<p><span class="scs">XVIII</span>. Now it is indeed true that where nature loses one
kind of beauty, as you approach it, she substitutes another;
this is worthy of her infinite power: and, as we shall see, art
can sometimes follow her even in doing this; but all I insist
upon at present is, that the several effects of nature are each
worked with means referred to a particular distance, and producing
<span class="pagenum"><SPAN name="page247"></SPAN>247</span>
their effect at that distance only. Take a singular and
marked instance: When the sun rises behind a ridge of pines,
and those pines are seen from a distance of a mile or two,
against his light, the whole form of the tree, trunk, branches,
and all, becomes one frostwork of intensely brilliant silver,
which is relieved against the clear sky like a burning fringe,
for some distance on either side of the sun.<SPAN name="FnAnchor_71" href="#Footnote_71"><span class="sp">71</span></SPAN> Now suppose
that a person who had never seen pines were, for the first time
in his life, to see them under this strange aspect, and, reasoning
as to the means by which such effect could be produced,
laboriously to approach the eastern ridge, how would he be
amazed to find that the fiery spectres had been produced by
trees with swarthy and grey trunks, and dark green leaves!
We, in our simplicity, if we had been required to produce such
an appearance, should have built up trees of chased silver, with
trunks of glass, and then been grievously amazed to find that,
at two miles off, neither silver nor glass were any more visible;
but nature knew better, and prepared for her fairy work with
the strong branches and dark leaves, in her own mysterious
way.</p>
<p><span class="scs correction" title="corrected from XIV">XIX</span>. Now this is exactly what you have to do with your
good ornament. It may be that it is capable of being approached,
as well as likely to be seen far away, and then it
ought to have microscopic qualities, as the pine leaves have,
which will bear approach. But your calculation of its purpose
is for a glory to be produced at a given distance; it may
be here, or may be there, but it is a <i>given</i> distance; and the
excellence of the ornament depends upon its fitting that distance,
<span class="pagenum"><SPAN name="page248"></SPAN>248</span>
and being seen better there than anywhere else, and
having a particular function and form which it can only discharge
and assume there. You are never to say that ornament
has great merit because “you cannot see the beauty of it
here;” but, it has great merit because “you <i>can</i> see its beauty
<i>here only</i>.” And to give it this merit is just about as difficult
a task as I could well set you. I have above noted the two
ways in which it is done: the one, being merely rough cutting,
may be passed over; the other, which is scientific alteration of
design, falls, itself, into two great branches, Simplification and
Emphasis.</p>
<p>A word or two is necessary on each of these heads.</p>
<p><span class="scs">XX</span>. When an ornamental work is intended to be seen
near, if its composition be indeed fine, the subdued and delicate
portions of the design lead to, and unite, the energetic
parts, and those energetic parts form with the rest a whole, in
which their own immediate relations to each other are not perceived.
Remove this design to a distance, and the connecting
delicacies vanish, the energies alone remain, now either disconnected
altogether, or assuming with each other new relations,
which, not having been intended by the designer, will probably
be painful. There is a like, and a more palpable, effect, in the
retirement of a band of music in which the instruments are of
very unequal powers; the fluting and fifeing expire, the drumming
remains, and that in a painful arrangement, as demanding
something which is unheard. In like manner, as the
designer at arm’s length removes or elevates his work, fine
gradations, and roundings, and incidents, vanish, and a totally
unexpected arrangement is established between the remainder
of the markings, certainly confused, and in all probability
painful.</p>
<p><span class="scs">XXI</span>. The art of architectural design is therefore, first, the
preparation for this beforehand, the rejection of all the delicate
passages as worse than useless, and the fixing the thought upon
the arrangement of the features which will remain visible far
away. Nor does this always imply a diminution of resource;
for, while it may be assumed as a law that fine modulation of
<span class="pagenum"><SPAN name="page249"></SPAN>249</span>
surface in light becomes quickly invisible as the object retires,
there are a softness and mystery given to the harder markings,
which enable them to be safely used as media of expression.
