Digitized by the Internet Archive 
 in 2019 with funding from 
 Getty Research Institute 
 
 https://archive.org/details/attempttodefinepOOwyat 
 
I/O. 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 J'K < ’ '~) * 
 
 GLArlrOj cL^.^ tv • J < T^>: V cl 
 
 fyu'uAk .S. US l^',, r ^ y *'iU 
 
 eC^rvwVi- C^2lj^r.i fWwtfv^ Ci^\-<£o 
 
 CkwW- ✓v C^Cti ^ , t .V>«v 
 
 ^ 'Asc *j£ 
 
 ' v \ v\ &V. : v''^-tr Y" > fiwT 
 
 P^(^Vvv> K. * 
 
 ^ »-•£•-&*»- • r^,-, ’ 
 
 »«. «i. - 
 
 JUj2-t -■’-V’-JK.- AT/ V*. ' 0|- ' ; •'.-’ *iv- 1 . 
 
 ilvV-U, I'WiA^i i'J 
 
 K' f '‘7 ■ V'i l/u>» '' .4-^ 
 
 Z'* ^ ^ r . 
 
 • '• •. c !■ jkj 
 

394 
 
 THE BRITON, ROMAN, AND SAXON, 
 
 I trust 1 have been able to show that from the fragments 
 brought under review, huddled at present into any out-of- 
 the-way corner or dark receptacle (in which it strangely 
 seems Bath hopes to cause to be forgotten these remains of 
 her ancient grandeur), there is yet sufficient left to enable us 
 to make an almost perfect restoration of two of the archi¬ 
 tectural works of .Roman Britain, and not unworthy of the 
 consideration of the British Archaeological Association. 
 
LECTURE VII. 
 
 SECOND SEMES. 
 
 April 21 , 1852 . 
 
 AN ATTEMPT TO DEFINE THE PRINCIPLES WHICH SHOULD 
 DETERMINE FORM IN THE DECORATIVE ARTS, 
 
 BY 
 
 M. DIGBY WYATT, Esq. 
 
 It lias pleased the beneficent Designer of “ the world and all that 
 therein is,” not only to surround man with the ever-varying and inex¬ 
 haustible beauties of Nature, and to endow him with the gift of sight to 
 perceive her graces ; but he has been pleased also to confer upon him a 
 mind to understand, and a hand to imitate them. These gifts are clearly 
 talents committed to our charge, and to he accounted for by us. The 
 same Power 
 
 “ That gave us in this dark estate 
 To know the good from ill,” 
 
 conferred upon us also an unerring natural test to distinguish the beautiful 
 from the mean or ugly. That test is the sensation of delight which 
 invariably accompanies our recognition of beauty, moral or physical. 
 Whenever the powers of the mind are concentrated upon any of the great 
 external evidences of Omnipotence — upon “ the heavens above, or on the 
 earth beneath, or on the waters which arc under the earth ”—it is 
 impossible to refrain from pouring forth a tribute of silent but heartfelt 
 admiration ; and at such moments the Creator, as if to mark His appro¬ 
 bation of the sacrifice, lulls for a while all memory of earthly pain or care, 
 and pours peace and happiness into the soul. Thus it is that “ a thing of 
 beauty is a joy for ever.” It is impossible to examine the smallest object 
 upon which the skill of Divinity has been exercised—a shell, a flower, or 
 an insect — without feeling a longing to know somewhat of the mysterious 
 laws which make that individual specimen of design so perfect, and with¬ 
 out experiencing a desire to emulate the marvellous powers of creation. 
 The first sensation of the exercise of such powers we feel to be Godlike. 
 Thus it is man naturally attempts, in his feeble way, to emulate the 
 
 o o 
 
414 
 
 loftier faculties of Divinity; and thus “ ’tis to create, and in creating live 
 a being more intense, that we endow with form our fancy.” From such 
 exertions spring all that is ideal or poetical in every art. 
 
 Whenever we attempt to penetrate the wondrous system that makes 
 all nature one vast harmony, it is impossible to refrain from feeling that 
 “ God moves in a mysterious way His wonders to perform;” and that it is 
 as yet our portion only to see the full light of His majesty “ as through a 
 glass darkly.” Enough, however, is still apparent to teach us that there 
 are conditions of harmonious relation which pervade the most exquisite 
 forms in Divine creation ; and it is only while catching a faint reflexion 
 from their glories that we can hope to succeed, in the slightest degree, in 
 throwing a veil of beauty over our comparatively insignificant productions. 
 
 The first operation indispensable to any attempt to define the prin¬ 
 ciples which should determine form in decorative art, must obviously be 
 an investigation into those conditions of divine design in concord with 
 which all human attempts at its imitation must he moulded, before a 
 supreme sensation of delight can be produced. The occurrence of such a 
 sensation we have already pointed out as the constant and unerring test 
 of real beauty. 
 
 We propose, therefore, in the first place, to draw such general infer¬ 
 ences together, concerning the great scheme of design manifested in the 
 noblest works of Nature, as we have been enabled to collect, either from the 
 experiences of others, or our own study of the subject. 
 
 The second operation must evidently be, to trace the application of 
 these general inferences to the various material branches into which the 
 different necessities of man, or his sympathies, have divided all those 
 decorative arts which minister to his cravings for enjoyment on all occa¬ 
 sions. We purpose, therefore, in the second place, to take a rapid survey 
 of the principal members of that great family, and to point out some of 
 the innumerable enactments of Nature, specially affecting several of the 
 most important individual “ departments of practical art.” Never in the 
 whole history of the past has such a body of appropriate illustration of 
 this branch of our subject been collected as was brought together in the 
 vast extent of the ever memorable Palace of Industry, and it was impos¬ 
 sible to examine carefully the rich store of material enclosed with its 
 glassy walls, without gathering some few valuable hints. 
 
 In entering on the first division of our perhaps too ambitious attempt, 
 we are overcome with a sense of the infinite minuteness of our knowledge 
 of the great conditions of creation. We recognise an almost universal 
 beauty throughout the works of Nature by the exercise of some faculty, as 
 intuitive as memory, and not less inexplicable when we essay to predicate 
 concerning its ineffably mysterious constitution. It has been well ob¬ 
 served by some metaphysical writers, that in the developement of the 
 intellectual powers, the first effort is to realize, the second to enjoy, and 
 the third to reason. In obedience to this theory, the first and constant 
 effort of every child is to feel, to see, to use its senses, and to verify the 
 fact of its existence by ascertaining its physical relation to all by which it 
 is surrounded. Its second and occasional effort is to eat, to drink, to 
 smell, to show pain and pleasure, likes and dislikes, and to observe and 
 
415 
 
 treasure up such experiences as can affect its subsequent enjoyment. The 
 third effort is to exercise the gift of thought, and to form conclusions by 
 other processes than those of direct sensation. Now we, as respects our 
 knowledge of divine beauty, can be regarded only as very little children ; 
 and, if we would improve upon our condition of ignorance, instinct leads 
 us onwards through parallel states of progress. Let but the first effort of 
 one totally uneducated in Art be to see and to feel Nature, to look upon her 
 works with an observant eye, and he will almost instantly find himself led 
 on by unerring sensations of delight to the second stage of advancement. 
 In that stage he will enjoy, discriminate, select, store in his memory, and at 
 length endeavour either to reproduce, or cause to be reproduced, those natural 
 objects, contact with which has caused him the greatest amount of plea¬ 
 sure. Thus the first phase of all art is rude direct imitation. No sooner 
 does he arrive at the full developement of his secondary condition, than he 
 passes into the third. He begins to speculate upon the sensations he 
 experiences, upon the phenomena of their recurrence, and on the means 
 whereby he may be enabled by his own descriptions or imitations of the 
 original types, to convey to others the pleasure he himself derived from a 
 ’ contemplation of them—thus the ignorant may grow into the Connoisseur, 
 and thus the child into the Artist. 
 
