Page:The Galaxy, Volume 5.djvu/163

Rh under far abler leadership. England has no architect the equal of Viollet-le-Duc, as distinguished for his learning and scholarship as for his professional skill, and who, by his enthusiasm, his energy, and wonderful industry, is doing the work of many men in regenerating architecture in France, and helping it to regain its ancient glory. His "Dictionary of Architecture" and his "Conversations on Architecture," are already influencing our younger men, and sowing the seeds of higher teaching than has yet come to us from any quarter. At home his influence has been great enough to produce an actual revolution, and give a serious blow to the school that has, thus far, arrogated to itself the name of "French," and which is responsible, both here and abroad, for much of the degeneracy that architecture has fallen into. It is greatly to be wished that our American Institute of Architecture should ally itself with this important movement, and bring it in some way more directly to bear upon our young scholars. There would be no danger, in doing this, that we should hazard our prospect of developing a style of architecture suited to our wants as a people living an individual and peculiar life, under new conditions of climate and temperature; for the excellence of M. Viollet-le-Duc consists in the practical character of his teachings, in the fact that they are founded, not on whim or fashion, but on principles, and that they are not formal nor degenerate, but enthusiastic and creative. They will not teach our young men to design in a particular style or school; but they lay a broad foundation on which to design well whatever may be required, to be governed in design by the eternal laws of common sense and nature. We have already had too much of one kind of French influence, and too many bad buildings have been designed, and too many built, in the style which the present Emperor—whose taste is of a very low order—has made fashionable, but which, happily, he has not succeeded in making national. Now let us enter into sympathy with the real France—the France of intelligence, progress—and enthusiasm, and learn what she can teach us of the true principles of building. And let us trust that by another decade, when these buildings that do so little credit to our culture, and are in such ludicrous contrast to the metropolitan claim we so loudly make, shall be tumbled down to make room for others, the public will show its growth in refinement and intelligence by demanding structures in their place that will represent its highest class, its most thoughtful, its best taught—structures built, not to be pulled down, but to endure—to become a part of our civil and national life, landmarks of our history, fit servants for our noblest uses, silent and venerable teachers of things not to be forgotten or despised.