CHAPTER VII

THE TRANSITIONAL PERIOD

The trick enigmatical nature sometimes plays the gentlest parents by an

offspring who, notwithstanding their constant solicitude--the constant

bending of the twig--turns out to be a disappointment, not to say a

positively black sheep, has its analogy in art. And of such curious

analogy no more picturesque example exists than that supplied by what

has come to be known as our “Transitional period”--a hopelessly ordinary

offspring of a civilization highly cultivated and refined.

To see the Transitional period in its popular aspect, which is its worst

aspect, no better spectacles may be borrowed than those once worn by

Charles Dickens, the novelist, to write his “American Notes” and “Martin

Chuzzlewit.” Only, it will not do to pass final judgment from a scathing

arraignment of crimes to the extent of burlesquing the subject, as

happens at times in Dickens’ books. There is the documentary evidence

to be sifted and examined which, I am very sure, will lessen and correct

the scandal materially. And if I have hitherto neglected to avail myself

of such evidence, permitting the scandal of the Transitional period to

appear as common gossip in these articles, it was for dramatic effect

and for contrast. In the present article I propose to make reparation,

and direct the magnifying power mainly upon that which is good.

It was somewhat unfair of Dickens to expect that we should have achieved

architectural grandeur in the brief time at our disposal; but I regret

that his uncomplimentary description of the City of Washington in the

forties is yet graphic in a degree of the present capital, though vast

appropriations by Congress have been frequently lavished upon it, and

misspent. We know that Dickens was not always prejudiced, by the

encomiums he bestowed upon the scenery of New England, for instance, and

the pretty girls he chanced to meet during his visit, who it seems

contrived to be born in America despite the banal times and hideous

fashions which, I am glad, could not wholly disguise them. However, as

complete sets of the works of Charles Dickens are to be found upon the

shelves of every public library, and secondhand copies of “American

Notes” and “Martin Chuzzlewit” may be picked up for a few pennies at the

bookstands, nobody need miss the salutary influence of many of the

criticisms. Not so easily may the American student provide himself with

a copy of the diary of Philip Hone, though it be a much more instructive

and faithful commentary upon the Transitional period than anything

Dickens ever wrote. For I think the two volumes sell for $7 net. There

are no pirated copies to be had, of course, no cheap editions, as is

usually the case with the more reliable sources of information it is

obligatory upon us to look up would we follow cause and effect in the

history of American art. Here indeed our own copyright law is a positive

hindrance to the acquisition of knowledge. Few architectural students

can afford $7 for a purely literary work devoted to the Transitional

period.

Mr. Hone wrote his journal from day to day as Samuel Pepys wrote his,

without idea of publication, and, consequently, without exaggeration,

praise or ridicule for effect. He wrote things down as he saw them. He

was not writing to correct popular abuses. He was, apparently, governed

in his avocation by no other desire than the simple one of keeping a

diary. And it is this unaffected form of diary that makes its contents

more and more valuable as time goes on.

When Dickens has “Martin Chuzzlewit” entertained in New York society he

constructs for our edification an amusing farce which we enjoy as a

farce, though the author himself pretends to be in very earnest; but

when Philip Hone relates of an assembly ball with great difficulty

arranged owing to the painful lack of homogeneity and even suitability

of the available personnel, another and serious phase of the case is

presented, because it is sadly true. Under the ingenuous pen of this

diarist, we may see James Gordon Bennett the elder wrangling with the

unliveried servants for admission which, we are told, the management

finally consented to extend upon the one condition that the account of

the ball which was to appear in the _Herald_ the following morning

should at least be “decent.” I believe that is the word Mr. Hone uses.

PLATE XLVII.

[Illustration: GRACE CHURCH RECTORY.]

At any rate, we realize as never before how disorganized the social

fabric must have been at the period, and how it had deteriorated from

that of the older régimes. It is all but ludicrous, that entry in the

diary where the connoisseurs gather in Barclay Street to pay their

respects to such mediocre art as was exemplified by the allegorical

series of paintings called “The Voyage of Life.” The reader remembers

the old engravings of them, I dare say, very well. But we know that the

connoisseurs did do this very silly thing, because Philip Hone’s diary

is indisputable and exact evidence uncolored. It is incredible,

nevertheless, that a political expediency should have caused the whole

nation to forget so readily the proficiency in art matters attained by

preceding generations, and, presto! resolved its most representative

spirits into an unpromising class of abecedarians.

There is a tone often noticeable throughout the memoirs of Philip Hone,

who sometimes made trips abroad in the sailing packets of his day,

thereby extending the scope of his own horizon, as though he were a bit

ashamed of the crude provincialism of his compatriots when it was the

custom to speak the English language incorrectly, and when the three

Rs--“Reading, Riting and Rithmetic”--were all the academic preparation

for a life of usefulness that was required. Indeed, if he were quick at

figures, could follow Webster’s spelling book, and make neat flourishes

with his pen, no young man of the Transitional period need ever have

despaired of positions and promotion.

