The compound words, or terms _good-taste_ and _bad-taste_ have been used
in the preceding pages without, perhaps, sufficiently explaining what is
meant by the word _taste_, other than as giving vague and unsatisfactory
terms to the reader in measuring the subject in hand. _Taste_ is a term
universally applied in criticism of the fine-arts, such as painting,
sculpture, architecture, &c., &c., of which there are many schools--of
_taste_, we mean--some of them, perhaps natural, but chiefly
conventional, and all more or less arbitrary. The proverb, "there is no
accounting for taste," is as old as the aforesaid schools themselves,
and defines perfectly our own estimate of the common usage of the term.
As we have intended to use it, Webster defines the word _taste_ to be
"the faculty of discerning beauty, order, congruity, proportion,
symmetry, or whatever constitutes excellence; style; manner with respect
to what is pleasing." With this understanding, therefore; a fitness to
the purpose for which a thing is intended--got up in a manner agreeable
to the eye and the mind--preserving also a harmony between its various
parts and uses; pleasing to the eye, as addressed to the sense, and
satisfactory to the mind, as appropriate to the object for which it is
required;--these constitute _good-taste_, as the term is here
understood.
The term _style_, also, is "the _manner_ or _form_ of a thing."
When we say, "that is a stylish house," it should mean that it is in,
or approaches some particular style of building recognized by the
schools. It may or may not be in accordance with good taste, and is,
consequently, subject to the same capricious test in its government. Yet
_styles_ are subject to arrangement, and are classified in the several
schools of architecture, either as distinct specimens of acknowledged
orders, as the Doric, the Ionic, the Corinthian, in Grecian
architecture, or, the Tuscan and Composite, which are, more distinctly,
styles of Roman architecture. To these may be added the Egyptian, the
most massive of all; and either of them, in their proper character,
grand and imposing when applied to public buildings or extensive
structures, but altogether inapplicable, from their want of lightness
and convenience, to country or even city dwellings. Other styles--not
exactly orders--of architecture, such as the Italian, the Romanesque,
the Gothic, the Swiss, with their modifications--all of which admit of a
variety of departures from fixed rules, not allowed in the more rigid
orders--may be adapted in a variety of ways, to the most agreeable and
harmonious arrangement in architectural effect, for dwellings and
structures appurtenant to them.
The Italian style of architecture, modified somewhat in pretension and
extent, is admirably adapted to most parts of the United States. Its
general lightness, openness, and freedom gives a wide range of choice;
and its wings, verandas, and terraces, stretching off in any and almost
every direction desired, from the main building, make it exceedingly
appropriate for general use. The modern, or rural Gothic, branching off
sometimes into what is termed the English cottage style, and in many
instances blending so intimately with the Italian, as hardly to mark the
line of division, is also a beautiful _arrangement_ of building for
country dwellings. These, in ruder structures, may also be carried into
the Rustic--not a style proper, in itself--but so termed as
approximating in execution or pretension to either of the above; while
the Swiss, with its hanging roofs, and sheltering eaves may be
frequently brought in aid to show out the rustic form in more
completeness, and in greater harmony with surrounding objects, than
either of the others.
For farm houses, either of these _arrangements_ or departures from a
_set_ and _positive_ style, are better fitted than any which we have
noticed; and in some one or other of the modifications named, we have
applied them in the examples submitted in this work. They may not
therefore be viewed as _distinct_ delineations of an _order_ of
architecture, or style _proper_, even; but as a _mode_ appropriate to
the object required. And so long as they do not absolutely conflict with
true taste, or in their construction commit a barbarism upon any
acknowledged system of architecture, in any of its modifications, we
hazard no impropriety in introducing them for the imitation of country
builders. Congruity with the objects to which it is applied should be
the chief merit of any structure whatever; and so long as that object be
attained, good taste is not violated, and utility is fully subserved.
Intimately connected with this subject, in rural buildings, is the
_shape_ of the structure. Many of the designs recently introduced for
the imitation of builders, are full of angles and all sorts of zig-zag
lines, which, although they may add to the variety of style, or relieve
the monotony of straight and continuous lines, are carried to a needless
excess, expensive in their construction, and entail infinite trouble
upon the owner or occupant, in the repairs they subject him to, in the
leakages continually occurring, against which last, either of wind or
rain, it is almost impossible to guard. And what, let us ask, are the
benefits of a parcel of needless gables and peaked windows, running up
like owl's ears, above the eaves of a house, except to create expense,
and invite leakage and decay? If in appearance, they provoke an
association of that kind, they certainly are not in good taste; and a
foot or two of increased height in a wall, or a low window sufficient
for the purpose intended, would give a tone of dignity, of comfort, and
real utility, which a whole covey of such pretentious things could not.
All such trumpery should be scouted from the dwelling house of the
farmer, and left to the special indulgence of the town builder.
A _square_ form of house will afford more area within a given line of
wall than any other _sensible_ form which may be adopted. Yet a square
house is not so agreeable to the eye as an oblong. Thus, a house should
stand somewhat broader on one front than on another. It should also be
relieved from an appearance of monotony and tameness, by one or more
wings; and such wings should, at their junction with the main building,
retreat or advance a sufficient distance from a continuous line, as to
relieve it effectually from an appearance of stiffness, and show a
different character of occupation from that of the main structure. The
front of a house should be the most imposing and finished in its
architecture of any one of its parts; and unless some motive of greater
convenience control otherwise, its entrance the most highly wrought,
as indicating the luxury of the establishment--for even the humblest
habitations have their luxuries. The side rooms, or more usually
occupied apartments, require less pretension in both architectural
effect and finish, and should wear a more subdued appearance; while the
kitchen section, and from that, the several grades of apartments
stretching beyond it, should distinctly show that they are subservient
in their character, and wear a style and finish accordingly. Thus, each
part of the house speaks for itself. It is its own finger-board,
pointing the stranger to its various accommodation, as plainly as if
written on its walls, and saying as significantly as dumb walls can do,
that here dwells a well regulated family, who have a parlor for their
friends; a library, or sitting-room for their own leisure and comfort;
an ample bedroom and nursery, for the parents and the little ones; a
kitchen for the cooking; and a scullery and closets, and all the other
etceteras which belong to a perfect family homestead.
And so with the grounds. The lawn or "dooryard," should be the best kept
ground on the place. The most conspicuous part of the garden should show
its shrubbery and its flowers. The side or rear approach should be
separated from the lawn, and show its constant _business_ occupation,
and openly lead off to where men and farm stock meet on common ground,
devoted to every purpose which the farm requires. Such arrangement would
be complete in all its parts, satisfactory, and lasting. Tinsel
ornament, or gewgaw decoration should never be permitted on any building
where the sober enjoyment of agricultural life is designed. It can never
add consideration or dignity to the retired gentleman even, and least of
all should it be indulged in by the farmer, dwelling on his own
cultivated acres.