THE ETHICAL FALLACY
153
themorefamiliarIamwithRenaissancearchitecture,
theless.likely am Itobelieveit
; butneitherdoI
wish tobelieve it, nordoes it mattertomeif, by
chance,Iampersuaded. Iwantthewindowfor
the
sakeofthebalancewhichitcan givetothedesign.
Ifthewindow,inregardtoitsutilitarianproperties,
hadbeenwante(^atthatpoint,presumablyitwould
havebeenmade.^ But,onthecontrary,itwas—very
likely—definitelynotwanted. Butitsaestheticpro-
perties—apatch ofitscolour, shapeandposition
—
were requiredin thedesign, and these Ihave been
given. Had it been otherwise there would have
beenartkticdisappointment; asitis,thereisnodis-
appointmenteitherpractical orartistic. And
there
isnodeceit,for,asthearchitectisaware,thefacts,
should Ichoose
toknowthem,are
readily
discover-
able.
True,ifIfindtheapparentstoneworkofthe
windowis false, there isanelementofgenuineaes-
thetic
disappointment,forthequalityof
the
material
hasitsownaestheticbeauty. Butthebaroquearchi-
tectsdidnotpreferpaint
to
stone. Ruskinwas
not
more
disappointedthan Palladiothatthepalacesof
[Vicenza,areofstucco. Fewgenerationsrealisedmore
clearlytheaestheticqualityofrich material; asthe
bronze and lapis lazuli of the altar of S. Ignazio
intheRomanGesiimaysufficetoshow. Butthese
architectsplacedaestheticvaluesin
thescaleoftheir
importance, and where economic or other barriers