 A knowledge of the sequence of these natural phases of transition 
 points out the course by which alone special education in decorative art 
 can be brought to a successful issue. Surround the pupil with every 
 attainable example of general beauty of form, if he is to be a general 
 artist or draughtsman ; make him acquainted with all the antecedent 
 productions in his specialty, if he is to be a special designer. Show him 
 only as much as possible of what is good, whether general or special; then 
 his sense of enjoyment will teach him selection, and he will store his 
 memory with the best. Practise his hand as you educate his senses, and 
 the feeling of power will soon come upon him. Reason will assert its 
 empire, and inquiry will be stimulated. Once roused, effort will succeed 
 effort, and thus in time the pupil will grow into the Master. As it is 
 impossible to arrive at correct theories in science, except by the analysis 
 of accumulated observations, firstly of things, secondly of properties, and 
 thirdly of relations, so it is impossible to assume any general conclusions 
 concerning Divine design without passing through the three stages of 
 realization, enjoyment, and reflection. 
 
 When we take into consideration, on the one hand, the shortness of life 
 and the limitation of the powers of man, and, on the other, the extent and 
 illimitable divisibility of matter and its incessant changes in form and 
 application, we cannot but feel conscious in how slight a degree the best 
 disposed and most talented student of Nature can have become acquainted 
 with her innumerable phenomena, a thorough knowledge and enjoyment 
 of which we have shown to be indispensable to any just general conclusions. 
 It is only by the transmission from generation to generation of accumu¬ 
 lating experiences and deductions, that the very few points we are about to 
 indicate have been assumed as universal recurrences in the external forms 
 in which Nature pours forth her bounteous gifts to man. 
 
 The first quality with which the observer must be struck is the infinite 
 variety of form which pervades creation. On attempting to reason con- 
 
416 
 
 corning it, he perceives its dependence upon the functions each object, 
 and the component parts of each object, are ordained to fulfil; hence he 
 will at once recognise the fact, that form is in every case, if not dependent 
 on, at least coincident with, structural fitness. When the most complex 
 flower is submitted to the test of a scientific botanical examination, no 
 particles are found to be adventitious—all are concerned in fulfilling the 
 appointed functions of vegetable physiology. As those functions vary with 
 the growth of the plant, so in every case does its form—changing from 
 tender bud to blooming flower, and from blooming flower to reproductive 
 seed-pod, as each successive change of purpose progresses. Infinite variety 
 and unerring fitness thus appear to govern all form in Nature. 
 
 While the former of these properties demonstrates her infinite power 
 of complexity, the latter restrains the former, and binds all in beautiful 
 simplicity. In every case ornament appears the offspring of necessity 
 alone, and wherever structural necessity permits the simplest lines in 
 every case consistent with the variety of uses of the object are adopted. 
 Thus, the principal forest trees, which spring erect and hardy from the 
 ground, in their normal state, uninfluenced by special conditions of light 
 or heat, shoot straight aloft, with boughs equally balanced on all sides, 
 growing so symmetrically, that a regular cone or oviform would, in most 
 cases, precisely define their outline; and thus the climbing plants, from 
 their first appearance, creep along the ground in weak and wayward lines, 
 until they reach something stronger and more erect than themselves ; to 
 this they cling, and from it hang either vertically or in the most graceful 
 festoons; to each its character of form as of purpose—to each the simplest 
 line consistent with its appointed function and propriety of expression. 
 From Nature’s delight in simplicity, man probably derived his earliest 
 perception of geometrical figures. The term horizontal at once betrays 
 the source from which our idea of such a line may have been derived. 
 Upon the horizon, as a base, endless perpendiculars are erected in every 
 plant that pierces the soil at right angles to its tangent. A plain in 
 Nature furnishes the idea of a plane in geometry. Every variety of 
 triangle is indicated by the outline of the snow-clatl peaks of the loftiest 
 mountains; every kind of cone by their substance. The thin clouds that 
 sweep along the sky at sunset, hanging over the distant blue line of the 
 ocean, form exquisite parallels, and where cut by the lines of trees and 
 plants suggest every variety of square and oblong, rhombus and paral¬ 
 lelogram. Where compactness is indispensable, the honey-yielding hexagons 
 abound, and in her endless variety of crystals Nature has furnished us 
 with models of the most exquisite solids. In the rainbow we have her 
 noblest arch; in the parabola at once one of her most graceful curves and 
 most elegant formulae of projection. 
 
 While a consideration of the quality of fitness binds us to simplicity, 
 that of variety, as if in counterbalance, conducts us to a just recognition 
 of the value of contrast throughout all the works of creation. Simplicity 
 becomes appreciable only when opposed to complexity; while complexity 
 itself will, on analysis, be found to consist only of the combination of 
 parts, individually of extreme simplicity. Mr. Owen Jones will, doubtless, 
 have much to tell us respecting the beautiful laws of the simultaneous 
 contrast of colour, so we may for the present content ourselves with 
 
417 
 
 noticing the parallel effects, produced in obedience to the laws of the “ si¬ 
 multaneous contrast of form.” The researches of Mr. Penrose have lately- 
 developed many of these most interesting phenomena ; and have not only 
 demonstrated the fact of the scientiiic acquaintance of the Greeks with 
 their peculiarities, hut have shown how essential an attempt to apply such 
 knowledge has been to the production of those exquisite monuments 
 which, from the first moment of their creation to the present time, have 
 maintained a position of unquestionable supremacy over every other work 
 which human art has yet produced. The general result of Mr. Penrose’s 
 investigations tends to the assumption, that no two lines can come in 
 contrast with one another, either in nature or in art, without the direction 
 of the one acting, either attractively or repulsively, upon the other, and 
 tending to diminish or exaggerate the mutual divergence of both lines, 
 i.e. to increase or lessen to the eye the angle at which they meet. Thus, 
 if to a perfectly horizontal line another he drawn, meeting it at an angle 
 of six degrees (about half the angle at which the inclined sides of the best 
 Greek pediments leave the surface of the cornice), it will be difficult to 
 convince the eye, as it traces the direction of each line, that the angle has 
 not been materially increased by an apparent deflection of the base line, 
 and an apparent very slight drawing down of that with which it actually 
 forms an angle of six degrees only. In order to remedy similar apparent 
 distortions in their monuments, the Greeks have given Entasis, or swelling 
 to their columns, inclination of the axes of their pillars towards a central 
 line, a tendency outwards to their antic, and exquisite convex curves to 
 the horizontal lines of their cornices and stylobates, which would otherwise 
 have appeared bent and crooked. 
 
 Nature, in working out her harmonies of contrast, abounds with similar 
 optical corrections. The infinitely gentle convexity of her water sky line 
 is precisely corrected into perfect apparent horizontality by contrast with 
 any line at right angles to a tangent to its curve. It is by attention to 
 the optical effects produced by the impact of lines upon one another in 
 nature, that the artist can alone store his mind with the most graceful 
 varieties of delicate contrast. Thus it is alone that he can appreciate 
 the extreme beauty of her constant, minute, and generally inappreciable 
 divergence from the precise mathematical figures, in approximation to 
 which simplicity demands, as we have already shown, that her leading 
 forms should be modelled. 
 
 We have now arrived at a recognition of the four principal elements 
 which invariably concur in producing those emotions of delight, which 
 may he regarded as infallible tests of our contact with real beauty in the 
 productions of Nature — Variety — Fitness — Simplicity—and Contrast. 
 
 Before leaving our consideration of these elements we cannot refrain 
 from drawing attention to that which is the crowning illustration of the 
 effects of their co-operation — the human body. That theme, upon the 
 reproduction of the external features of which the highest powers and the 
 profoundest study have been lavished by the greatest artists of all time. 
 
