Remarks on secular & domestic architecture, present & future

Front matter

Lack

'1 r

! t

Preface

TJST offering to the public the following, as I fear somewhat rough and crude remarks upon secular and domestic architecture, I feel bound to preface them with a few words in explanation of their origin and object.

I have for many years been strongly impressed with the following facts : —

First, that the vernacular Domestic architecture of our day is wholly unworthy of our state of civilization, and requires a thorough reformation.

Secondly, that the attempts which have been made to effect this, whether by those who favour the Italian, mediaeval, or other styles, though often most praiseworthy, have been in the main unsuccessful.

Thirdly, that the success, however incomplete, of the great movement by which Pointed architecture has been revived for ecclesiastical purposes, though unquestionably the one great fact of our day, so far as architecture is concerned, has not hitherto had full scope for producing a corresponding effect upon our secular buildings.

Fourthly, that this has been caused chiefly by two viii

PREFACE.

circumstances : — the impression which, strange as it may be, is so prevalent that Gothic architecture is essentially an ecclesiastical style, and that though eminently suited to churches, it is not fitted for other classes of buildings, and the consequent unnatural severance which has taken place within the last few years between ecclesiastical and secular architecture, — a severance which has never existed at any former period; and, on the other hand, the want of a due appreciation of the question by many of the architects themselves who have been engaged in this revival, which has led, in many cases, to an uncertainty and hesitation in their efforts when engaged in secular works.

Fifthly, that a thoroughly erroneous impression prevails as to the principles on which the revival of Pointed architecture is founded and carried on ; that it is an antiquarian movement, and seeks to revive all that is ancient, instead of being, as is really the case, pre-eminently free, comprehensive, and practical; ready to adapt itself to every change in the habits of society, to embrace every new material or system of construction, and to adopt implicitly and naturally, and with hearty good will, every invention or improvement, whether artistic, constructional, or directed to the increase of comfort and convenience.

A long and serious consideration of these facts led me, about two years since, to commence in my leisure moments a series of somewhat unconnected papers bearing upon them, and, the subject growing upon me

PREFACE.

IX as I proceeded, these have in the course of time increased into the present volume. I must plead the unconnected way in which they have been written as my excuse for the want of system, and the frequent repetition which will, I fear, be found in them. I should also mention, that from various causes the publication has been delayed for a twelvemonth since the completion of the manuscript, and for several months since nearly the whole was in print, which will account for some remarks being inconsistent with the date. The two first chapters, though read at an architectural meeting, were written expressly for this volume. My object has not been to write a book which will be praised for its systematic completeness, or for its composition, — in these respects I leave it to take its chance, — but simply to do good by suggesting remedies for the evils I have enumerated.

I want to call attention to the meanness of our vernacular architecture, and to the very partial success which has hitherto attended the attempts at its improvement; I want to point out the absurdity of the theory that one style is suited to churches and another to houses, and of the consequent divorce between ecclesiastical and secular architecture ; to press upon architects who are engaged in the Gothic revival the paramount duty of rendering it consistent by perfecting it, and that on a systematic principle, in its domestic and secular branches ; and, finally, to shew to the public that we aim not at a dead antiquarian revival, but at developing upon the basis of the indi-

X

PREFACE.

genous architecture of our own country, a style which will be pre-eminently that of our own age, and will naturally, readily, and with right good will and heartiness, meet all its requirements, and embrace all its arts, improvements, and inventions.

If I shall have in any degree contributed towards these ends, my object in undertaking this little work will have been effected.

I will only add one more prefatory remark, — that I disclaim as a deduction from what I have written in this volume any, even the slightest, feeling of depreciation of the talents or efforts of those who have been labouring in the styles which, while fully appreciating their intrinsic beauties, I do not think best suited to our own uses. One, in particular, among cotemporary architects, I should be grieved at the very thought of paining. I need hardly say that I refer to our highlygifted and noble-minded Professor of Architecture at the Eoyal Academy, — a man whose every aspiration and sentiment is devoted to the promotion of art ; and who, though practically and by education a Greek, has shewn by his enthusiastic treatises upon mediaeval sculpture that, had circumstances so directed his earlier studies, he would have been the great leader and ornament of our Gothic revival.

Chapter I. Page

The Present State of Domestic Architecture in its Vernacular Form ....... 1

CHAPTEE II.

The Eevival of Pointed Architecture, viewed in its bearing upon Domestic Buildings . . . . .10

CHAPTEE III.

On the leading External Features and Characteristics of Buildings ....... 24

CHAPTEE IV.

CHAPTEE V.

