lectures on Architecture and painting

 I think myself peculiarly happy in being permitted to address the citizens of Edinburgh on the subject of architecture，for it is one which，they cannot but feel。interests them nearly．Of all the cities in the British Islands，Edinburgh is the one which presents most advantages for the display of a noble building；and which，on the other hand，sustains most injury in the erection of a commonplace or unworthy one． You are all proud of your city: surely you must feel it a duty in some sort to justify your pride；that is to say，to give yourselves a right to be proud of it．That you were born under the shadow of its two fantastic mountains，——that you live where from your room windows you can trace the shores of its glittering Firth , are no rightful subjects of pride．You did not raise the mountains，nor shape the shores；and the historical houses of your Canongate, and the broad battlements of your castle，reflect honor upon you only through your ancestors．Before you boast of your city，before even you venture to call it yours, ought you not scrupulously to weigh the exact share you have had in adding to it or adorning it，to calculate seriously the influence upon its aspect which the work of your own hands has exercised? I do not say that, even when you regard your city in this scrupulous and testing spirit，you have not considerable ground for exultation．As far as I am acquainted with modern architecture，I am aware of no streets which，in simplicity and manliness of style，or general breadth and brightness of effect，equal those of the New Town of Edinburgh．But yet I am well persuaded that as you traverse those streets，your feelings of pleasure and pride in them are much complicated with those which are excited entirely by the Surrounding scenery．As you walk up or down George Street，for instance，do you not look eagerly for every opening to the north and south，which lets in the lustre of the Firth of Forth，or the rugged outline of the Castle Rock? Take away the sea—waves，and the dark basalt，and I fear you would find little to interest you in George Street by itself．Now I remember a city，more nobly placed even than your Edinburgh，which, instead of the valley that you have now filled by lines of railroad，has a broad and rushing river of blue water sweeping through the heart of it；which，for the dark and solitary rock that bears your castle，has an amphitheatre of cliffs crested with cypresses and olive：which，for the two masses of Arthur’s Seat and the ranges of the Pent—lands，has a chain of blue mountains higher than the haughtiest peaks of your Highlands；and which，for your far—away Ben Ledi and Ben More，has the great central chain of the St．Gothard Alps：and yet，as you go out of the gates，and walk in the suburban streets of that city—I mean Verona--the eye never seeks to rest on that external scenery，however gorgeous；it does not look for the gaps between the houses，as you do here：it may for a few moments follow the broken line of the great Alpine battlements；but it is only where they form a background for other battlements，built by the hand of man．There is no necessity felt to dwell on the blue river or the burning hills．The heart and eye have enough to do in the streets of the city itself；they are contented there；nay，they sometimes turn from the natural scenery，as if too savage and solitary，to dwell with a deeper interest on the palace walls that cast their shade upon the streets，and the crowd of towers that rise out of that shadow into the depth of the sky．   

That is a city to be proud of，indeed；and it is this kind of architectural dignity which you should aim at，in what you add to Edinburgh or rebuild init．For remember，you must either help your scenery or destroy it；Whatever you do has an effect of one kind or the other；it is never indifferent．But。a—bore all，remember that it is chiefly by private，not by public，effort that your city，must be adorned．It does not matter how many beautiful public buildings you possess，if they are not supported by，and in harmony with，the private houses of the town．Neither the mind nor the eye will accept a new college，or a new hospital，or a new institution，for a city．It is the Canongate，and the Princes Street，and the High Street that are Edinburgh．It is in your own private houses that the real majesty of Edinburgh must consist；and，what is more，it must be by your own personal interest that the style of the architecture which rises around you must be principally guided．Do not think that you can have good architecture merely by paying for it．It is not by subscribing liberally for a large building once in forty years that you can call up architects and inspiration．It is only by active and sympathetic attention to the domestic and every day work which is done for each of you，that you can educate either yourselves to the feeling，or your builders to the doing，of what is truly great．   