There is an exquisite example of this use, in the head of the
Adam of the Ducal Palace. It is only at the height of 17 or
18 feet above the eye; nevertheless, the sculptor felt it was no
use to trouble himself about drawing the corners of the mouth,
or the lines of the lips, delicately, at that distance; his object
has been to mark them clearly, and to prevent accidental
shadows from concealing them, or altering their expression.
The lips are cut thin and sharp, so that their line cannot be
mistaken, and a good deep drill-hole struck into the angle of
the mouth; the eye is anxious and questioning, and one is surprised,
from below, to perceive a kind of darkness in the iris
of it, neither like color, nor like a circular furrow. The expedient
can only be discovered by ascending to the level of the
head; it is one which would have been quite inadmissible
except in distant work, six drill-holes cut into the iris, round a
central one for the pupil.</p>
<p><span class="scs">XXII</span>. By just calculation, like this, of the means at our
disposal, by beautiful arrangement of the prominent features,
and by choice of different subjects for different places, choosing
the broadest forms for the farthest distance, it is possible
to give the impression, not only of perfection, but of an
exquisite delicacy, to the most distant ornament. And this is
the true sign of the right having been done, and the utmost
possible power attained:—The spectator should be satisfied to
stay in his place, feeling the decoration, wherever it may be,
equally rich, full, and lovely: not desiring to climb the steeples
in order to examine it, but sure that he has it all, where he is.
Perhaps the capitals of the cathedral of Genoa are the best
instances of absolute perfection in this kind: seen from below,
they appear as rich as the frosted silver of the Strada degli
Orefici; and the nearer you approach them, the less delicate
they seem.</p>
<p><span class="scs">XXIII</span>. This is, however, not the only mode, though the
best, in which ornament is adapted for distance. The other
<span class="pagenum"><SPAN name="page250"></SPAN>250</span>
is emphasis,—the unnatural insisting upon explanatory lines,
where the subject would otherwise become unintelligible. It
is to be remembered that, by a deep and narrow incision, an
architect has the power, at least in sunshine, of drawing a
black line on stone, just as vigorously as it can be drawn with
chalk on grey paper; and that he may thus, wherever and in
the degree that he chooses, substitute <i>chalk sketching</i> for
sculpture. They are curiously mingled by the Romans. The
bas-reliefs of the Arc d’Orange are small, and would be confused,
though in bold relief, if they depended for intelligibility
on the relief only; but each figure is outlined by a strong
<i>incision</i> at its edge into the background, and all the ornaments
on the armor are simply drawn with incised lines, and not cut
out at all. A similar use of lines is made by the Gothic nations
in all their early sculpture, and with delicious effect. Now, to
draw a mere pattern—as, for instance, the bearings of a shield—with
these simple incisions, would, I suppose, occupy an able
sculptor twenty minutes or half an hour; and the pattern is
then clearly seen, under all circumstances of light and shade;
there can be no mistake about it, and no missing it. To carve
out the bearings in due and finished relief would occupy a long
summer’s day, and the results would be feeble and indecipherable
in the best lights, and in some lights totally and hopelessly
invisible, ignored, non-existant. Now the Renaissance architects,
and our modern ones, despise the simple expedient of
the rough Roman or barbarian. They do not care to be understood.
They care only to speak finely, and be thought great
orators, if one could only hear them. So I leave you to choose
between the old men, who took minutes to tell things plainly,
and the modern men, who take days to tell them unintelligibly.</p>
<p><span class="scs">XXIV</span>. All expedients of this kind, both of simplification
and energy, for the expression of details at a distance where
their actual forms would have been invisible, but more especially
this linear method, I shall call Proutism; for the greatest
master of the art in modern times has been Samuel Prout.
He actually takes up buildings of the later times in which the
<span class="pagenum"><SPAN name="page251"></SPAN>251</span>
ornament has been too refined for its place, and translates it
into the energised linear ornament of earlier art: and to this
power of taking the life and essence of decoration, and putting
it into a perfectly intelligible form, when its own fulness would
have been confused, is owing the especial power of his drawings.