CHAPTEE VI.

Country and Town. ISTo. I. — Buildings in the Country . 112

CHAPTEE VII.

Country and Town. No. II. — Buildings in Towns . .163

PAGE

Xll CONTENTS.

CHAPTER VIII.

Buildings in Towns continued. — Public Buildings . .187

CHAPTER IX.

Commercial Buildings, &c. ..... 209

CHAPTER X.

CHAPTER XI.

On the Boundaries of Truth and Falsehood in Architecture , 235

CHAPTER XII.

The Architecture of the Euture . . . .258

NOTE.

On the Uses to be made of the Mediaeval Architecture of Italy 275

CHAPTEK I.

a

THE PRESENT STATE OF DOMESTIC ARCHITECTURE IN ITS

EE we, as Englishmen, satisfied with the state of domestic architecture amongst us, or ought we to be so?

I am not asking whether our dining-rooms are comfortable, our drawing-rooms brilliant, or our parlours snug,— we are pretty sure to take care of ourselves as to comfort, — but are our houses pleasant things to look upon, as well as comfortable to live in? Are they objects which we feel a national pride in, or would wish to point out to our visitors from other countries as symbolizing well with the state of civilization we profess to have attained ? Do they contrast satisfactorily with the houses of our forefathers, built in periods we are accustomed to think rude ? Do our town-houses add grandeur and picturesque effect to the streets of our cities? Do our country-houses harmonize well with the scenery around them, and add beauty to the landscape ? Then, again, how do we feel satisfied with the look of our country towns ? Does a view of their streets tend to elevate the feelings and excite our patriotic pride? Do our great manufacturing and commercial towns contrast favourably with

a This and the following chapter were read at a meeting of the Lincolnshire and Nottinghamshire Architectural Societies, held at Newark in 1855.

VERNACULAR FORM.

B

2 The present state of Domestic Architecture

the ancient seats of industry and commerce, such as we see in Flanders and Germany ? Again, how do we like the look of the cottages of our poor, as compared with the old cottages we often find of the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries, such as those of the villages of Gloucestershire, Northamptonshire, and Somerset? On the whole, is the good taste and good feeling these different domestic works display snch as makes ns feel a secret pride in the place and period in which our lot has been cast ?

If so, I can only say that our taste is even worse than I suppose it to be. No ; though taste is, with the community at large, undoubtedly at discount, I cannot believe tnat there are many amongst us who, if they took the trouble to ask themselves such questions as the above, could screw np their consciences to give a favourable reply. The fact is that, from being all our lives surrounded (more or less) with ugliness, we take it as a thing of course, and hardly give it a thought.

Now let us look back for a moment to former periods, when civilization was far less advanced. Go back almost as far as you like, — go to the very infancy of modern civilization, — and as far back as any remains of domestic buildings have escaped the hand of time, we find them more systematically treated as to care for external appearance, than is usual among ourselves. From the twelfth century onwards, we have domestic remains which, in every instance, however simple they may be, display real architectural thought and care. Of the thirteenth century, many of the remains of houses, both in cities and in the country, though never richly ornamented, are really noble specimens of architecture. In the fourteenth in its Vernacular Form.

they become — though retaining a grand simplicity of treatment — magnificent ; while in the fifteenth and sixteenth the domestic architects strained every nerve to render their cities noble and picturesque, and their country-houses beautiful additions to the scenery which surrounded them.

Even the barns of these times are often finer objects, and more architectural buildings, than our houses. Their warehouses, as we see at Nuremberg, though severely plain as suited their uses, were noble and dignified buildings; while their cloth-halls, markethouses, and town-halls, were often much finer, and more impressive, (though infinitely less costly,) than our palaces.

To the very close of the middle ages a noble sentiment pervaded every building. In some instances, particularly abroad, a taste for the fantastic had somewhat injured the domestic, as it had the ecclesiastical, architecture, especially in cases where funds were superabundant ; but in general we find a grand simplicity of character, a generous and natural treatment — adapting every feature thoroughly and fearlessly to its uses, — and an abstinence from over-strained effort beyond what the occasion demanded, accompanied by an instinctive power of giving beauty to every form which utility might suggest, lasting up to the very period of the renaissance of the long-exploded architecture of the ancient world.

As instances of this, see the older portions of Hampton- court, or of Eton College, the ruins of Wingfield Manor-house, and the remains of numberless domestic buildings of the fifteenth and the commencement of the sixteenth centuries.

