Abbildungen der Seite
PDF
EPUB

vious, and the difficulty of doing better is known to the artist only *.

Nothing can be more evident, than that the form of a dwelling-house ought to be fuited to the climate; and yet no error is more common, than to copy in Britain the form of Italian houses; not forgetting even thofe parts that are purposely contrived for air, and for excluding the fun. I fhall give one or two inftances. A colonnade along the front of a building, hath a fine effect in Greece and Italy, by producing coolness and obfcurity, agreeable properties in warm and luminous climates. The cold climate of Britain is altogether averfe to this ornament. A colonnade therefore, can never be proper in this country, unless when employ'd to communicate with a detached building. Again, a logio opening the house to the north, contrived in Italy for gathering cool air, is, if poffible, ftill more improper for this climate. Scarce endurable in fummer, it, in

ر

-,,*

* "Houses are built to live in, and not to lo

[ocr errors]

look on. There

"fore let ufe be preferred before uniformity, except where

T

"both may be had."

Lo. Verulam, eJay 45.

winter,

winter, expofes the house to the bitter blafts of the north, and to every fhower of fnow and rain. for bus biaogang fal [1 Having discussed what appeared neceffary to be faid upon relative beauty, fingly confidered, or in combination with intrinfic beauty, the next step is, to view architecture as one of the fine arts, and to examine thofe buildings and parts of buildings that are folely calculated to pleafe the eye. In the works of nature, grand and magnificent, variety prevails. The timid hand of art, is guided by rule and compass. Hence it is, that in works which imitate nature, the great art is to hide every appearance of art, which is done by avoiding regularity and indulging variety. But in works of art that are original and not imitative, fuch as architecture, ftrict regularity and uniformity ought to be ftudied fo far as confiftent with utilitysg ni In buildings intended to please the eye, proportion is not less effential than regularityl and uniformity; for we are fo framed by nature, as to be pleafed equally with seach of these. By many writers it is taken for granted, that in all the parts of a building It there

[ocr errors]

there are certain ftrict proportions which please the eye; precisely as there are certain ftrict proportions of found which please the ear; and that in both the slightest deviation is equally disagreeable. Others again feem to relish more a comparison betwixt proportion in numbers and proportion in quantity; and hold that the fame proportions are agreeable in both. The proportions, for example, of the numbers 16, 24, and 36 are agreeable; and fo, fay they, are the proportions of a room, the height of which is 16 feet, the breadth 24, and the length 36. This point, with relation to the present subject, being of importance, the reader will examine it with attention and impartiality. To refute the notion of a refemblance betwixt musical proportions and those of architecture, it might be fufficient to observe in general, that the one is addreffed to the car, the other to the eye; and that objects of different fenfes have no refemblance, nor indeed any relation to each other. But more particularly, what pleases the ear in harmony, is not the proportion of the ftrings of the inftrument, but of the founds that VOL. III. thefe

T t

[ocr errors]
[ocr errors]

thefe ftrings produce. In architecture, on the contrary, it is the proportion of different quantities that pleafes the eye, without the leaft relation to found. Befide, were quantity here to be the fole ground of compari fon, we have no reason to prefume, that there is any natural analogy betwixt the proportions that please in a building and the proportions of ftrings that produce concordant founds. I inftance in particular an octave, the most complete of all concords. An octave is produced by two ftrings of the fame tenfion and diameter, and as to length in the proportion of one to two. I do not know, that this proportion will be agreeable in any two parts of a building. I add, that concordant notes are produced by wind inftruments, which, as to proportion, appear not to have even the flightest resemblance to a building.

[ocr errors]

With refpect to the other notion inftituting a comparison betwixt proportion in numbers and proportion in quantity, I urge, that number and quantity are so distinct from each other, as to afford no probability of any natural relation betwixt them. Quan

tity is a real quality of every fubftance.or body: number is not a real quality, but merely a conception that arifes upon viewing a plurality of things in fucceffion. Becaufe an arithmetical proportion is agreeable in numbers, have we any reafon to conclude that it must also be agreeable in quantity ? At this rate, a geometrical proportion and many others, ought alfo to be agreeable in both. A certain proportion may coincide. in both; and among an endless variety of proportions, it would be wonderful, if there never should be a coincidence. One example is given of this coincidence, in the numbers 16, 24, and 36; but to be convinced that it is merely accidental, we need but reflect, that the fame proportions are not applicable to the external figure of a house, and far lefs to a column.

That we are framed by nature to relish, proportion as well as regularity, is indifputable: but that agreeable proportion, like concord in founds, is confined to certain precife measures, is not warranted by experience on the contrary, we learn from experience, that various proportions are e

[blocks in formation]
« ZurückWeiter »