Well but，you will answer，you cannot feel interested in architecture：you do not care about it，and cannot care about it．I know you cannot．About such architecture as is built now-a—days，no mortal ever did or could care．You do not feel interested in hearing the same thing over and over again；——why do you suppose you can feel interested in seeing the same thing over and over a—gain，were that thing even the best and most beautiful in the world? Now，you all know the kind of window which you usually build in Edinburgh：here is an example of the head of one，a massy lintel of a single stone，laid across from side to side，with bold square-cut jambs in fact，the simplest form it is possible to build．It is by no means a bad form；on the contrary，it is very manly and vigorous，and has a certain dignity in its utter refusal of ornament．But I cannot say it is entertaining．How many windows precisely of this form do you suppose there are in the New Town of Edinburgh? I have not counted them all through the town，but I counted them this morning along this very Queen Street，in which your Hall is；and on the one side of that street，there are of these windows，absolutely similar to this example，and al—together devoid of any relief by decoration，six hundred and seventy-eight．。And your decorations are just as monotonous as your simplicities．How many Corinthian and Doric columns do you think there are in your banks，and post—offices，institutions，and l know not what else，one exactly like another? and yet you expect to be interested! Nay，but，you will answer me again，we see sunrises and sunsets，and violets and roses，over and over again，and we do not tire of them．What! Did you ever see one sunrise like another? Does not God vary his clouds for you every morning and every night? Though，in—deed，there is enough in the disappearing and appearing of the great orb above the rolling of the world，to interest all of us，one would think，for as many times as we shall see it；and yet the aspect of it is changed for us daily．You see violets and roses often，and are not tired of them．True! But you did not often see two roses alike，or，if you did，you took care not to put them beside each other in the same nosegay，for fear your nosegay should be uninteresting；and yet you think you can put 1 50，000 square windows side by side in the same streets，and still be interested by them．Why，if 1 were to say the same thing over and over again，for the single hour you are going to let me talk to you，would you listen to me? And yet you let your architects do the same thing over and over again for three centuries，and expect to be interested by their architecture；with a farther disadvantage on the side of the builder，as compared with the speaker，that my wasted words would cost you but little，but his wasted stones have cost you no small part of your incomes．   

“Well，but，”you still think within yourselves，“it is not right that architecture should be interesting．It is a very grand thing，this architecture，but essentially unentertaining．  It is its duty to be dull，it is monotonous by law：it cannot be correct and yet amusing．”   

Believe me，it is not so．All things that are worth doing in art，are interesting and attractive when they are done．There is no law of right which consecrates dulness．The proof of a thing’s being right is，that it has power over the heart；that it excites us，wins us，or helps us．I do not say that it has influence over all，but it has over a large class，one kind of art being fit for one class．and another for another；and there is no goodness in art which is independent of the power of pleasing．Yet，do not mistake me；I do not mean that there is no such thing as neglect of the best art，or delight in the worst，just as many men neglect nature．and feed upon what is artificial and base；but I mean，that all good art has the capacity of pleasing，if people will attend to it；that there is no law against its pleasing；but，on the contrary，something wrong either in the spectator or the art，when it ceases to please．Now，Therefore, if you feel that your present school of architecture is unattractive to you，I say there is something wrong，either in the architecture or in you；and I trust you will not think I mean to flatter you when I tell you，that the wrong is not in you，but in the architecture．Look at this for a moment；it is a window actually existing--a window of an English domestic building。--a window built six hundred years ago．You will not tell me you have no pleasure in looking at this；or that you could not，by any possibility，become interested in the art which produced it；or that，if every window in your streets were of some such form，with perpetual change in their ornaments，you would pass up and down the street with as much indifference as now，when your windows are of this form．Can you for an instant suppose that the architect was a greater or wiser man who built this，than he who built that? Or that in the arrangement of these dull and monotonous stones there is more wit and sense than you can penetrate? Believe me，the wrong is not in you；you would all like the best things best，if you only saw them．What is wrong in you is your temper，not your taste；your patient and trustful temper，which lives in houses whose architecture it takes for granted，and subscribes to public edifices from which it derives no enjoyment．   

“Well，but what are we to do?”you will say to me；we cannot make architects of ourselves．Pardon me，you can——and you ought．Architecture is an art for all men to learn，because all are concerned with it；and it is so simple，that there is no excuse for not being acquainted with its primary rules，anymore than for ignorance of grammar or of spelling，which are both of them far more difficult sciences．Far less trouble than is necessary to learn how to play chess，or whist，or golf，tolerably，far less than a schoolboy takes to win the meanest prize of the passing year，would acquaint you with all the main principles of the construction of a Gothic cathedral，and I believe you would hardly find the study less amusing．But be that as it may，there are one or two broad principles which need only be stated to be understood and accepted；and those I mean to lay before you，with your permission，before you leave this room．

译文