

 very little more of him than any one else ; having only a few hours 

 ago opened his two volumes entitled " ^Irahcski," when my attention 

 was instantly arrested by an article headed " On Archikcture." That 

 was suflBcient to determine me where to commence an acquaintance 

 with Gogol: yet I must confess that it was not without very great 

 misgivings that 1 did so; for it was not at all likelv, 1 thought, tliat I 

 should meet witli any thing particularly new, or rather, not particularly 

 stale, on siich a subject, in such a, (juarter. To mv asti^juishment, how- 

 ever, I have found that it does contain much original thinking on the 

 subject, much sound criticism, and many ingenious and clever remarks. 

 I shall confine myself, however, at least for the present, to that passage 

 where he expresses his discontent at the utter want of originality 

 manifested in all modern works of architecture. In every other class 

 of ornamental productions, he observes, inventicm is permitted to have 

 free scope, the consequence of which is that fcnius and condjinations, 

 as tasteful as they are novel, are obtained, which but for such liberty 

 would never have been thought of. It is thus that the artisan, the 

 mere mechanic frequently surpasses his models, although they may 

 be veiy good in themselves, and seem to require no further improve- 

 ment : but the architect — the artist as he is pleased to style himself, 

 durst not, for the veiy hfe of him, attempt any thing of the kind. Such 

 privilege is denied to him. Innovation! heterodoxy t heresy! All 

 his ccunrades would at once be up in arms against him who should 

 attempt to alter, not the proportions of an order, but any of its (I'ecorative 

 details, however true he might keep to its general character. I am 

 afraid Gogol himself will be considered outrageously heterodox. What 

 business has he to have an ojjinion at all upon the matter ? Nobody 

 ought to presume to understand architectm-e, but architects them- 

 selves ; and (hem things would goon smoothly and quietly. It is all 

 very well for other people to have just brains enough to admire and 

 wonder, and nothing more. 



Nkw Projectile. — Veiy early on Tliursilay innrning, the 1th ultimo, an 

 e\iicriiiient was made at Kiiigstiju mth a now and (ormiclalile projectile, 

 meant to supersede, not only cannon, Init also the iiiucli more questionably 

 vamitecl liollow-slicdl, now a favourite in the French and Russian navies. The 

 wliulc apparatus did not exceed twelve or thirteen ]ioumls weight, and was 

 enclosed iu a very small conqiass. The projectile was lannelic'd by hand, 

 fmni a distance, at a pleasiu-e-hoat. It proceeded noiselessly till it reaclic<t 

 the aim, and the etl'cct was then terrific. Catcliing the vesscla-midships, the 

 force of the explosion fairly raised it aliove the stream and broke cvei-y single 

 plank into splinters and small fragments, so that no idea of (lie vessel's form 

 or use was left for the spectator. The splinters were carried in evciy di. 

 rcction, and many thrown into the neighbouring fields. The explosive power 

 was only about two iioimds, lint exceeded the destructive energy of at least 

 forty limes that weight of gunpowder, as now used, in any shape. The per- 

 cussicm was trenicndous and shook (he houses fur aconsidcralile distance. It 

 was attrilnitecl ,at Kingston to the explosion of a powder iiiill at Hounslow, 

 and caused great excitement. — Times. 