 In its structure, the anatomist, aided by microscopic examination, dis¬ 
 covers a variety, to which that of the Great Exhibition was monotony 
 itself—a fitness, to which the most exquisite machines therein contained 
 displayed no parallel — a simplicity of external form, which, without the 
 
418 
 
 slightest display of all that marvellous internal mechanism, confines the 
 whole in a space precisely adapted for the free working and protection of 
 every part, and yet covers all with a soft and undulating surface, the 
 curves of which are gentleness and simplicity itself. 
 
 Contrast between curve and curve, between one line of limb and 
 another, produces in motion incessant variety of expression, still in obe¬ 
 dience to the bounding conditions of simplicity. The swelling muscles, 
 increasing as the angles of approach are diminished by their action, 
 counteract otherwise apparent ungraceful concavities, and in that loveliest 
 of created things, the perfect female form, every quality of beauty is freely 
 and exquisitely balanced and united. 
 
 To recapitulate the sequence of these four great impressions, we may 
 state, that when the attention of the student of Nature is first concentrated 
 earnestly upon her works, his senses are bewildered by the variety of her 
 charms. His first discovery will probably be that of the perfect individual 
 fitness of some one object upon which he may fix for analysis ; he will 
 subsequently recognise fitness as universal. In perfect fitness he will 
 marvel at perfect simplicity; and as he becomes acquainted with normal 
 forms, isolated or at rest, he will learn to gather general impressions 
 when he witnesses their combination, or varying forms in contrasted 
 action. 
 
 As from this point his experiences increase, he will begin to appreciate 
 marvellous affinities; he will find certain conditions universally forming 
 the basis of propriety in all imitations of Nature. Thus he will recognise 
 that she lias a style of form and detail peculiar and appropriate to every 
 material in which she works, and that this style of form and detail is, in 
 every case, modified by the exact method in which her operations of 
 manufacture are conducted. Of this no more perfect illustration can be 
 given than the lines of fibrous reticulation which constitute the substance, 
 and at the same time form the ornament of every leaf that blows. In the 
 aggregate of every class he will trace general character, while the slightest 
 variety of structure will infallibly be testified by some change in external 
 outline. Gradually form will become with him an index to all leading 
 attributes — a clue by which he will at once recognise the relation of 
 bodies, or their properties, to one another. Thus, from form alone he 
 will soon discern at a glance of what materials, and how, any particular 
 object he may examine has been executed. This index or clue, be it 
 remarked, never misleads; the “lampof truth”never in Nature burns dimly, 
 nor with fallacious fires — never refuses to illuminate those who incline to 
 learn in a truthful and reverential spirit. One material in her produc¬ 
 tions never looks like another. Rocks have their rugged outlines—mine¬ 
 rals their appropriate crystals — metals their colours and glittering 
 aspects—timber its bark and cellular section—flowers their delicacy and 
 evident fragility—even transparent bodies their varying angles of refrac¬ 
 tion— water its glassy surface when at rest, and unmistakeable curves 
 when agitated. Never does a flower look like a piece of metal—never a 
 piece of timber like a rock. 
 
 As the student’s acquaintance with these consistencies in Nature in¬ 
 creases, his power of generalizing will become developed. He will learn 
 to separate constants from accidents, and to trace the distinctive lines 
 
419 
 
 which convey the idea of each general family of materials, or modes of 
 formation. He will begin to select, and to treasure up in his memory, 
 those symbols of expression with which Nature indicates the leading cha¬ 
 racteristics of every variety of object she produces. On the amount of the 
 artist's acquaintance with such conventionalities, or, in other words, with 
 the written language of Nature, will entirely depend his possible success 
 in producing by his labours sensations of delight at all equivalent to those 
 excited by the aspect of her noblest works. Direct imitation will do next 
 to nothing—fanciful and ignorant invention still less; it is alone by his 
 power of wielding her weapons of expression, and making in all cases the 
 form and the object strictly concordant, as she does, that the artist may 
 aspire to emulate the power of giving delight, which, above all others, 
 appears to be her paramount prerogative. Time will not permit our 
 dwelling further upon the general inferences deducible from a study of 
 the wonderful beauties of Nature. Enough may, however, have been 
 enunciated concerning the most palpable principles, to warrant our asser¬ 
 tion, that there exist conditions of harmonious relation which pervade the 
 most exquisite forms in divine creation. It will be our pleasing task now 
 to show how essential it is that we should catch a faint reflexion from 
 their glories, before we can hope to succeed in the slightest degree in 
 throwing a veil of beauty over our comparatively insignificant productions. 
 
 In entering on the second division of our subject, we shall endeavour 
 to trace the application of principles analogous to those on which we have 
 lately dwelt, in the first place, generally; and in the second, to the respec¬ 
 tive leading and special departments of practical art. 
 
 In the first place, then, it may be observed generally, that the endless 
 diversity of men's tastes, and the ever-changing conditions of their educa¬ 
 tion and association of ideas, demand for their productions a variety almost 
 as-incessant as that which pervades creation. Whenever that craving 
 after variety has been gratified, irrespective of fitness, novelty has dege¬ 
 nerated into frivolity, design into conceits, and style into mannerism and 
 vulgarity. Without a due attention to simplicity, fitness has never been 
 adequately carried out; attention has been diverted from a proper estimate 
 of every work of art, or object of manufacture, and false impressions 
 concerning its true and legitimate functions have been generated. Great 
 care is necessary in applying Nature’s principles of simplicity to human 
 productions, since many have erred by regarding simplicity as identified 
 with plainness, or a hare and frigid style. The true office of simplicity is 
 to limit form and ornament to a correct expression of whatever may be 
 the predominant sentiment intended to be conveyed by any object, and to 
 reject all that is extraneous to that sentiment. Where, for instance, as in 
 jewellery or in regal furniture, a sentiment of splendour is demanded, 
 simplicity accords the same latitude that Nature assumes in her most bril¬ 
 liant sunsets or most magnificent flowers. Where, however, in the ordi¬ 
 nary vessels which minister to the material wants of man, simplicity pre¬ 
 scribes a closer range ; there the greatest amount of true good taste will 
 be invariably found in the most modest form consistent with the perfect 
 adaptation of the vessel to its office. It may, perhaps, sound paradoxical 
 to assert, but it is nevertheless correct to believe, that the true principle 
 of Nature’s just simplicity was scarcely less worthily represented by the 
 
420 
 
 gorgeous chair of tho Rajah of Travancore than it was by the rude, yet 
 graceful articles of Hindoo pottery. A gown, relatively speaking, displays 
 its just amount of simplicity, not hv the dowdiness of its colour, pattern, 
 or material, but by its due accordance with the age, position, claims to 
 beauty, or other social accidents of its wearer. 
 
 Contrast teaches us to give a due relief to all to which we would desire 
 to call attention. A sudden break in a long straight line, a slender 
 necking in a continuous sweep, a sudden concavity in a generally convex 
 outline, a hold projection starting forward from an even plane, right 
 lines opposed to curves, segments to sections of the cone, smooth to 
 rough surfaces, conventional forms to direct imitations of nature, all 
 carry out the desired object, and are every one subject to the phenomena 
 of simultaneous contrast of form. To obviate such optical delusions, 
 allowances must be made in every case by the artist; many such cor¬ 
 rections are constantly perceived and effected by the eye ; but few, alas ! 
 by rule. In reference to such corrections, it is justly remarked by so 
 ancient a writer as Vitruvius, that “ the deception to which the sight is 
 liable should be counteracted by means suggested by the faculty of rea¬ 
 soning. Since the eye alone,” he continues, “ is the judge of beauty, and 
 where a false impression is made upon it, through the natural defects of 
 vision, we must correct the apparent want of harmony in the whole by 
 instituting peculiar proportions in particular parts.” It is singular that 
 this passage should occur in connexion with the subject of entasis, and 
 the theory of those subtle proportions in the construction of temples, on 
 which the Greeks bestowed such exquisite refinements of study. We 
 cannot afford in the present Lecture to dwell further on this department 
 of the study of form, deeply interesting though it be, since we have a 
 full-length sketch to give, and but a kit-cat to execute it upon. 
 
