374 



THE CIVIL ENGINEER AND ARCHITECTS JOURNAL. 



[OCTOBBR, 



— poeticaUv, in tlie pnigrnatical language of allegory, or in the plain 

 prose and vulgar tongue of inatter-of-fact reality ?— Lord Malioo seems 

 to entertain some remarkably curious notions in regard to what would 

 be suitable subjects for the occasion. Among others which he recom- 

 mends are " Queen Margaret of Anjou encountering the Robber in the 

 forest ; Anne Boleyn in her bridal array ! Lady Jane Grey at her 

 youthful studies ; (as a pendant there might be Prince of Wales pon- 

 dering over his primer ;) Queen Mary receiving the news of the Bat- 

 tle of the Boyne, the battle itself perhaps being, in order to prevent 

 mistake, represented on the hangings of the room. Truly, a goodly 

 selection of subjects— all of them exceedingly dignified and of para- 

 mount national interest and importance ! Admirable mode of illus- 

 trating the history of our constitution and the annals of the British 

 people ! The gallant viscount might as well have recommended that 

 "Old Bess," and the other wax.vork figures in the abbe)', should be 

 stuck up in Mr. Barry's building. Unless the painters can get better 

 advisers, or get rid of advisers altogether, matters are likely to be 

 confoundedly messed. 



IV. Although there is jnst now almost a mania for ornamental de- 

 sign intended for almost every conceivable purpose, no one, it seems, 

 has been able to produce any ideas that would help to extend the com- 

 paratively narrow limits of architectural ornament and decoration. 

 Nay, to abstain from any attempt of the kind, in regard to what is 

 termed an Order, is considered a positive merit, and so very greai a 

 one as to make amends for all other faults and deficiencies. No mat- 

 ter how much at variance every other part of a design may be with 

 the intention and character of the order adopted for the occasion, so 

 long as the columns and their entablature are in strict conformity with 

 some established specimen, they at least are safe from critiscism, and 

 entitled to be recognised as classical, whereas any fro re nata modifica- 

 tion of such members, any deviation from liter ,d and mechanical copy- 

 ing, as far as they are concerned, is condemned at once ; therefore the 

 practice of those from whom we derive such types— converted by us 

 into s/e«o/i/;;es— ought in consistency to be condemned likewise, since 

 the ancients, both Greeks and Romans, never repeated their orders 

 literally, but almost every example is marked by some individual pe- 

 culiarity, sli<iht as it may be, and many examples of the same order 

 are of decidedly different character, although all retain the same 

 general indicial marks. The Ionic, for instance, ranges from almost 

 Doric severity to Corinthian luxuriance. But we have thought pro- 

 per to reject for ourselves all such artistic liberty. To compose from 

 the study of ancient examples something that should resemble no sin- 

 gle one of them, and yet be true to the genuine type, Us spirit, its 

 capability, its latent and undeveloped suggestiveness, is on no account 

 to be thought of. It quite revolts all those old-womanly prejudices 

 which cause architectural design to stick fast. It would be attempt- 

 ing what we are told cannot by any possibility be accomplished, or it 

 it could, must not even be so much as thought of. 