Nothing can be more closely analogous than the method
with which an old Lombard uses his chisel, and that with
which Prout uses the reed-pen; and we shall see presently
farther correspondence in their feeling about the enrichment
of luminous surfaces.</p>
<p><span class="scs">XXV</span>. Now, all that has been hitherto said refers to ornament
whose distance is fixed, or nearly so; as when it is at
any considerable height from the ground, supposing the spectator
to desire to see it, and to get as near it as he can. But
the distance of ornament is never fixed to the <i>general</i> spectator.
The tower of a cathedral is bound to look well, ten miles
off, or five miles, or half a mile, or within fifty yards. The
ornaments of its top have fixed distances, compared with those
of its base; but quite unfixed distances in their relation to the
great world: and the ornaments of the base have no fixed distance
at all. They are bound to look well from the other side
of the cathedral close, and to look equally well, or better, as we
enter the cathedral door. How are we to manage this?</p>
<p><span class="scs">XXVI</span>. As nature manages it. I said above, <span class="scs">XVII</span>., that
for every distance from the eye there was a different system
of form in all natural objects: this is to be so then in architecture.
The lesser ornament is to be grafted on the greater,
and third or fourth orders of ornaments upon this again, as
need may be, until we reach the limits of possible sight; each
order of ornament being adapted for a different distance: first,
for example, the great masses,—the buttresses and stories and
black windows and broad cornices of the tower, which give it
make, and organism, as it rises over the horizon, half a score of
miles away: then the traceries and shafts and pinnacles, which
give it richness as we approach: then the niches and statues
and knobs and flowers, which we can only see when we stand
beneath it. At this third order of ornament, we may pause,
<span class="pagenum"><SPAN name="page252"></SPAN>252</span>
in the upper portions; but on the roofs of the niches, and the
robes of the statues, and the rolls of the mouldings, comes a
fourth order of ornament, as delicate as the eye can follow,
when any of these features may be approached.</p>
<p><span class="scs">XXVII</span>. All good ornamentation is thus arborescent, as it
were, one class of it branching out of another and sustained by
it; and its nobility consists in this, that whatever order or class
of it we may be contemplating, we shall find it subordinated to
a greater, simpler, and more powerful; and if we then contemplate
the greater order, we shall find it again subordinated to a
greater still; until the greatest can only be quite grasped by
retiring to the limits of distance commanding it.</p>
<p>And if this subordination be not complete, the ornament is
bad: if the figurings and chasings and borderings of a dress
be not subordinated to the folds of it,—if the folds are not subordinate
to the action and mass of the figure,—if this action
and mass not to the divisions of the recesses and shafts among
which it stands,—if these not to the shadows of the great arches
and buttresses of the whole building, in each case there is error;
much more if all be contending with each other and striving
for attention at the same time.</p>
<p><span class="scs">XXVIII</span>. It is nevertheless evident, that, however perfect
this distribution, there cannot be orders adapted to <i>every</i> distance
of the spectator. Between the ranks of ornament there
must always be a bold separation; and there must be many
intermediate distances, where we are too far off to see the
lesser rank clearly, and yet too near to grasp the next higher
rank wholly: and at all these distances the spectator will feel
himself ill-placed, and will desire to go nearer or farther away.