 When we turn to a consideration of the united action upon human 
 design of the general principles of consistency, exhibited in the works of 
 Nature, we find that of all qualities which can be expressed by the objects 
 upon which our executive ability may be occupied, the noblest, and most 
 universally to be aimed at, is plain and manly truth. Let it ever be 
 borne in mind that design is but a variety of speech or writing. By 
 means of design we inscribe, or ought to inscribe, upon every object of 
 which we determine the form, all essential particulars concerning its ma¬ 
 terial, its method of construction, and its uses—by varying ornaments, 
 and by peculiar styles of conventional treatment, we know that we shall 
 excite certain trains of thought and certain associations of idea. The 
 highest property of design is, that it speaks the universal language of 
 nature, which all can read. If, therefore, men he found to systematically 
 deceive,—by too direct an imitation of nature, pretending to be nature — 
 by using one material in the peculiar style of conventionality universally 
 recognised as incident to another—by borrowing ornaments expressive of 
 lofty associations, and applying them to mean objects — by hiding the 
 structural purpose of the article, and sanctioning by a borrowed form, the 
 presumption that it may have been made for a totally different object, or 
 in a perfectly different way—such men cannot clear themselves from the 
 charge of degrading art by systematic misrepresentation, as they would 
 lower human nature by writing or speaking a falsehood. Unfortunately, 
 
421 
 
 temptations to such perversions of truth surround the growing designer. 
 The debilitating effects of nearly a century’s incessant copying without 
 discrimination, appropriating without compunction, and falsifying without 
 blushing, still bind our powers in a vicious circle, from which we have 
 hardly yet strength to burst the spell. Some extraordinary stimulant 
 could alone awaken all our energies, and that stimulant came,—it may not, 
 perhaps, be impious to esteem Providentially,—in the form of the great and 
 glorious Exhibition. It was but natural that we should be startled when 
 we found that in consistency of design in industrial art, those we had 
 been too apt to regard as almost savages were infinitely our superiors. 
 Men’s minds are now earnestly directed to the subject of restoring to 
 symmetry all that had fallen into disorder. The conventionalities of form 
 peculiar to every class of object, to every kind of material, to every process 
 of manufacture, are now beginning to be ardently studied ; and instead of 
 that vague system of instruction by which pupils were taught, that any¬ 
 thing that was pretty in one shape was equally pretty in another, a more 
 correct recognition of the claims of the various branches of special design, 
 and the necessity of a far closer identification of the artist with the manu¬ 
 facturer, in point of technical knowledge, have been gradually stealing 
 upwards in public estimation. Let us hope that success will crown 
 exertion, and that in time the system of design universally adopted in 
 this country will offer a happy coincidence with those lofty principles by 
 means of which the seals of truth and beauty are stamped on every ema¬ 
 nation from the creative skill of Divinity. 
 
 In approaching the more directly, though not essentially, practical 
 portion of our subject, that of the application of Nature’s principles to 
 some of the special departments of practical art, represented in the Exhi¬ 
 bition, we shall premise by a few considerations on Architecture and 
 Sculpture, and the Plastic Arts. 
 
 It would be difficult to imagine a juster and more comprehensive view 
 of the extent of direct imitation admissible in each department of the fine 
 arts than that which was presented in the Appendix to the Third 
 Report of the Commissioners, by Sir Charles Lock Eastlake, and repub¬ 
 lished in his “ Contributions to the Literature of the Fine Arts.” In a 
 note to one of those important essays the writer observes, that “ the 
 general style of the formative arts is the result of a principle of selection, 
 as opposed to indiscriminate imitation. It consists, therefore, in qualities 
 which may be said to distinguish those arts from nature. The specific 
 style of any one of the arts consists in the effective use of those particular 
 means of imitation which distinguish it from other arts. Style is complete 
 when the spectator is not reminded of any want which another art, or 
 which nature, could supply.” 
 
 Now, the specific style of architecture is especially worthy of study, 
 since not only do similar conditions pervade all branches of design into 
 which structural forms enter as principal elements, but of all the arts it is 
 obviously the least imitative, and the most abstract. The effects of delight 
 which can be produced by it, are dependent not upon a reproduction of 
 any objects existing in creation, but upon a just display by the architect 
 of his knowledge of those subtle general conditions, a few of which we have 
 recoguised as pervading every perfect work of nature. The beauty of 
 
422 
 
 Civil Architecture, we are told by the best writers upon the subject, 
 depends upon—1st. Convenience; 2d. Symmetry, or proportion ; 3dly, 
 Eurythmia, or such a balance and disposition of parts as evidences design 
 and order ; and, 4thly. On Ornament. In too many modern buildings, 
 alas! we find that either convenience has been attended to and all other 
 qualities left to chance, or, what is still worse, ornament alone aimed at 
 and all other considerations disregarded. Let us, for the sake of example, 
 trace the operation of the principles to which we have alluded, all of which 
 will be found to have their origin in the provisions of nature. The wise 
 architect will begin by considering the purpose of his building, and will 
 so contrive its plan and leading form, as to fulfil all the utilitarian objects 
 for which it was proposed to be constructed; in other words, he will be 
 governed by a sense of convenience or fitness. 
 
 He will then consider how all the requisites can be most agreeably 
 provided, and harmonious proportion combined with an expression of 
 purpose. He will find, on recurring to nature, that every substance suit¬ 
 able to be employed in construction, exhibits endless variety in strength, 
 weight, and texture. He will study these various qualities, and by expe¬ 
 riment ascertain that each material possesses a certain scale of proportions, 
 and a certain series of solids, by the employment of which, in fixed posi¬ 
 tions, its functions may be at once most economically and most fitly 
 employed. Acting on such data, he will distribute his lines of substructure, 
 his columns of support, his load supported, his walls to resist the driving 
 of the elements, and he will assign to each its special proportion and 
 form—never confounding those of one substance with another—never using 
 iron as he would stone, or wood as glass should be. Thus aided by his 
 sense of the functions of each portion of the structure, the material of 
 which it may be constructed, and its condition of relative importance, the 
 architect adjusts the appropriate dimension of every part. His work is as 
 yet, however, only half done’; his materials require bringing into graceful 
 and regulated distribution. At this point, Eurythmia, the original of 
 “ the fairy order,” steps in, bringing Geometry in her train. Doors, 
 windows, columns, cornices, string-courses, roofs, and chimneys, are in¬ 
 stantly disposed so as to contrast with, and balance one another, showing, 
 by the symmetry of their arrangements, the artist’s appreciation of that 
 method and evidence of design, which indicate the restraining power of 
 mind over matter throughout all nature,—wild as her graces may occa¬ 
 sionally appear. The crowning difficulty yet remains behind in the adjust¬ 
 ment of appropriate ornament. In all other departments of his art, the 
 architect employs only pure abstractions, harmonizing with his general 
 deductions of leading principles of beauty: in his application of ornament, 
 however, his resources are somewhat more expanded. All decoration, the 
 forms of which are borrowed from nature, to be pleasing, must undergo a 
 process of conventionalizing; direct imitation, such as that which would be 
 produced by casting from a gelatine mould, would infallibly disappoint, 
 since the perfect reproduction of the form would lead to demands for 
 reality, in colour, in texture, and in, other qualities which it might be 
 utterly beyond the power of any other material or processes to render, 
 than those which Nature has herself employed in the original. The duty 
 '. of the architect is, therefore, to study* first of all, to employ such forms as 
 
 s . /' A 
 
 % 
 
 
 W 
 
423 
 
 harmonize and contrast with his leading lines of structure,—and then in 
 those few instances where, for the sake of adding more immediately human 
 interest to his work, or for explaining its purpose more directly, he may 
 desire to suggest the idea of some object existent in nature—then, and in 
 such a case, it is his duty to symbolize rather than to express, and to 
 strive to convey an idea of particulars and qualities only, instead of to 
 make a necessarily imperfect reproduction, which conveys no idea at all. 
 