V. It happens not a little curiously that after exclaiming so lustily 

 against architectural amateurs and non-professional writers, more es- 

 pecially clerical and collegiate ones, Joseph Gwilt has now actually 

 joined the "British Archsological Association"— virtuosi who have 

 very little sympathy with him and his architectural orthodoxy, bnt 

 would freely give iip the writings of both Vitruvius and Palladio, 

 doubtless of Gwilt himself too, in exchange for some quaint and, per- 

 haps, unintelligible, certainly now useless, terms from " popular me- 

 dieval m\\.exi"—popidar here meaning writers whom only tne most 

 courageous bibliomaniacs and venerators of black letter would dare to 

 encounter. Laudable as may be, in themselves, the professed objects 

 of the " Association," there is far more of bustling, fussy parade in 

 their proceedings than is consistent with good taste ; so much ol if, 

 indeed, that to the uninitiated there must seem to be a good deal ot 

 quackery and charlatanery in them. They seem to direct their atten- 

 tion chiefly to all the little knicknackeries and odds and ends of anti- 

 quarianism— those nugce difficiles which are only so much lumber in 

 the way of study, at least of'architectural study. It certainly does not 

 say much for the profit derived to this latter from the micrological 

 inquiries of antiquaries, that notwithstanding so much has lately been 

 written upon church architecture, and so many structures of the kind 

 have been described, the merits or defects of the respective examples 

 aie hardly ever discussed, or even adverted to, in an intelligent and 

 instructive manner, hut merely a dry, plodding, tedious and drawling 

 account is given, interlarded with laboriously raked-up stufl, ot no 

 other use whatever than to stew away in a head that would otherwise, 

 be empty. As to the Association's whim of holding a sort of annual 

 ambulatory Bartholomew Fair, it is no doubt very "innocent"— exceed- 

 ingly innocent indeed! probably its greatest recommendation ot all, 

 in the opinion of those who think aTi^/cA-fng— jaunting about and jun- 

 keting in troops, the best part of antiquarianism, more especially as 

 such doings, and the names of those who "assist" at them, are re- 



ported, or we should say "chronicled," with a microscopic fidelity 

 that magnifies them, and those concerned in them, into apparently 

 gigantic dimensions. Hence even Ainsworth's Magazine has gone 

 quite out of its usual track, and devoted several of its valuable pages 

 to what its readers must consider excessively dull— a very stupid sort 

 of Canterbury tale— viz., a long-winded account of the late proceed- 

 ings at Canterbury, Harrison Ainsworth having been the leading lite- 

 rary notability present— the one, we presume, by whom "severe" 

 history was represented, in like manner as were we told "severe ar- 

 chitecture" was by Charles Barry and John Britton— what an associa- 

 tion that: Poor Gwilt, however, seems to have represented just 

 nothing, for he is treated as a mere cypher. 



EPISTLE TO CHARLES DICKENS. 



Now that you have concluded your Chuzzlewit or Chuzzlewitty 

 history, greatly to the satisfaction, it would seem, of your readers and 

 critics— a sort of double-meaning phrase,— and greatly to your own 

 regret, and having done so, have thought fit to dedicate to a lady 

 what in some of its chapters cannot be considered particularly lady- 

 like reading;- now that you have done this I say, allow me to enact 

 the part of slave behind you in your triumphal car, and to whisper in 

 your ear that you are not altogether what the acclamations of the 

 multitude would proclaim you. To decline such distinction, as not 

 sufficiently worthy of it, would in you look far more like conscious 

 misgivin"", or even cowardice, than unaffected modesty. If you can- 

 not now°bear to hear a little wholesome, though unpalatable truth, 

 who can? You are not in the position of one who is struggling to 

 obtain a footing in public favour, and whom a blow from ungentle 

 criticism might perhaps lay prostrate at once. On the contrary, you 

 stand loftily ; see that you also stand firmly. In your case the press 

 has been so prodigal of applause, and so unanimous in its opinions, 

 that your reviewers seem to have taken their cue from, and said ditto 

 to each other. Their praise has been pushed to flattery-even to 

 adulation. Yet it would perhaps have been better for you had a little 

 sober criticism been mingled along with it, since that might both have 

 helped to keep the praise from evaporating like so much sheer puff, 

 and have stimulated you to prove yourself more deserving of it, by 

 merely doing justice to your own talent, and bestowing more care on 

 your productions. At present, vou evidently do not blot, neither do 

 Vou file— at least not ^nglici;hewg rather addicted to /to a good 

 deal of whimsical, and merely whimsical stuff. Very possibly, this 

 may be excellent policy enough if your ambition limits itself to pre- 

 sent popularity : in that case it has been as successful as it can be, 

 since you are already placed by acclamation on the pedestal of popu- 

 larity,' as the popular writer /ac excellence of the day. Though it may 

 be quite unintentional, the last expression carries with it something 

 of wholesome and corrective warning : " of the day," is well put in. 



Modern literary history affords not a few striking instances of ex- 

 traordinary vogue of popularity which have lasted lor "the day" and 

 no longer. Not to posterity alone, but even to the next generation have 

 names become unknown which were once familiar to all ; and such 

 very sudden falling-off of public favour has generally been in those 

 cases where it was as suddenly bestowed all at once without any sort 

 of reserve or discretion. Towards a declared favourite, the public is 

 apt to show itself a very passionate and ardent lover, but also a very 

 inconstant one. So long as the honeymoon of love lasts the object of 

 admiration is all perfection ; that over, indifterence succeeds to rap- 

 ture—may be, not only indifterence but disgust. 



The very craving for novelty, which has so great a share in elevat- 

 ing into notoriety the writer who has struck out into a new path, 

 becomes after a while a circumstance against him. What was at first 

 admired in him as freshness of manner, if not positive originality, 

 comes to be looked upon as mere mannerism, if the repetition of it be 

 not attended by progressive improvement. Defects that either passed 

 undetected, or else were indulgently excused so long as the charm ol 

 novelty lasted, or allowance might fairly be made lor inexperience, 

 begin to strike more and more. But to cut short all this random and 

 impertinent prosing, what I have really to say is, that in your last pro- 

 duction, you have played your cards very clumsily. 



After bringing forward at the outset what promised to be a de- 

 cidedly new character, as belonging to a profession which has never 

 yet been brought forward either in the drama or the novel, you suf- 

 fered it to dwindle to a mere appellation, thereby showing either that 

 you had no aim at all in pusliing forward such nominal character 



