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

THE ROMANTIC

FALLACY 6i

thedirect

elementsarevaluable,

almostsolely,asa

meanstothe

indirect,andthatthemethodofthe

art

isstrictly

associative. In architecture,

ontheother

hand, so smallis herethe

necessary importanceof

mere significance,

that abuilding whose

utilitarian

intention

iscrudelyignoble,and

whichisthus sym-

bolicofignoblethings,

mayeasilyaffectus,through

its direct

elements, as sublime. Literature

may

possessabstractarchitectural

properties—scale, pro-

portion,distribution—

^independentofitssignificance

;

architecture

mayevokeapoeticdream,independent

ofits

forms

;

but, fundamentally, the language

of

the twoartsis distinct and

even opposite. In the

onewe

awaitthemeaning

;

intheotherwelookto

animmediateemotion resultingfrom thesubstance

andtheform.

The reason of this difference is obvious. The

materialofliterature is alreadysignificant. Every

particle

ofithas beenorganised

in

ordertoconvey

significance,and inordertoconveythesame signifi-

cance

toall.

• Butforthematerialofarchitecture,
  no

system of accepted meanings has been organised.

If, therefore, we derive associative values from its

forms,
thosevalueswillbe

determinedwhollyby

the

accidentsofourtimeandpersonality. Ourreadings

will
disagree. Thus,

whileeach individual,orgene-

ration,mayaddtothedirectpleasuresofarchitecture

a
further

elementofassociativedelight, thisassoci-