Lutyens, Edwin Landseer ( 1869 – 1944 )
Design for Viceroy’s House, RIBA, Lutyens [ 58 ] 73 , Graphite on paperEdwin Lutyens was born in London; his family moved to the countryside of Surrey when he was a
child. After attending the South Kensington School of Art, with little education in architecture he
began to work for the architect Ernst George in 1887. Leaving to start his own practice in 1889 , he
began with small domestic projects.
Peter Inskip, in David Dunster’s collection of essays on Lutyens, writes that Lutyens’ architecture,
especially his country houses, replicated historical imagery and was influenced by the work of his con-
temporaries, including Richard Norman Shaw ( 1986 ). Incorporating elements of the vernacular, these
domestic projects reflected the Tudor and classical baroque, some with castle-like romantic references.
Building for newly rich Edwardians, Lutyens designed smaller estates that evoked manor houses of the
previous century. Many of these houses displayed axial and processional siting, employing long drives
and dramatic vistas. A distinctive feature included the extension of the house externally into baroque,
geometrically organized gardens (Dunster, 1986 ). Some of his more celebrated house projects include
Ednaston Manor, house and farm buildings for W. G. Player; Marshcourt, a house for Herbert
Johnson, and Gledstone Hall, a house for Sir Amos Nelson.
Lutyens designed governmental projects in India between 1912 and 1939 and held the position of
chief architect for the imperial capital at New Delhi, collaborating on the layout of the city with
Herbert Baker. Concerning the design for the Viceroy’s House in New Delhi, he felt it necessary to
build with English classical proportions but adapted it to the regional climate (Irving, 1981 ).
These study sketches (Figure 5. 7 ) for the Viceroy’s House express techniques typical of Lutyen’s
design process. On folded grid paper, this page seems to have been approached from all sides, sug-
gesting that he rotated the paper, looking for the next available space to continue his exploration.
The page is comprised of partial plans, preliminary elevations, details and perspectives. Lutyen’s pen-
cil techniques reveal how he handled the various aspects of the building with a certain analytical
evenness. Evidenced by the fact that each sketch has been studied with similar size and amount of
detail. Lutyen’s needed to quickly refer to a three-dimensional view; so fast, in fact, that the windows
were rendered as thicker marks. Other parts, such as the plans, were slow and deliberate, as he made
small changes in reaction to what he was perceiving. This displays both his comfort with the media
and how easily the sketches conveyed necessary information. The graphite technique shows relatively
small consistent lines delineating an amount of realism. It is as if he had much of the general form of
the building in mind and was working out the specific look for the project. His sketching skills were
highly developed, which is expected considering his father’s occupation as an artist. His belief in the
role of sketches surfaces as he delineates every aspect of the building, down to doorway details and
connections. Without erasures, the pencil seems to be an extension of his hand as he moved easily
between views. It appears that he sketched as fast as he could imagine or make decisions. The sketches
represent the same stage of development and reference, both inside and out. They are executed with
primarily the same line weight, since he did not stop to change media or test a finished solution. They
reveal his concentration while drawing, evaluating what he imagined in three dimensions viewing the
building in its totality. Not at all restrained, he was deeply engrossed in a dialogue with the sketches,
pondering and reworking, while reacting to their communications.H5719-Ch05.qxd 7/15/05 3:39 PM Page 129