This must be the case in all noble work, natural or artificial. It
is exactly the same with respect to Rouen cathedral or the Mont
Blanc. We like to see them from the other side of the Seine,
or of the lake of Geneva; from the Marchaux Fleurs, or the
Valley of Chamouni; from the parapets of the apse, or the
crags of the Montagne de la C�te: but there are intermediate
distances which dissatisfy us in either case, and from which one
is in haste either to advance or to retire.</p>
<p><span class="pagenum"><SPAN name="page253"></SPAN>253</span></p>
<p><span class="scs">XXIX</span>. Directly opposed to this ordered, disciplined, well
officered and variously ranked ornament, this type of divine,
and therefore of all good human government, is the democratic
ornament, in which all is equally influential, and has equal
office and authority; that is to say, none of it any office nor
authority, but a life of continual struggle for independence and
notoriety, or of gambling for chance regards. The English
perpendicular work is by far the worst of this kind that I know;
its main idea, or decimal fraction of an idea, being to cover
its walls with dull, successive, eternity of reticulation, to fill
with equal foils the equal interstices between the equal bars,
and charge the interminable blanks with statues and rosettes,
invisible at a distance, and uninteresting near.</p>
<p>The early Lombardic, Veronese, and Norman work is the
exact reverse of this; being divided first into large masses, and
these masses covered with minute chasing and surface work,
which fill them with interest, and yet do not disturb nor divide
their greatness. The lights are kept broad and bright, and yet
are found on near approach to be charged with intricate design.
This, again, is a part of the great system of treatment which I
shall hereafter call “Proutism;” much of what is thought mannerism
and imperfection in Prout’s work, being the result of
his determined resolution that minor details shall never break
up his large masses of light.</p>
<p><span class="scs">XXX</span>. Such are the main principles to be observed in the
adaptation of ornament to the sight. We have lastly to inquire
by what method, and in what quantities, the ornament, thus
adapted to mental contemplation, and prepared for its physical
position, may most wisely be arranged. I think the method
ought first to be considered, and the quantity last; for the advisable
quantity depends upon the method.</p>
<p><span class="scs">XXXI</span>. It was said above, that the proper treatment or
arrangement of ornament was that which expressed the laws
and ways of Deity. Now, the subordination of visible orders
to each other, just noted, is one expression of these. But there
may also—must also—be a subordination and obedience of the
parts of each order to some visible law, out of itself, but having
<span class="pagenum"><SPAN name="page254"></SPAN>254</span>
reference to itself only (not to any upper order): some law
which shall not oppress, but guide, limit, and sustain.</p>
<p>In the tenth chapter of the second volume of “Modern
Painters,” the reader will find that I traced one part of the
beauty of God’s creation to the expression of a <i>self</i>-restrained
liberty: that is to say, the image of that perfection of <i>divine</i>
action, which, though free to work in arbitrary methods, works
always in consistent methods, called by us Laws.</p>
<p>Now, correspondingly, we find that when these natural
objects are to become subjects of the art of man, their perfect
treatment is an image of the perfection of <i>human</i> action: a
voluntary submission to divine law.</p>
<p>It was suggested to me but lately by the friend to whose
originality of thought I have before expressed my obligations,
Mr. Newton, that the Greek pediment, with its enclosed sculptures,
represented to the Greek mind the law of Fate, confining
human action within limits not to be overpassed. I do not
believe the Greeks ever distinctly thought of this; but the
instinct of all the human race, since the world began, agrees in
some expression of such limitation as one of the first necessities
of good ornament.<SPAN name="FnAnchor_72" href="#Footnote_72"><span class="sp">72</span></SPAN> And this expression is heightened,
rather than diminished, when some portion of the design
slightly breaks the law to which the rest is subjected; it is
like expressing the use of miracles in the divine government;
or, perhaps, in slighter degrees, the relaxing of a law, generally
imperative, in compliance with some more imperative need—the
hungering of David. How eagerly this special infringement
of a general law was sometimes sought by the medi�val
workmen, I shall be frequently able to point out to the reader;
but I remember just now a most curious instance, in an archivolt
of a house in the Corte del Remer close to the Rialto at
Venice. It is composed of a wreath of flower-work—a constant
Byzantine design—with an animal in each coil; the
<span class="pagenum"><SPAN name="page255"></SPAN>255</span>
whole enclosed between two fillets. Each animal, leaping or
