I818.J 



THE CIVIL ENGINEER AND ARCHITECT'S JOURNAL. 



163 



them, they require considerable modification in order to render 

 them, or any one of them, generally applicable at the present day. 

 After all, it may be ([uestioned whether what looks so much like 

 praiseworthy reserve, and scrupulous adherence to autlientic 

 models, does not proceed from motives that are not the most 

 laudable. Merely to copy, saves such an infinity of study, thought, 

 and trouble, as to' renderthe copying system, in what calls itself a 

 Fine Art, less of a mystery than it else would be. Architects — and 

 I say it in sorrow — are not artists, except, perhaps, just here and 

 there one e.xceptionally. The majority of the profession have 

 nothing whatever of the feeling or spirit of artists in them. It is 

 said that it takes nine tailors to make a man , I am sure it takes 

 ninety-nine Architects to make an artist ; for, as matters go, if 

 we get one out of a hundred who answers to the latter character, 

 we ought to be grateful. It will be said, perhaps, that the oppor- 

 tunities for showing artistic and original talent are so exceedingly 

 few, that we ought not to judge of tlie ability in pnsxe by the little 

 ability vvliich manifests itself in esse. Opportunities do occur, 

 nevertheless, and wliat is the use we make of them ? AVhy, to 

 pirate, in the most unblushing manner, designs from Sansovino ! 

 It is true. Count D'Orsay makes a merit of such doings : what 

 then .'' — he merely shows himself a priggish coxcomb. His count- 

 ship's opinion may be very good authority for the cut of a coat, or 

 other question in tailoring, but in Architecture not worth a straw ; 

 although it had, it seems, overbearing weight with the " Armoury 

 and Knavery Club." 



V. Belo\'ed, but most unhappy Architecture, how art thou beset! 

 — by tlie merest apes on one side, and the merest parrots on the 

 other — creatures who merely repeat by rote what they ha\e either 

 heard from others, or got out of books, witliout bringing so much 

 as a single idea of their own to incorporate itself with, or work 

 upon it. So long as we merely listen to them in silence, they go on 

 fluently and volubly enough. But once begin to cross-question them, 

 and it is all up Mit'h them. Nothing then is left for them but to 

 express astonishment at the ignorance which cannot perceive, or 

 the impudence which presumes to throw doubt upon excellence 

 that has all along been universally admitted. Anything like satis- 

 factory reasons or intelligent reasoning, is not to be expected from 

 people whose admiration is founded upon mere prejudice — upon 

 authoiity, tradition, and conventionalism. Their criticism consists 

 of nothing better than mere cant and parrot-like rote ; and tlieir 

 dogmatism is in proportion to their shallowness. The most inno- 

 cently-put WHY disturbs them, — upsets their criticism and their 

 temper too. Albeit, anything but poetical themselves, they firmly 

 maintain with the j)oet, that " Whatever is, is right ; — in other 

 words, everything is excellent for which due authority can be pro- 

 duced. And would tliey but be content to stop there, a good deal 

 might be said in tlieir excuse. Instead of that, however, they 

 insist upon our believing that whatever is not — i. e. has not been 

 done before, consequently derives no support from direct precedent 

 for it, but must stand upon its own merits, — must of necessity be 

 wrong, even though it sliould evidently be warranted both by 

 analogy and common-sense. After all, there is a particle or two 

 of shrewdness in the narrow-minded dulness of such persons : 

 they have just discernment enough to be aware that tliey them- 

 selves depend entirely upon precedent, rote, and routine; and that 

 by insisting upon others abiding by them likewise, they bring them 

 down and keep them down to the level of their own intellect. 



ARCHITECTURE AT THE ROYAL ACADEMY ; 



AND THE ARCHITECTURAL DRAWINGS AT THE EXHIBITION. 



Most cheering and encouraging symptoms manifest themselves 

 this year in the Architectural Room, — that is, supposing there be 

 truth in the saying, that when things come to the worst they are 

 sure to mend, for to that comfortable stnge of pessimity are matters 

 now come. Never was there before, within our recollection, so 

 miserably poor an architectural " spread" at the Academy — sucli a 

 beggarly and ill-arranged set-out. Even before we begin to look 

 round, we perceive that one interesting class of architectural sub- 

 jects are altogether missing. Either no architectural models were 

 sent, or they were turned away ; and incomprehensible as the last 

 may be thought, it is quite as probable as the other case — at least 

 to ourselves, because we happen to have seen some of the rejected 

 designs, — designs, too, by those who have been e.xhibitors for several 

 years past, and whose productions have usually obtained deserved 

 commendation, both from ourselves and others. Their productions 

 are now missing from the walls, and their names from the cata- 



logue, which contains very few names indeed of any note in the 

 architectural world ; and what few there are, are not by any means 

 pluralist exliibitors, they having contented themselves with sending 

 no more than what just entitles them to an exhibitor's ticket. 