The first effect of the revival of Eoman detail was

b 2

4 The present state of Domestic Architecture

to foster a feeling for extravagant and fantastic forms of ornament. The high gables of the Gothic honse or hall became broken into all kinds of fanciful forms, and every feature of the old style was remodelled into some new shape, though the general feeling was in a great measure retained. The architecture, consequently, of the latter half of the sixteenth and the beginning of the seventeenth century, while retaining much of the noble feeling of the previous age, had lost its purity and simplicity ; still, however, one can never see the domestic works of those days without admiration, and still we see the great pervading principle that no building can be so homely in its uses as not to be deserving of careful thought in its design.

It seems to be generally imagined that the merits of the Elizabethan style are most displayed in its grand baronial mansions, such as Burleigh or Hatfield. I think quite the contrary. A style is best tested by reducing it to its humblest conditions ; and the great glory of this style is, not that it produced gorgeous and costly mansions for the nobles, — for here its weakness is shewn in the fantastic forms it often assumed, — but that it produced beautifully simple, yet perfectly architectural, cottages for the poor ; appropriate and comfortable farm-houses ; and pleasantlooking residences for the smaller country gentlemen, and for the inhabitants of country towns and villages. In these the faults of the style rarely shew themselves ; the parts are always simple and natural, the leading forms the same as at the best periods, and the " classic" admixture is not obtrusive, being only seen in the profiles of the few simple mouldings.

In this style, as in all preceding it, the great principle holds good, that no mean or contemptible in it a Vernacular For in.

architecture exists: from the palace to the cottage, every building was treated with care to its appearance; and an object painful to the eye was held to be just as inexcusable as an offence against any of the other senses, — and none the less so on account of ' the homeliness of its uses ; nor was the modern principle up to this time thought of, that, provided your house administers to your own comforts within, no matter how much it offends your neighbour's eye without.

The departure from these principles commences, in England, with the period of the great rebellion, though this event only affected it indirectly. The real cause of the change was the more perfect introduction of pure Palladian classicism, which came about from various causes at this period, and was fostered by the long sojourn of our nobles on the Continent, and the general breaking up of our national traditions. The change, however, was by no means complete. Our ecclesiastics, at the Eestoration, in many cases attempted to perpetuate the old style of building, and in the rural districts the retention of the old forms was very general throughout the seventeenth, and even to the end of the eighteenth, centuries ; so much so, that in some of the more secluded villages of Northamptonshire, Oxfordshire, and, probably, some other counties, cottages continued to be built, up to the beginning of the present century, in a manner which one would almost call " Elizabethan," and the framing of timber buildings, such as barns, &c, continued much the same (though in a ruder form) as in the middle ages, — and even now an unsophisticated village carpenter or mason, if simply following his own uncorrupted instinct, often reverts, unconsciously, to the old way of doing things.

f> The present state of Domestic Architecture

The great war from 1793 to 1815 has been the deluge which has, for the most part, swept away all true feeling for characteristic domestic architecture. Up to that time, whatever the style, whether exotic or traditional, we find some remaining traces of regard to appearance, some lingering sense of beauty, even in the simplest structures ; but from that time this has (as a general rule) ceased to be the case : the house-builder, left to himself, ceased even to think of the appearance of its structure, unless its importance were such as to compel him to pay it some little regard ; and from that time to the present our country has become disfigured by masses of brick and mortar such as the most barbarous age or nation would reject with disgust.

Within the last few years, architects, and the more educated classes of the public, have become conscious of this miserable degradation — this unfathomable bathos of the public taste, and many praiseworthy attempts have been made to remedy it. I do not at the present moment speak of these attempts, but rather of the vernacular house-building of the million ; for, as stated above, the real merits of a style are best tested by viewing it when reduced to its simplest conditions.

Look at the vernacular cottage-building of the day, — not the ornate specimens which are seen near the park-gates of our nobility, nor those admirable attempts which are now happily becoming frequent, to raise the habitation of the labourer both in comfort and character, — but the spontaneous productions of our builders, where no external influence is brought to bear upon them. Can anything be more execrable ? Can anything be more utterly at variance with what in its Vernacular Form.

one would think should be the character of a country village, or more deadening to all the natural feelings of the labourer for his home ?

Look, again, at the rows of miserable houses in the suburbs of our country towns, and at the wretched creations of speculating builders in the neighbourhood of London : are they not vile beyond description ? Look at the houses which grow up like mushrooms round the Crystal Palace, and which appear wherever a needy landowner begins to let out his ground on building leases : are they not perfect plaguespots on the landscape, instead of heightening its beauties, as they ought to do ? And yet these display the vernacular style of house-building more truthfully than the forced productions of persons of more ambitious notions, and are, for the most part, much the same things denuded of a few ornaments, by which their natural ugliness is in a measure disguised.