 The exact amount of resemblance which the hieroglyphic may be per¬ 
 mitted to bear to that object, some ideal property of which it is intended 
 to express, must depend upon so great a variety of circumstances that it 
 obviously becomes one of the most delicate operations of the artist’s skill 
 to adjust the precise form in which he shall work out his ornament. The 
 treatment of the honeysuckle by the Greeks, and the lotus by the Egyp¬ 
 tians, are probably the happiest existing illustrations of refined apprecia¬ 
 tion of the mysteries of judicious conventionalizing. 
 
 As a general rule the less closely the artist attempts to embody nature 
 the more safe he will be, but as there are, we conceive, some few cases 
 which justify a nearer approximation than is generally admissible, we shall 
 proceed to enumerate the most important of them, premising that, para- 
 4 mount over every other consideration, must reign an exact regard to the 
 f conventionalities incident to the material employed, and the absolute ne¬ 
 cessity of arranging the forms of the ornament, so as to contrast rightly 
 with the adjacent geometrical lines of structure. 
 
 1st. That imitation may approximate to nature only in an inverse ratio 
 to the resemblance of the material in which the work is to be executed to 
 the object to be copied. Thus, the smoothness of flesh maj r be imitated 
 with delicacy in white marble, and the idea of rock-work only conveyed 
 in the same material by a completely formal and geometrical method of 
 representation. 
 
 2d. That as imitation in all cases interests and attracts attention, it 
 becomes necessary to restrict its use sparingly to particular situations ; 
 thus, we may, on the one hand, with propriety employ decorations sugges- 
 
 [ tive of natural types, in those few important points on which we wish the 
 eye to dwell, such as the centre of a facade, the principal doorway, or win 
 flow, the starting of a staircase, or the end of a boudoir ; but if, on the other 
 hand, we employed in such leading situations mere conventional patterns, 
 and in less important parts, ornaments in convention approaching imita¬ 
 tion, then we should find attention concentrated on those meaner portions 
 of the structure, and the really principal features of the design passed over 
 and neglected. ' A striking illustration of the consequences of this want of 
 discrimination was shown by the sculptor Lequesne, in his various groups 
 in the great Exhibition; the care he bestowed in working up his acces¬ 
 sories, his weeds, foliage, rocks, earth, and everything else, almost entirely 
 neutralized the interest which should have been excited by the finished 
 treatment of the flesh of his unhappy mother and her miserable infant. 
 The admiration which might otherwise have been given to his two groups 
 of dogs and boys, w T ere completely absorbed by admiration at the patience 
 with which “each particular hair” was made to curl. To all the above- 
 described faults the works of M. Etex offered a truly remarkable contrast, 
 the labour in them being applied at exactly the right points. 
 
 V'tx ' > V 
 
 V ^ \ > 
 
424 
 
 3dly. That where ornament is contrasted by evident connexion with 
 geometrical lines of structure, conventional imitation may be introduced. 
 Thus in many of the marble chimney-pieces in the Exhibition, and in 
 much of the furniture, the structural forms of which made regular panels, 
 or conventional framework, the introduction of nicely-carved flowers or 
 fruit, of the size of nature, and in low relief, produced an agreeable effect. 
 Where, in others (and more particularly in some of the Austrian), the 
 foliage, scrolls, Cupids, and all sorts of things, completely ate up the 
 whole surface, and made up the whole structure, the effect w r as eminently 
 objectionable. 
 
 4thly. That where the copy differs absolutely in bulk from the original, 
 minutiae of surface detail may be introduced. Thus, when we reduce a 
 subject, such as a bunch of grapes, from the round or full relief to the 
 lowest relievo, much of the conventionality which would otherwise be 
 essential, may be dispensed with. 
 
 5thly. That considerable differences of scale in things of unvarying 
 dimension, justify an approach to natural form. Thus, when we materially 
 diminish in our reproduction any object the smallest size of which is gene¬ 
 rally known never to equal that to which it is lowered in our copy, we may 
 safely attempt as close a conventional transcript as the material in which 
 we work admits of. On this account delicate flowers, such as those which 
 decorate small Dresden china vases, and which are executed with such 
 skill in biscuit by Mr. Alderman Copeland, Mr. Minton, Mr. Grainger of 
 Worcester, and others, form not unappropriate ornaments when confined 
 to a scale considerably smaller than nature. In cases, however, such as 
 that of the Dresden white camellia tree of the Exhibition, where an 
 attempt is made to copy nature on her own scale, the effort altogether 
 fails, and the labour so far from giving pleasure utterly fails, and becomes 
 a trick not less inimical to good taste than the veiled figures. 
 
 Gthly. That where in ornament the leading forms are geometrically 
 disposed, as in regularly recurring scrolls, or other curves, which could 
 never take so formal a position in nature, a rendering of her spirit, though 
 not of her substance, may be permitted in the leaves and accessories. 
 Thus, in much of the elaborate wood-carving produced by Mr. Rogers and 
 otliei's, the artificial disposition alone of the beautifully executed objects 
 redeemed many of the groups from the charge of too close a reproduction 
 of nature. 
 
 We have dwelt at some length upon these special circumstances, which 
 modify conventional treatment in ornament, partly because we felt that the 
 data applied generally to most varieties of enrichment as well as specially 
 to architecture, and partly because we felt it necessary to indicate some 
 of the exceptions, the comparative rarity of which tends generally to 
 a confirmation of the accepted dogma, which prescribes that architectural 
 ornament shall be in a remote style of convention only. 
 
 Before proceeding to the subject of Sculpture, we would fain offer one 
 or two remarks concerning what is called style in art, for fear lest 
 our recommendations to systematic study of elementary principles should 
 be misapprehended. In what are generally understood as styles in the 
 history of art, such as the Grecian, the Roman, the Gothic, the Renaissance, 
 &c., may be recognised deeply interesting accumulations of experience 
 
425 
 
 
 concerning the nature of men’s intuitive affections for certain concatena¬ 
 tions of form. Styles are usually complete in themselves ; and though not 
 of uniform excellence, are still generally concordant among all the various 
 members that compose them. Whatever may have been the dominant 
 form in each, or whatever the favourite set of ratios, proportion 
 usually pervades each whole monument, as it may be generally traced 
 in a few detached mouldings. Styles, therefore, may be regarded as store¬ 
 houses of experiments tried, and results ascertained, concerning various 
 methods of conventionalizing, from whence the designer of the present day 
 may learn the general expression to be obtained, by modifying his imita¬ 
 tions of nature on the basis of recorded experience, instead of his own 
 wayward impulses alone. Canova, Gibson, and many of the greatest 
 masters in art held, and hold the creed, that nature, as developed in 
 the human form, can only be rightly appreciated by constant recurrence to, 
 and comparison with, the conventionalities of the ancient sculpture of 
 Greece. Mr. Penrose has shown us what beautiful illustrations of optical 
 corrections in line may be gathered from the study of her architectural re¬ 
 mains. Mr. Dyce, who has made himself deeply acquainted with ancient 
 11 styles, thus expresses himself on the subject:—“ In the first place,” 
 he remarks, “ the beauties of form or of colour, abstracted from nature by 
 the ornamentist, from the very circumstance that they are abstractions, 
 assume in relation to the whole progress of the art the character of 
 principles or facts, that tend, by accumulation, to bring it to perfection. 
 The accumulated labours of each successive race of ornamentists are 
 so many discoveries made—so many facts to be learned, treasured up, 
 applied to a new use, submitted to the process of artistic generalization, or 
 added to. A language and a literature of ornamental design are consti¬ 
 tuted ; the former of which must be mastered before the latter can be 
 understood ; and the latter known before we are in a condition to add to its 
 treasures. The first step, therefore, in the education of ornamentists, 
 must be their initiation into the current and conventional language of their 
 art, and by this means into its existing literature.” By this last passage, 
 we may fairly assume that Mr. Dyce would recommend first the study of 
 the conventionalities of the student’s specialty, and then as much as life is 
 long enough to learn. The great previous error iu art-education has been 
 to grasp at so much vaguely, and attain so little practically. 
 