 Possibly, however, we are here in error, and do them injustice, for 

 though oiil)' one subject of theirs is to be found here, several 

 may have been turned away : in fact, we know this to have been 

 the case in one instance, and in that instance the drawing admitted 

 is precisely the one which its author cared least of all about. 



Knowing as much as we do, we cannot help suspecting that a 

 great many more ugly revelations might be made, and a good deal 

 brought to light that would accuse the Academy of most prepos- 

 terous mismanagement in this department of its exhibitions, if of 

 nothing worse. That architecture is there most unwelcome, there 

 can be no doubt. That has been growing more and more evident 

 for several years past. And to the chilling coldness with which it 

 is regarded and treated by the general body of Academicians, may 

 perhaps be attributed the forbearance of their architectural brethren, 

 and the discountenancing, as far as in them lies, the practice of 

 exhibiting architectural drawings at all. In the days of Sir John 

 Soane, it used to be the custom for the Academy's Professor of 

 Architecture — at least he made it such — not only to contribute, 

 but to contribute each season, and to contribute abundantly. The 

 present Professor, on the contrary, chooses to put himself upon the 

 shelf, where he lies wedged in between Colonna, Vitruvius, and a 

 good many other very mouldy and musty matters, — and wedged 

 there so fast, that it seems he cannot get down for a moment to 

 look at and protest against the outrageous doings in the arcliitec- 

 tural room.* Most enviable state of repose ! it saves him from 

 being horrified. Mr. Barry has of course other and far better 

 " fisli to fry." Sir Robert Smirke has been all along a nonentity 

 in the Academy — sa\e that he is its treasurer, and keeps a keen 

 eye upon its '■^shillings." We should just as soon expect to find a 

 design by one of the porters as by him. Mr. Hardwick and the 

 new associate, Mr. Sydney Smirke, are the only architects con- 

 nected with the Academy who condescend to let us see anything 

 of theirs in the Exhibition. 



Such being the case, we can forgive the editor of the Art-Union 

 for so strongly objecting, as he lately did, to architects being 

 elected into the Academy. Unless they enter it with the inten- 

 tion and full determination of really representing their own art 

 there, — of upholding and promoting its interests, the " R.A." 

 so acquired becomes more of a reproach to them than an honour. 

 They only take upon themselves the ungenerous and odious part of 

 the dog-in-the-manger ; doing nothing themselves for either the 

 Academy or for architecture, and excluding from the former those 

 who deserve to be in it, because they would prove active and effi- 

 cient members. There being so few architect-Academicians, is the 

 very strongest reason possible why those few should exert them- 

 selves manfully, instead of sitting by most tamely, while architec- 

 ture is all but actually kicked out. For it to be kicked out alto- 

 gether would perliaps be less ignominious than to be treated as it 

 is at present. Probably, next year the architectural drawings will 

 be thrust aside into the Octagon-room — a hole, never intended, we 

 presume, by Wilkins to form one of the exhibition rooms, — for 

 this season most terrible inroad has been made by the painters 

 upon the s])ace hitherto allotted to such subjects, and to which 

 tliey might be supposed to have acquired prescriptive right. The 

 wliole of the east-end of the room is now given up to oil-paintings, 

 — not that we should at all complain of that, provided they were 

 strictly architectural in subject, instead of being the refuse of the 

 works of their kind in the E.xhibition, with such charmingly namby- 

 pamby titles as " The Pet," " Aifection's First Offering," and others 

 of the same "mmN/" and lack-a-daisical stamp. Had no architect- 

 Academician courage to protest against such an invasion of the 

 architectural territory on the walls .'' Was there not in the whole 

 Academical conclave one single Abdiel 



'* Faithful found 

 Among the faithless, faithful only he 

 Among tile innumeratiie falsp, unmovedp 

 Unsiialien, nnseduced. unterrified. 

 His loyalty liept, his love, his zeal"? 



That there was not even one such seems, for had such one there 

 been, either his remonstrances would have had due effect, or he 

 himself would have withdrawn, and renouncing the brummagem 

 honour of R.A., would have escaped the ignominy of being con- 

 founded with the faithless, — for as matters stand, the being an 



* Wilkins, during his professorship at the Academy, exhibited only two sioall draw- 

 ings, and those showed us his very worst work of all— Downing College, Cambridga. Tha 

 present Professor has shown at hast more discretion, for instead of exposing to crilioism 

 any architectural design of his own, he exhibited first what was only a medley conglo- 

 meration of Sir C. Wren's buildings ; and nest and lastly, merely a sculptural cemposl- 

 tion tor a pediment in a building erected by another architect. 



22* 



