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

RENAISSANCE ARCHITECTURE

35

Renaissance was indifferent to these points it was

bad taste, and the architecture which embodied it

bad

ajrchitecture. Thus,theveryfactorswhich,on

thepointofhistory,wehaverelegatedtoasecondary

place,

mightstill, on the point of cesthetics, resume

theirauthority.

This view

of architecture has many adherents.

Itfindsconfirmation—soatleastitisclaimed—^inthe

greaterstylesofthepast,inthepracticeoftheGreek

andGothicbuilders. To

ignorethis

rejoinderwould

beto

fallintothecommonerrorofdogmaticcriticism,

andtoneglecta

largepartofactualartisticexperience.

Butit

isaviewofarchitecturewhichtheRenaissance

builders, at

least, were far from holding. Itis at

variance with buildings which

were enjoyed, and

enjoyed

enthusiastically, by a people devoted, and

presumably

sensitive,toart.

Confronted

by those

rival dogmatisms,

how

can

-•

weproceed? The

naturalcoursewouldbetoexamine

*

the

buildingsthemselves

andtaketheevidenceofour

owii sensations.

Arethey

beautiful, or

not?

But

on

oursensations,after

all,wecanplacenoimmediate

reliance.

For our sensations

will be determined

partly by

our

opinionsand,still more,bywhatwe

lookoutfor,

attendto,

andexpecttofind. Allthese

preoccupations

may modify ourjudgment at

every

turn,and

interpose

betweenusandtheclearfeatures

of the artan

invisible but

obscuring veil. Before