eating, scratching or biting, is kept nevertheless strictly within
its coil, and between the fillets. Not the shake of an ear, not
the tip of a tail, overpasses this appointed line, through a series
of some five-and-twenty or thirty animals; until, on a sudden,
and by mutual consent, two little beasts (not looking, for the
rest, more rampant than the others), one on each side, lay their
small paws across the enclosing fillet at exactly the same point
of its course, and thus break the continuity of its line. Two
ears of corn, or leaves, do the same thing in the mouldings
round the northern door of the Baptistery at Florence.</p>
<p><span class="scs">XXXII</span>. Observe, however, and this is of the utmost possible
importance, that the value of this type does not consist in the
mere shutting of the ornament into a certain space, but in the
acknowledgment <i>by</i> the ornament of the fitness of the limitation—of
its own perfect willingness to submit to it; nay, of a
predisposition in itself to fall into the ordained form, without
any direct expression of the command to do so; an anticipation
of the authority, and an instant and willing submission to
it, in every fibre and spray: not merely <i>willing</i>, but <i>happy</i>
submission, as being pleased rather than vexed to have so
beautiful a law suggested to it, and one which to follow is so
justly in accordance with its own nature. You must not cut
out a branch of hawthorn as it grows, and rule a triangle round
it, and suppose that it is then submitted to law. Not a bit of
it. It is only put in a cage, and will look as if it must get out,
for its life, or wither in the confinement. But the spirit of
triangle must be put into the hawthorn. It must suck in
isoscelesism with its sap. Thorn and blossom, leaf and spray,
must grow with an awful sense of triangular necessity upon
them, for the guidance of which they are to be thankful, and
to grow all the stronger and more gloriously. And though
there may be a transgression here and there, and an adaptation
to some other need, or a reaching forth to some other end
greater even than the triangle, yet this liberty is to be always
accepted under a solemn sense of special permission; and
when the full form is reached and the entire submission
<span class="pagenum"><SPAN name="page256"></SPAN>256</span>
expressed, and every blossom has a thrilling sense of its responsibility
down into its tiniest stamen, you may take your
terminal line away if you will. No need for it any more.
The commandment is written on the heart of the thing.</p>
<p><span class="scs">XXXIII</span>. Then, besides this obedience to external law, there
is the obedience to internal headship, which constitutes the
unity of ornament, of which I think enough has been said for
my present purpose in the chapter on Unity in the second
vol. of “Modern Painters.” But I hardly know whether to
arrange as an expression of a divine law, or a representation
of a physical fact, the alternation of shade with light which,
in equal succession, forms one of the chief elements of <i>continuous</i>
ornament, and in some peculiar ones, such as dentils and
billet mouldings, is the source of their only charm. The opposition
of good and evil, the antagonism of the entire human
system (so ably worked out by Lord Lindsay), the alternation
of labor with rest, the mingling of life with death, or the
actual physical fact of the division of light from darkness, and
of the falling and rising of night and day, are all typified or
represented by these chains of shade and light of which the
eye never wearies, though their true meaning may never occur
to the thoughts.</p>
<p><span class="scs">XXXIV</span>. The next question respecting the arrangement of
ornament is one closely connected also with its quantity. The
system of creation is one in which “God’s creatures leap not,
but express a feast, where all the guests sit close, and nothing
wants.” It is also a feast, where there is nothing redundant.
So, then, in distributing our ornament, there must never be
any sense of gap or blank, neither any sense of there being a
single member, or fragment of a member, which could be
spared. Whatever has nothing to do, whatever could go without
being missed, is not ornament; it is deformity and encumbrance.
Away with it. And, on the other hand, care
must be taken either to diffuse the ornament which we permit,
in due relation over the whole building, or so to concentrate it,
as never to leave a sense of its having got into knots, and
curdled upon some points, and left the rest of the building
<span class="pagenum"><SPAN name="page257"></SPAN>257</span>
whey. It is very difficult to give the rules, or analyse the
feelings, which should direct us in this matter: for some
shafts may be carved and others left unfinished, and that with
advantage; some windows may be jewelled like Aladdin’s,
and one left plain, and still with advantage; the door or doors,
or a single turret, or the whole western fa�ade of a church,
or the apse or transept, may be made special subjects of decoration,
and the rest left plain, and still sometimes with advantage.