 The modifications which nature receives at the hands of the intelligent 
 sculptor are so various, and frequently so subtle, that it would require a 
 volume to enumerate them, and an Eastlake to write it. To night wc can 
 glance but at a very few. The first condition of the highest class of Sculpture 
 is, that it should be allied with the noblest architecture, to which it should 
 serve as an inscription, explaining to those capable of reading its ideal ex¬ 
 pression those purposes of the structure which it is not in the power 
 of architecture alone to convey. In all such cases fitness prescribes the 
 subject— simplicity , its sublimcst treatment— contrast, the general conditions 
 of the lines of its composition. In order to give to his works that com¬ 
 manding language which speaks to the heart, (the phonetic quality in 
 Mr. Fergusson’s admirable theory of beauty in art), the sculptor requires to 
 select from his observation of the expression of individual forms, those 
 precise lines he learns from study and experience invariably convey the 
 
# 
 
 426 
 
 particular sensations it is liis office to communicate to the mind of the 
 beholder. It is by some such process that an approach was made by the 
 Greek sculptors of old to attain an embodiment of their conceptions of 
 divinity, and the beau ideal in loveliness of form. Time will not permit a 
 longer reference to this topic, but it may be found touched upon with 
 the utmost acuteness and good taste in an article on physiognomy in 
 the last number of the “ Quarterly Review,” written, if any confidence 
 may be placed in internal evidence of style, by one worthy in every 
 respect to occupy herself in kindred studies to those which engage the 
 attention of the President of the Royal Academy. Among the works 
 of sculpture in the Great Exhibition which displayed the most perfect 
 mastery over the just combination of ordinary and ideal nature, especial 
 attention may be drawn to Gibson’s and Jerichau’s Hunters; Foley’s Ino 
 and Bacchus, and Boy at the Stream ; Bell’s Eagle-slayer ; M‘Dowell's 
 Eve; De Bay’s First Cradle; and Wyatt’s nymph, Glycera. 
 
 The peculiar refinements of form and texture which fall within the 
 especial province of the sculptor to carry to their highest pitch of perfec¬ 
 tion, he constantly heightens by availing himself of the effect on the senses 
 of the simultaneous contrast of form. Thus he exaggerates the roughness 
 of the hair and the coarse texture of every object coming in contact with 
 his flesh, in order to give to it the exquisite smoothness of Nature; he in¬ 
 troduces straight lines, equally balanced folds, and angular breaks into his 
 draperies, in order to bring out the tender sweeping curves of the outlines 
 of the limbs he so gracefully disposes. His is of a truth the happy art 
 which begins by collecting all that is most sweet and fresh; and then by 
 one additional touch, one further artful contrast, he “throws a perfume 
 on the violet.” In sculpture, as in every other of the decorative arts, 
 changing circumstances bring ever-changing conventionalities, and as su¬ 
 preme arbiters over the propriety of one and all, still preside our original 
 great principles — variety, fitness, simplicity, and contrast. 
 
 In turning to those departments of practical art into which Sculpture 
 enters as a predominant ingredient, metal-work first presents itself to our 
 notice. Nothing can be more apparent than the variety of properties and 
 qualities of the several metals, nothing more consistent than to prescribe a 
 different mode of treatment to each. Sculpture in metal, partly on account 
 of the much greater ductility and tenacity of the material, and partly on 
 account of its peculiar colour and power of reflecting light, can rarely, 
 however highly its degree of finish may be carried, be mistaken for that 
 which it professes to imitate. Hence it arises that elaborate execution of 
 details may, and indeed should, be carried in metal to the most minute per¬ 
 fection. Works in gold, or silver, should, as a general rule (except in 
 instances where an overpowering display of wealth is intended, in which 
 case art does not much signify), be confined to small dimensions, and those 
 relatively correspondent to the associations of idea connected with the 
 rarity and value of each. It was from inattention to these conditions that 
 many of the largest pieces of plate in the Exhibition failed to interest us, 
 and that the eye dwelt with much greater complacency upon the smaller 
 than upon the larger objects. Among the exhibitors of specimens of 
 gold work, Messrs. Morel, Watherston and Brogden, and Froment Meu- 
 rice, held the most distinguished place in point of excellence and appro- 
 
427 
 
 priateness of design; among those who contributed silver work, Messrs. 
 Hunt and Roskill, Wagner, Froment Meurice, Lebrun, Rudolplii, Garrard, 
 Morel, &c. In parcel-gilding, inattention to the just amount of profusion 
 of the several metals is frequently lost sight of. The gold instead of the 
 silver is allowed to preponderate on the surface, and the improbable idea 
 conveyed that the vessel is made of the nobler metal, and inlaid with the 
 baser. It would be a sad want of a due recognition of rare talent, if in 
 allusion to metal-work an acknowledgment was omitted of the rare talents 
 of M. Vechte, by whom the exquisite vase and unfinished shield, exhibited 
 by Messrs. Hunt and Roskill, were made for those enterprising manufac¬ 
 turers. Whoever examines the marvellous grace and refinement of the 
 modelling and chasing of these objects will admit that there is ample room 
 for improvement in English silversmith’s work of the highest class,—and 
 for refinements which, though perhaps little appreciated at present, must 
 sooner or later become estimated at a value equal to those fabulous sums 
 which are constantly paid for mutilated etchings of the great masters, 
 cabinet pictures by Hobbima, Wouvermans, and Metsu ; or factitious speci¬ 
 mens of the great Cellini. In M. Vechte’s design for the Goodwood cup of 
 the present year, he has shown us what his idea of the application of high 
 * style to metal-work should be; and if in its execution he rivals only that of 
 the portion of a vase he wrought for M. Devandeuve of Paris, of a portion 
 of which I am happily enabled this evening to exhibit a cast, or the shield 
 now before us, fortunate indeed will be the winner of so masterly a work of 
 art. In bronze-work, although in small objects we may certainly still find 
 a difficulty in competing with the admirable specimens exhibited by Messrs. 
 Collas, Barbedienne, Vittoz, Matifat, Susse, and other Parisian bronzists, 
 still, upon a large scale, the casting and finishing of Mr. Foley's beautiful 
 “Boy at the Stream,” by Mr. Hatfield, and Mr. Bell’s “Eagle Slayer” 
 and “ Andromeda,” by the Coalbrookdale Company, left little to desire. In 
 the application not only of correct principles of design, but of the details 
 of the electro-galvanic process, Messrs. Elkington’s display was in almost 
 all points thoroughly satisfactory. In brass and mixed work Mr. Win¬ 
 field’s, Mr. Messenger’s, and other collections, maintained, and, indeed, 
 tended to raise the reputation of Birmingham. It was gratifying to bo 
 enabled to notice, with regard to furnishing brass-work, that direct imita¬ 
 tions of things which, however beautiful they may be in nature, have no 
 business stuck about one’s curtains ; lilies and convolvuluses, looking all 
 alive, were on the decrease; and that correct conventionalities, the unob¬ 
 trusive and graceful forms of which were suitable for execution in metal, 
 were rapidly talcing their place. While in ornamental iron and brass work 
 applied to stoves, Messrs. Stewart and Smith displayed the most exquisite 
 workmanship, Messrs. Hoole and Robson manifested the most correct ap¬ 
 preciation of the conventionalities to be observed in the treatment of those 
 metals. For much of this movement in the right direction, more particu¬ 
 larly for the idea of the introduction of clean iron into ornamental casting, 
 the public are indebted to the artistic ability of Mr. Stevens. Messrs. 
 Feetham, Pierce, Jeakes, and Bailey, likewise showed much good taste in 
 the goods contributed by them. 
 