The builder's style of our day is, in fact, after making a certain abatement for want of skill, a truthful exposition of what is too generally the architect's style ; in the same manner as a Nuremberg warehouse of the fifteenth century shewed the style of the mansion or the Hotel de Yille reduced to its simplest elements, and proved its innate nobility ; as the tithe-barn of the fourteenth century proved that the architecture of the day was noble even in its simplest forms ; and as the cottages of a Northamptonshire village shew the architecture of Burleigh, of Kirby, or of Bushton, reduced to its elementary forms, and in doing so enhance, instead of diminishing, our opinion of its merits ; so do the erections of our speculating house- builders hold a truthful mirror to the majority of our house-architects, and shew them, without flat-

8 The present state of Domestic Architecture

tery or detraction, what their architecture is in its native and normal conditions ; but instead of proving it noble, they exhibit it in its genuine meanness and deformity. In the same manner as the architecture of former ages has been proved noble by the natural beauty of its most normal and spontaneous productions, so does that of our day stand before us selfcondemned, when tested by the same ordeal. The one was proved to be alike suited to the most exalted and the humblest uses, the latter only tolerable in its forced and laboured efforts, but sinking into despicable meanness when reduced to its simpler elements \

I need hardly say that we want a style which will stand this test, — which will be pleasing in its most normal forms, yet be susceptible of every gradation of beauty, till it reach the noblest and most exalted objects to which art can aspire.

If we can devise such a style for ourselves, by all means let us do so ; but if not, let us endeavour to develope it out of that of some former period which we find to have met these conditions : and happily we find such a nucleus to work upon in the native archib It may, perhaps, be objected to this, that our builders fail still more signally when they attempt a Gothic house, and that our old styles are, in their hands, even more execrable than their own. I would reply that, if three centuries of labour at revived c'assicism has failed in rendering the vernacular buildings tolerable, it is hardly to be expected that those who make such a hash of what they have had such long schooling in, should succeed better in a style they have never before tried. While our indigenous styles prevailed, they imparted to the humblest mechanic an instinctive sense of beauty and of propriety of form ; the exotic style, on the contrary, has utterly destro)red all such instinct, and, whatever intrinsic beauties it may possess, produces, in the hands of the unlearned, nothing but deformity.

in Us Vernacular Form.

tecture of our own country, — the production of our own forefathers ; men bearing our own names ; whose lands still often remain in the same families; whose armorial bearings we are still proud to hold ; to whom we owe our liberties, our constitution, and our national customs ; and who, though living in simpler times, were the fathers of our modern civilization.

This style of architecture, whose traditions have, in our rural districts, only vanished within the memory of man, has the strongest possible claims upon our affection. It is the absence of anything to excite interest and to enlist the feelings of the heart, which has been the great cause of the present degradation of our vernacular architecture ; and it is a happy circumstance, that the style which on its own intrinsic merits recommends itself as the ground- work of the future, is that which above all others is calculated to enlist our love and sympathy, from its association with the past.

Chapter II

THE REVIVAL OF POINTED ARCHITECTURE VIEWED IN ITS BEARING UPON DOMESTIC BUILDINGS.

TT is now about fifteen years a since we took in hand in good earnest the great cause of the revival of our own national architecture. About an equal time had previously elapsed during which slight \ faint , irresolute attempts had been made, but without shewing any strong or decided feeling for the greatness or the nobleness of the work. Let it not be believed that this great work has been the result of fashion \ It has, on the contrary, arisen from one of those revolutions in the human mind which from time to time occur, as if from some overruling guidance, and affect at once and simultaneously the minds of persons having no communication with each other, nor perhaps any previous knowledge of the subject in question, but who, from some unknown cause, are unconsciously

a It is two years since this was written.

h Nothing seems so mnch to gratify our opponents as to hear our great movement styled a "fashion," — as if they were doing honour to the noblest of arts by degrading it to the level of the trades of the tailor and the mantua-maker ! Let them know that what they are pleased to style a " fashion," has been the result of the most powerful and enthusiastic feelings ; that our work has originated in intense love for what we are engaged upon ; that our labour has been to overthrow the fashions (if such they must needs be called) in which we were educated ; and that if ours is a fashion, it is not one we have followed, but one which we have had the honour of ourselves establishing.

The Revival of Pointed Architecture, §c. 11

all drawn individually and separately into the same line of thought and to the same mental cravings, which only wait for an external impulse to awaken them into actual energy.

