1843.] 



THE CIVIL ENGINEER AND ARCHITECT'S JOURNAL. 



117 



CANDIDUS'S NOTE-BOOK. 



FASCICULUS XLVII. 



" I must have liberty 

 Withal, as large a charter as the winds, 

 To blow on whom 1 please." 



I. " The works of Messrs. Whewell and Willis, honorary members 

 of the Royal Institute of British Architects, reflect the greatest credit 

 upon their penetration and learning :"— so says Professor Donaldson, 

 and therefore so far differs toto ccelo from the author of a certain 

 " Encyclopaedia," who, although he does not name those gentlemen, 

 gives a pretty broad hint as to the esteem he entertains for them and 

 their works ; which last, he has considered unworthy of being named 

 in the list he gives of architectural publications — a list, by the bye, 

 that seems to have been made up from a bookseller's catalogue. How- 

 ever, the " Encyclopedia " has got plenty of puff from some of the 

 country newspapers, therefore, it is to be hoped that Mr. Gwilt will 

 now become quite reconciled to "small-fry critics," of that class, 

 who, if they do not understand anything of the subject, are most 

 conveniently blind to defects and blunders, yet at the same time so 

 lynx-eyed, that [they discover wonderful learning and industry, 

 where others detect great carelessness, and the mere handicraft of 

 scissors and paste. As to Mr. Donaldson, his "learned and scientific 

 professional brother," as he styles him, is not likely to be at all pleased 

 at his complimenting the two W's. 



II. Donaldson is certainly the most good-natured of critics — liberal 

 of praise even to a fault, for he bestows it so freely as to render it 

 quite common, and hardly worth having; in which respect, however, 



■ lie does not exactly stand alone, yet one looks for something superior 

 to ordinary puff, from a professional man and a Professor. After 

 that honey, a gentle squeeze of acid from Welby Pugin will prove 

 refreshing ; and no doubt he will give us some of it by and bye, in his 

 forthcoming work. His bill of fare promises some relish of the kind ; 

 and there are one or two capital tid-bits for him to serve up to us, 

 should he not have overlooked them. It is a pity that he does not 

 mean to give us a chapter on " Lost Opportunities," but a chapter 

 would hardly suffice to enumerate them all — they would require a 

 yolume. As to his idea of recommending Gothic architecture, as 

 our general style at the present day, and for public buildings of all 

 kinds, it seems to be somewhat a visionary and Quixotic one. At 

 any rate he will hardly be able to enforce his argument by satisfactory 

 and encouraging examples, proving how successfully we can now accom- 

 modate that style to every purpose and every occasion. But what does 

 Pugin himself mean by clapping that odd bristling chevaux-de-fme on 

 the ridge of St. George's Catholic church? It looks neither useful nor 

 ornamental — quite the contrary: nor does there seem to be precedent 

 for it, much as it stands in need of authority to reconcile us at all 

 to it. 