But in all such cases there is either sign of that feeling
which I advocated in the First Chapter of the “Seven Lamps,”
the desire of rather doing some portion of the building as we
would have it, and leaving the rest plain, than doing the
whole imperfectly; or else there is choice made of some important
feature, to which, as more honorable than the rest,
the decoration is confined. The evil is when, without system,
and without preference of the nobler members, the ornament
alternates between sickly luxuriance and sudden blankness.
In many of our Scotch and English abbeys, especially Melrose,
this is painfully felt; but the worst instance I have ever seen
is the window in the side of the arch under the Wellington
statue, next St. George’s Hospital. In the first place, a window
has no business there at all; in the second, the bars of the
window are not the proper place for decoration, especially
<i>wavy</i> decoration, which one instantly fancies of cast iron; in
the third, the richness of the ornament is a mere patch and
eruption upon the wall, and one hardly knows whether to be
most irritated at the affectation of severity in the rest, or at the
vain luxuriance of the dissolute parallelogram.</p>
<p><span class="scs">XXXV</span>. Finally, as regards quantity of ornament I have
already said, again and again, you cannot have too much if it
be good; that is, if it be thoroughly united and harmonised by
the laws hitherto insisted upon. But you may easily have too
much if you have more than you have sense to manage. For
with every added order of ornament increases the difficulty of
discipline. It is exactly the same as in war: you cannot, as an
abstract law, have too many soldiers, but you may easily have
more than the country is able to sustain, or than your generalship
<span class="pagenum"><SPAN name="page258"></SPAN>258</span>
is competent to command. And every regiment which
you cannot manage will, on the day of battle, be in your way,
and encumber the movements it is not in disposition to sustain.</p>
<p><span class="scs">XXXVI</span>. As an architect, therefore, you are modestly to
measure your capacity of governing ornament. Remember,
its essence,—its being ornament at all, consists in its being
governed. Lose your authority over it, let it command you,
or lead you, or dictate to you in any wise, and it is an offence,
an incumbrance, and a dishonor. And it is always ready to do
this; wild to get the bit in its teeth, and rush forth on its own
devices. Measure, therefore, your strength; and as long as
there is no chance of mutiny, add soldier to soldier, battalion
to battalion; but be assured that all are heartily in the cause,
and that there is not one of whose position you are ignorant,
or whose service you could spare.</p>
<hr class="foot" />
<div class="note">
<p><SPAN name="Footnote_70" href="#FnAnchor_70"><span class="fn">70</span></SPAN> Vide “Seven Lamps,” Chap. IV. 34.</p>
<p><SPAN name="Footnote_71" href="#FnAnchor_71"><span class="fn">71</span></SPAN> Shakspeare and Wordsworth (I think they only) have noticed this,
Shakspeare, in Richard II.:—</p>
<table class="reg" summary="poem"><tr><td>
<div class="poem">
<p class="ind05">“But when, from under this terrestrial ball,</p>
<p>He fires the proud tops of the eastern pines.”</p>
</div>
</td></tr></table>
<p>And Wordsworth, in one of his minor poems, on leaving Italy:</p>
<table class="reg" summary="poem"><tr><td>
<div class="poem">
<p class="ind05">“My thoughts become bright like yon edging of pines</p>
<p>On the steep’s lofty verge—how it blackened the air!</p>
<p>But, touched from behind by the sun, it now shines</p>
<p>With threads that seem part of his own silver hair.”</p>
</div>
</td></tr></table>
<p><SPAN name="Footnote_72" href="#FnAnchor_72"><span class="fn">72</span></SPAN> Some valuable remarks on this subject will be found in a notice of the
“Seven Lamps” in the British Quarterly for August, 1849. I think, however,
the writer attaches too great importance to one out of many ornamental
necessities.</p>
</div>
<hr class="art" />
<p><span class="pagenum"><SPAN name="page259"></SPAN>259</span></p>
<div style="break-after:column;"></div><br />