We are taunted by our opponents as mere followers of a fashion, mere panderers to the caprices of public taste. For myself, I can assert that I commenced to sketch with delight from Gothic buildings before I knew one style of architecture from another, or hardly knew that there was such a profession as that to which I now belong ; that, after joining that profession as a pupil, I followed up my old bias at a time when there was nothing to encourage it, devoting to it every holiday I could get and every spare hour I could obtain, without a thought of ever having an opportunity of turning it to practical account; and I am convinced that the same has been very much the case with all who have zealously followed what has since become so energetic a movement as to go far towards revolutionizing the popular taste in architecture. That movement, then, is not a mere fashion -it is no popular caprice; it is a deep-seated, earnest, and energetic revolution in the human mind, and one which is not peculiar to our own country or our OAvn Church, but which, in a greater or less degree, pervades all the countries where Gothic architecture once flourished0. It is a craving after the resumption of our national architecture, the only genuine exponent of the civilization of the modern as distinguished from the ancient world, of the Northern as distinguished from the c Even in Italy a strong feeling for pointed architecture has arisen, and in one, at least, of her schools of art it excites greater enthusiasm than the works of the so-called " revival."

Southern races, and, in some degree, of Christian as distinguished from Pagan art.

How far has our movement been successful ?

To this question almost every town and village supplies an answer. We everywhere see that ancient churches are more respected, and in innumerable instances restored to a state of seemly reparation. But the great fact is this ; that whereas forty years ago no one dreamed, if a new church were to be built, of attempting to assimilate it in style to those bequeathed to us by our forefathers, the reverse is now the case : no one ever now entertains the idea of building one in any style but those of our old churches. This (let alone the question of whether we do it well or ill) is a great fact, a great and signal revolution.

It is true that many of our so-called restorations would have been far better left undone ; that both in repairing and building we have done much which we would gladly undo : true, that our new churches are often very far from carrying out the spirit of the style we aim at; still the aim is a great point gained. The change of style (so far as concerns our churches) is practically acknowledged, and is often carried out in a way which emulates, without servilely copying, our ancient churches, and which, taking up their spirit, accommodates it to the altered requirements of the present day.

So far we may safely chronicle our success, — that we have thoroughly revolutionized our ecclesiastical architecture, and have brought it back to our true national type d.

d Let it not be imagined that I mean by this that the ecclesiastical branch of our work is anything like complete. On the con-

There remains, however, a great work before us, — - our civil architecture is as yet unrevolutionized. We cannot, however, say that we are, in civil and domestic architecture, in precisely the same position in which we were as concerns church architecture fifteen years ago, for we have been all this time laying in stores of knowledge on the subject. We have put out our feelers. We have made many feeble and irresolute essays, not to mention many miserable failures. We have made our reconnaissances, but the real brunt of the attack is still to come. Let us gird on our harness for this new contest. It may seem at first sight hopeless, but let us look back at what we have already achieved, and our courage need not fail us.

The first thing in preparing for more energetic exertion is to form a just estimate of our present position.

As I said before, our course hitherto has been purely experimental; we have been foraging in detached parties, in different directions, and with varied success; but we have not been wasting our time. We have learned by our failures where our weak points lie; we have by thought and experiment learned to appreciate our difficulties, and have found out what are the tough points to be mastered; we have by a series of feints learned from our opponents what is to be their line of defence ; we know their arguments, and how to meet them ; we know their weak points, and how to assail them ; we have also laid in a great store of facts, and have deeply thought over the best

trary, I think that one great effort is still before us ; we have still to make our style thoroughly our own, and, divesting ourselves of the shackles, though not of the aid, of precedent, to strike out boldly and fearlessly for ourselves.

The Revived of Pointed Architecture ways of using them; so that, on the whole, we are now in an excellent position for systematic and successful action.

One of the most necessary steps to ensure success is to investigate carefully the causes of the partial failures of our own experimental endeavours, as well as of the more glaring errors of earlier attempts.

These may, I think, be classed under the following heads : —

1st. The tendency to masquerading, or dressing up our buildings in characters which do not belong to them.

2ndly. The want of unity of purpose as to the style to be taken as our leading type.

3rdly. Our want of boldness in fearlessly adapting the style chosen to the requirements, the appliances, and the feelings of the present day; and importing into it every hint which we may gather from other styles, and every aid to be obtained from modern inventions, so as to render it, not an antiquarian matter, but strictly our own.

4thly. The absurd and growing error of considering ecclesiastical and secular architecture as so distinct, that the same person cannot practise both.