III. If instead of falling foul on reviewers, anonymous critics, and 

 others of that class, and bestowing upon them a good deal of his 

 " Big bow-wow," as Scott calls it, the illustrious Joseph had con- 

 descended to point out some of the best architectural papers that 

 are to be found scattered up and down periodicals, foreign as well 

 as English ones, he would have performed a good office. There 

 are several of the kind in the Quarterly Review, although of late that 

 journal has given us nothing on the subject of architecture ; and from 

 that entitled the " Modern Palladian Architecture of Italy," he him- 

 self might have picked up some information which he does not ap- 

 pear to possess. No doubt there has been a good deal of flimsy 

 nonsense written in periodicals, not only upon architecture, but other 

 subjects also : yet it does not therefore follow that there is nothing at 

 all good, or deserving attention, to be met with in the shape of ma- 

 gazine and review articles ; and as the good ones, it seems, bear so 

 small a proportion to the rest, a list of them would not have occupied 

 a great deal of room— though as for the matter of room, Gwilt had 

 more than he knew how to fill up, except by cramming into his book 



such heterogeneous stuff as tables of compound interest. Takenjin 

 general, reviewers— more especially architectural reviewers, may be 

 the ignoramusses Gwilt represents them. Nevertheless, every rule 

 has its exceptions: at any rate, certain it is that some who have 

 written in periodicals are not only professional men, but those who as 

 such stand rather high in public opinion. Professor Pugin, for in- 

 stance, has written in the Dublin Review; and each of the other Pro- 

 fessors— Cockerell, Hosking and Donaldson, stands suspected of having 

 occasionally contributed to periodical publications. How they relish 

 Gwilt's remarks may, therefore^ easily be conceived. Whether the 

 venerable Vitruvius and the great Palladio were ever guilty of any 

 thing so unprofessional and so horrible, may be questioned, because 

 in their times — oh! happy times for architecture! — there were no 

 periodicals; and if there had been, those great luminaries of art, 

 would not have' put their light under a bushel. Surely an " ignorant 

 reviewer" may be excused from admiring Schinkel, when for so doing 

 he had the authority of all Germany. To vent his wroth on such a 

 poor devil, looks like cowardice on the part of Mr. Gwilt, more espe- 

 cially as he might attack architectural heresy in " high places," and 

 display his prowess against giants instead of dwarfs. Besides, 



Thyself, friend Joseph, may at times be wrong; 

 Bethink thee, then, what says the song, 



" Remember, where the judgment's weak, 



The prejudice is strong.'' 

 And there, 'twould seem thy strength most lies. 

 Reviewers, v. hy should you so rail at and despise ? 



On them why all thy vengeance wreak — 



Reviewers, meekest of the meek, 

 If not the wisest of the wise? 



IV. There is no department of biography in which less has been 

 done than that of architects ; and, strange to say, least of all has been 

 done — at any rate in this country — of late years, when even the most 

 eminent — if not exactly the ablest — in the profession have obtained 

 only a mere passing notice in an obituary — hardly so full a one as is be- 

 stowed upon some of those " distinguished," persons of whom the world 

 never heard while living, nor will care to remember when dead. 

 Wyatt, Gandon, Soane, Wyatville, Wilkins, and Rickman, have pas- 

 sed away without obtaining more than that kind of notice. In 

 Soane's case, indeed, it was entirely his own fault, for a handsome 

 legacy would have secured him a splendid biographical monument 

 from one who was always telling the world of his esteem for Sir John, 

 but who has since written him plain " Soane," without the knightly 

 prefix, and without endearing compliment of any kind. Well, per- 

 haps poor Soane had no relish for " extreme unction," administered 

 by an Egyptian — that is, by a crocodile. 



V. " It is found easier," says a writer in the Edinburgh Review, 

 " to deal with generalities and abstraction, than to descend to parti- 

 culars ; to frame a theory, or a philosophical essay having the slen- 

 derest application to the case in hand, than to direct the criticism to 

 the real appreciation of the work to be reviewed." This is more 

 especially true as regards architectural criticism, or what is given to 

 the world as such: of general remark that has been worn threadbare, 

 there is usually an overdose, while the building which calls it forth, 

 obtains no further notice than two or three lines, and sometimes not 

 even so much. When such is the case, we may without any very 

 great breach of charity, suppose that the writers know not how to apply 

 their own principles — supposing them to be really their own, which is 

 doubtful, and to test by them what they profess to examine and pass 

 sentence upon. Indeed, it occasionally happens that the opinion they 

 express, is altogether at variance with the principles they pretend to 

 lay down: — after twaddling about Grecian architecture, for instance, 

 they will praise what is no better than an abominable caricature or 

 preposterous application of it — at the best a servile copy in regard 

 to mere columns, and those generally introduced so injudiciously as 

 to render all the rest more insignificant in character than it other- 

 wise might have appeared. 



VI. Innovation is the bugbear of architects, and is most solemnly 

 of all, deprecated by those who themselves do not possess a fresh 



