The architecture of humanism; a study in the history of taste

214 THE

ARCHITECTURE OF

HUMANISM

II

To this statement several

objections

may be

expected. This

'

rising

'

of towers and

'

springing

'

ofarches,itwillbesaid—

thesedifferent

movements

whichanimate

architecture—aremere

metaphorsof

speech. Novalidinference

canbedrawn

fromthem.

Again, the enjoyment of fine

building is a simple

andimmediate

experience,whilethisdual

*

transcrip-

tion,' by which we interpret

the beauty of archi-

tecture,isa complicatedprocess.

Andnotonly—^it

willagainbeobjected

—^isthetheorytoocomplicated

;

itisalsotoophysical. Thebody,

itwillbesaid

,

plays

no part—or a

small and infrequent part

—

^in our

conscious enjoyment of

architecture, which com-

Berenson'sstudiesofItalianpainting,

wherethisviewofaesthetics

founditsmostfruitfulconcreteapplication.

With

this

exceptionthe

presentchapterhasbeenderivedwhollyfromthe

author'sownimmediate

experienceinthestudyandpracticeof

architecture,andisintended

tosatisfyratheranarchitecturalthana

philosophicalcuriosity. Time-

honouredas

Lipps'stheorynowis,andvalidasitappearstometobe,

itsinfluenceupoiipurelyarchitectural

criticismhasbeennegligible.

In Englisharchitecturalwriting it

is totallyignored

;

evenMr.

Blomfield,themostphilosophicalofourcritics,givesitbutafrigid

welcome. (TheMistressArt,

p.

ii8.) Yetitsarchitecturalimpor-

tance,bothfortheoryandpractice,isimmense; anditisforlack

ofitsrecognitionthattheFallaciesofCriticismstillflourishsoabun-

dantly. Forsometheorycriticismmusthave,andintheabsence

ofthetrue,itmakesshiftwiththepalpablyfalse.

j

Ihave avoided,asfaras clearness seemstopermit,allpurely

psychological discussion. Those interested in this aspect of the

matterwillfindintherecentwritingsofVernonLeethemostextensive

surveyofthequestionwhichhasappearedinEnglish,togetherwithall

necessaryreferQncestotheforeignliteratureofthesubject.