 When we pursue the subject of sculpture, or plastic art, as carried out 
 in other materials, such as the woods which are used for furniture, &c. &c., 
 
428 
 
 we are led at once to apply in all cases tlie test of fitness before we can 
 unhesitatingly approve the principles upon which the greater portion of 
 what was shown in the Exhibition appeared to have been designed, and 
 much, we are sorry to say, would not quite stand the ordeal. In too 
 many instances, in the furniture, fitness and structure were entirely disre¬ 
 garded ; table-tops were supported on bulrushes, and what should have 
 been the simple and rigid portions of looking-glasses, cabinets, &c., all made 
 up of flowers, scrolls, figures, and so on, which apparently no material, and 
 certainly no spiritual connexion, held together. In the treatment of fur¬ 
 niture, much was to be learnt from the sensible construction of poor Pugin’s 
 mediaeval woodwork. In it the refinements of joinery were all made the 
 most of; the object was well put together, and serviceable; while in the 
 panels and other intervals of the framework as much ornament was in¬ 
 serted as was consistent with the purposes of the article. Where Nature 
 puts her most delicate work she always contrives a special shelter for it; 
 her most exquisite spars and stalactites are ever protected, her tender 
 shoots are always shielded until they acquire strength to stand exposure. It 
 would be well if many of our wood-carvers in that respect followed her 
 example. 
 
 The mere possession of an elaborate bed such as that in which, accord¬ 
 ing to a satirical Frenchman, “ On ne pourrait meme bailler sans casser 
 un Cupidon,” would be a continual annoyance. The very idea would be 
 irritating of having a looking-glass covered over with all sorts of statuettes 
 and ornaments in high reliefs, from which any morning the slightest touch 
 of a housemaid’s brush might bring down two or three little “ unprotected 
 females.” The really true system of arranging ornament is in that respect 
 generally thoroughly well understood by the French; who, if they put 
 delicate ornament to look at, insert it where it will be quite safe from acci¬ 
 dent, and put strength and flatness to use or come in contact with. Not only 
 in a technical, but in an artistic point of view, this subduing of ornament is 
 excellent, since while the effect of decoration is obtained the bounding 
 lines and surfaces are kept broad and simple. Any one unacquainted with 
 the attention habitually paid to this preservation of ornament, who had 
 been allowed to pass his hand over the richly ornamented pistols, daggers, 
 vase handles, finest bronzes, and best French furniture, would have been 
 much surprised at the comparatively little obstruction it would have ordi¬ 
 narily met with in its passage, over even the richest objects. We cannot 
 leave the subject of furniture without glancing at the extremely appropriate 
 mode of ornamenting it by marqueterie, or inlaid wood — a process which 
 was carried to the highest perfection in the productions of Messrs. Trol¬ 
 lope and Sons. That process is to woodwork something like what ena¬ 
 melling or damascening should be to metal-work. A few among the many 
 agreeable specimens of design as applied to furniture were Barbetti’s 
 cabinet, Ringuet lc Prince’s ebony cabinet, Snell’s looking-glass, Trollope’s 
 bedroom suite, Jackson and Graham’s sideboard, and Rogers’ cradle. 
 Among the specimens of cabinet carving in wood were many which it would 
 appear impossible to surpass as pieces of execution, although in several the 
 extreme attenuation of substance was suited rather for metal than for wood¬ 
 work : conspicuous among these were a group of flowers and dead game, 
 by Wallis, of Louth; subjects in high relief, by Lienard ; a virgin in a 
 
429 
 
 niche, by Knecht, of Paris ; and some of Mr. Rogers' productions. In 
 several of the plastic materials, such as gutta percha, carton pierre, papier 
 mache, canabic, stamped leather, &c., much good design was exhibited, 
 although the tendency, more particularly in the gutta percha, was rather 
 in the direction of a plethora of ornament. Nature, it should be recol¬ 
 lected, abhors monotony even of beauty, and there is nothing so cloying 
 and fatiguing as too much sweetness, from which perpetual plainness would 
 be a haven of refuge. In respect to these materials a good deal of misap¬ 
 prehension has prevailed of late years; they have been called “ shams,” 
 and a variety of names which they intrinsically in no wise deserve. When 
 people paint and grain papier mache to make it look like oak or other 
 valuable woods, or when they dust sand over carton pierre to make it look 
 like stone, then certainly they perpetrate meannesses at which good taste 
 is disgusted the instant the deception is found out; but when the ma¬ 
 terials are used simply as ornaments, either in a uniform colour or picked 
 out with any variety of tints, everybody recognises the nature of the ma¬ 
 terial ; and there can then be no more sham or trick in employing them 
 than there would be in using Caen stone for a pulpit instead of marble, or 
 iron for a column instead of gold. 
 
 There is, perhaps, no substance in the manufacture and desigu of 
 which so great an improvement has taken place in this country within the 
 last ten years as in that of glass. Witness for manufacture the glass 
 palace and its wonderful fountain ; and for design, the exquisite articles 
 contributed by Messrs. Green, Pellatt, Richardson, Bacchus, Rice Harris, 
 and others. The subject of glass, its materials, appropriate form, colour, 
 and other conditions, having been most ably treated in the last lecture of 
 this series, renders it unnecessary now to make any further observation on 
 the subject. We maybe permitted, however, in drawing attention to some 
 exquisite specimens of Messrs. Green's manufacture, to simply assert, that 
 never at any other period has anything corresponding to the present per¬ 
 fect execution of glass-work existed; and that so soon as the cumbrous, 
 lumpy decanters, tumblers, and rummers, in which our fathers delighted, 
 shall have been all broken, there will be very little left to desire in respect 
 to table-glass. 
 
 With regard to china and the group of analogous materials, such as 
 porcelain, terra cotta, &c., time compels us to be brief. In all such 
 objects, the fragility of the material warns us against rash projections, and 
 yet we constantly recognize them stuck on, as though merely for the pur¬ 
 pose of being knocked off. The primitive arrangement of the potter's 
 wheel, and the plasticity of the material, yielding beneath his hand curves, 
 which in Etrurian and Magna Grecian ware we admire as exquisite, direct 
 us as it were to simplicity in all works in such materials. So long as by 
 the readiest means, and by a little education of the workman, we might 
 obtain forms quite as beautiful and as various as those which we always 
 have and always shall admire in the antique, there can exist no excuse for 
 casting octagon and hexagon jugs, or making teacups up out of half-a- 
 dozen curves. 
 
 In many respects it was gratifying to observe that the most beau¬ 
 tiful objects, upon the production and decoration of which the highest 
 artistic talent of France liad been employed in the Royal Manufactory 
 
 p p 
 
430 
 
 at Sevres, almost without exception, were rigidly simple in their out¬ 
 lines, and produced structurally by that primitive instrument, we must 
 ever respect and associate with pottery—the potter’s wheel. Much in¬ 
 formation as to the proprieties of the form and ornament of china 
 might be derived from a study of some of the beautiful Indian and 
 Tunisian ware ; and if our exquisite mechanical execution were com¬ 
 bined with their feeling for pure form, and the proper application of 
 not too much ornament, effects of surpassing beauty might doubtless 
 be produced. As it is, the great resources shown by Mr. Minton in 
 all his numerous productions, and by Mr. Alderman Copeland, in his 
 very choice, though not so varied display, impress us with the idea 
 that all that is now wanting, is for public taste to judiciously regulate 
 their producing powers, and to ask for a little less novelty and a little 
 more perfection. 
 
 We have now very hurriedly run through the leading classes of 
 objects on which practical art operates directly, and which possess what 
 the Germans call “ selbstandigkeit,” that is to say, an independent 
 structural existence. There remain for us to notice those which apply 
 particularly to surfaces, and the treatment of which consequently involves 
 the consideration of superficies only. As general rules for the guidance 
 of those who are called upon to design such objects—whether they 
 take the form of wall decorations or pavements, textile fabrics of which 
 the pattern is produced either in the loom or by printing, of mosaic 
 pavements, diapers for stained glass or paperhangings, no better hints 
 can be given than those which have been expressed by Mr. Owen 
 Jones in his notice in the “ Journal of Design ” of the Oriental objects 
 contributed to the Great Exhibition. We are told most truly, that 
 one “guiding principle of their admirable ornamentation appears to 
 be that their decoration was always what may be called surface deco¬ 
 ration. Their general guiding forms were first considered and these 
 forms decorated. Their flowers are not natural flowers, but conven¬ 
 tionalized by the material in which they worked. We do not see, as 
 in European works, a highly-wrought imitation of a natural flower, 
 with its light and shade struggling to stand out from the ground on 
 which it is worked, but a conventional representation sufficiently near 
 to suggest an image to the mind, without destroying the unity of the 
 objects it is intended to decorate. There is a total absence of shadow. 
 The patterns of their shawls and fabrics are harmonious and effective 
 from the proper distribution of form and colour, and do not require to l>e 
 heightened in effect by strong and positive oppositions ; the great aim 
 appears to be that objects viewed at a distance should present a neu¬ 
 tralized bloom—each step nearer exhibits fresh beauties, a close in¬ 
 spection the means whereby such effects are produced. In their diapers 
 and scroll-work, one of the means whereby their harmonizing effect is 
 produced, appears to be that the ornament and the ground occupy equal 
 areas; to obtain this requires no ordinary skill, and can only be arrived 
 at by highly-trained hands and minds. In their conventional foliage 
 
 in all cases, we find the forms flowing out from a parent stem ; the 
 
 space which has to be filled, however varied in form, being accom¬ 
 plished with the most exquisite skill. We never see here ornaments 
 
431 
 
 dotted down, .is in modem works, the existence of which cannot be 
 accounted for ; every flower, however distant, can be traced to its branch 
 and root.” 
 
 These are but a few of the general principles which should aid the 
 designer of surface decoration, hundreds more there are which vary in 
 their precise form of application with every special case and subject. 
 Where, for instance, on the one hand, drapery has to be ornamented, 
 which is intended to cling tightly to, and exhibit the form it covers, it 
 would obviously be absurd to introduce a bold pattern of strong contrasts, 
 the lines of which would arrest the eye, instead of allowing it to travel 
 over the outlines and inflections of the form it is intended to veil, but not 
 conceal; where, on the other hand, material has to fulfil the office of a 
 hanging, such as a portiere or curtain, or a loose covering, there a bold 
 pattern may frequently be introduced with the happiest effect. This 
 principle of costume was finely understood by the Venetian and Floren¬ 
 tine weavers, and by the Italian ladies of the sixteenth century, as may be 
 seen in many a splendid old female portrait by Titian, Giorgione, or 
 Parmegiano.* 
 
 Of the various appropriate modes of conventionalizing nature, scarcely 
 any is more agreeable than that which is frequently adopted by the skilful 
 paper-stainer, in what are commonly called panel papers. It consists in treat¬ 
 ing as a picture flowers and other objects, grouped with scarcely any apparent 
 artifice, in their natural forms and sizes, and with all their lights, subdued 
 shades and reflections, but with no cast shades. This, at first sight, 
 would appear to be too direct an imitation of nature to be agreeable, and 
 therefore liable to objection—and so unless care is taken it very frequently 
 is. Now the method of preserving all that is requisite is effected by 
 representing the flowers by successive blotches of body colour dabbed on, 
 with no attempt to soften the edges or conceal the method by which the 
 effect is produced. Thus, at a little distance the decoration looks, not 
 like a group of flowers, for that wmild be a mistake, but like a very clever 
 sketch of a group of flowers framed and inserted in the panel. Where 
 direct imitation of natural flowers, with endless tiresome repeats, are 
 carried out, either in paper-hangings, block or cylinder printed goods, in 
 carpets, damasks, or other woven hangings, the effect is rarely, if ever, 
 agreeable, however marvellous the manufacturing power may be which can 
 effect such elaborate reproductions, f In woven goods, as w r as most clearly 
 shown in an excellent lecture by Mr. Wornum, recently delivered at the 
 School of Design, the conditions of manufacture constantly modify the 
 structure of patterns ; and those even which have been originally derived 
 from nature, frequently become reformed to such an extent in putting on 
 or draughting, that the best mode of convention, that which is induced by 
 rhe process of manufacture makes that agreeable, which if it could have 
 been more perfectly carried out would most probably have been extremely 
 faulty. It was impossible to hear that gentleman’s animated description 
 of what intervened between the sale of a design, say of a ribbon, to a 
 
 * These principles were illustrated by reference to fine specimens of English 
 paperhangings, lent bv Messrs. Townsend and Parker and Woollams. 
 
 + Mr. Wyatt here drew attention to some beautiful fabrics exhibited by Messrs. 
 Blakeley, Lewis and Allen by, Lees and Co., Liddiard, &c. 
 
432 
 
 manufacturer, and the manufacturer’s delivery of the ribbon to the ware¬ 
 houseman, without feeling deep regret; either that the manufacturer 
 knew so little of design as to suffer the lines to become distorted in execution, 
 or that the designer knew' so little of manufacture as to be at the mercy of 
 the workman by whom his design was brought into the technical form in 
 which alone it could be manufactured. If with his design he had been in 
 a position to give to the manufacturer a rough outline sketch of the full 
 size of the requisite ruled paper, if for a woven pattern, the outlines would 
 have had only to lie traced on to the ruled paper, and no serious mistakes 
 or bungles in form could have subsequently taken place, particularly, if 
 from time to time the artist had had an opportunity of inspecting the 
 preparations made for the execution of his design. 
 
 The subject of surface decoration is one which involves such infinite 
 varieties of conventional treatment, which demands so large a study of the 
 effects of complicated geometrical subdivisions in mosaic; and, in fact, so 
 large a field of vision, that we feel that within die limits of one lecture, it 
 is quite impossible to systematize a subject which could scarcely be fitly 
 treated in half-a-dozen. We are fain, therefore, to draw to a close this 
 our most difficult attempt- to define the principles which should determine 
 form in the decorative arts. In doing so, however, we would pause for a 
 few moments to remark that, although for the sake of perspicuity, we have 
 throughout this evening adopted the language of analysis, it must be borne 
 in mind that our divisions are altogether arbitrary, and have no existing 
 prototypes in the great scheme of creation. In that, subdivide as we may, 
 all is unity and omnipotence. Variety, fitness, simplicity, contrast, and 
 perfect truth, are all swallowed up in one thing perfectly good, and 
 therefore perfectly beautiful—Divine will — that Divine will, which in 
 the beginning created the heaven and the earth, and saw' that everything 
 created was very good. Surely, we, whose privilege it is to be fashioned 
 in God’s own image, may strive to follow reverently and closely, though at 
 an infinite distance, that great example which has been given us; and 
 study, so far as lies in human power, to ensure that all we do, and all we 
 make, may, like the great works of nature, be all “very good.” 
 
 1