The question often heard, now-a-days, “What chance has a man for

self-cultivation in a boom town?” applies very nearly to the metropolis

of the Transitional period.[5] What use more profitable could one have

found for his time than speculation in real estate, if one could buy a

house for $25,000, as did Philip Hone, and sell it within a few years

for $60,000? Certainly, there was little inducement to pursue art in

such a phenomenally active market for values. The best that could be

expected of the very busy man of the day was to send his son betimes to

college and to Europe, the liberal education, it is true, often

unfitting him again for business as it was transacted in America. There

was a manufacturer of Transitional furniture who sent his son to Paris

to learn cabinet-making of those most renowned of European artificers;

and I have it from the son himself that he was, afterwards, obliged to

unlearn and forget all his Parisian training in order to meet the home

demand for cheap and tawdry stuff. Fancy!

The art prophet which this bourgeois epoch produced corresponded exactly

to it--just such a one as might be naturally expected--John Ruskin, old

fogy with ideas of no practical value to communicate to the world, but,

like Browning and Emerson, full of words, rhymes and sentences. Ruskin

conceived a violent passion _à la_ Plato for the Gothic mode of

building. He affected to deplore the “foul flood of the Renaissance.”

And his great theory was that as the leaves of plants nearly always

terminate in a point, it was intended by nature that man should take

pattern therefrom for his architecture. To make a theory so point-device

consistent Ruskin went so far as to criticise those leaves of plants

which terminate in other ways. Imagine some classic writer tracing the

origin of the Roman arch to lily-pads which may have floated in the

Tiber!

The only really clever observation concerning architecture Ruskin

ever made was the metaphor he applied to the great mediæval

cathedrals--“frozen music.” But he was not a purist of Gothic

architecture in the truer sense. Had he been so, he would have defended

the Tudor castles of England against Renaissance obtrusion; for the

Tudor architecture was a true development of the home idea, legitimate

and historical, while that of the Gothic cathedrals was not intended to

serve for dwelling-houses by any possible contingency. Yet Ruskin

persisted in the feasibility of an anomalous adaptation, something, as a

matter of fact, that nobody has achieved with very great credit. For

rectories and parish houses the ecclesiastic Gothic may serve as far as

sentiment and harmony are desired; but for practical uses it is a

failure applied to dwelling-houses. Grace Church rectory is extremely

disappointing within if we consider all the disiderata of a modern home,

however suggestive of comfort it may be to the casual observer. (See

Plate XLVII).

PLATE XLVIII.

[Illustration: NO. 23 BOND ST., NEW YORK.]

[Illustration: THE SARGENT HOUSE (COMMON, EAST), NEW HAVEN.]

[Illustration: EAST FOURTH ST., NEW YORK.]

The Richmond-Dow house at Warren, R. I., shown in Plate L, is a typical

example of Ruskin Gothic when the poet’s influence was at its height.

For the romantically inclined individual of the Transitional period but

one course was open, namely, to build himself a Ruskin Gothic cottage.

The stone cottages like the Richmond-Dow cottage were the better sort,

and if the narrow lancet windows tended to make them a little gloomy

they were otherwise not half bad; but the wooden cottages with the

perpendicular battens are execrable. Another very decent stone cottage

in ecclesiastic Gothic is shown in Plate LI. It has a charming setting

on High Street at Middletown, Ct., and again the interior, like Grace

church rectory, is a disappointment. The delightful window overlooking

the lawn is not nearly so nice from the inside. The fibre of quartered

oak was generally too tough for the planes and chisels of the

Transitional joiners, who always preferred to work in white pine, and

leave to the makeshift grainer the responsibility of doing it up to

simulate oak. We are, all of us, familiar with that forlorn art of

graining.

Then, in order not to forego in the ecclesiastic Gothic cottages another

indispensable makeshift--the American veranda--the Transitional

architects desecrated rood-screens and chancel carvings. Happily,

now-a-days, nobody would think of copying Ruskin in a dwelling-house.

People may like to read a conventional gift-book occasionally, and take

up “Sesame and Lilies” from the drawing-room table when they have time

to kill, and want to get away from everyday life and practical things.

Moreover, the most selfish and unscrupulous people in the world are apt

to have a vein of sentimental efflorescence in their nature which will

reveal itself, when they read Ruskin or Browning, with a zest that is

Machiavelian.

But the Transitional period as we have come to know it best was not a

Gothic revival, but a poverty-stricken application of Renaissance motive

and detail out of the midst of which I have proposed to try to find

something commendable--something to praise. Well, I think I shall have

done so when I throw upon the imaginary screen I have so often suspended

before my very patient audience, the picture of the doorway in East

Fourth Street, New York City (Plate XLVIII). And were it a “truly”

phantasmagoria I were conducting, I know it would be difficult for an

audience to restrain itself--not to cry “Ah!” after the manner of the

gallery, because I know how this picture affects me, and can discount

the reader’s enthusiasm accordingly. The adjoining windows are out of

proportion to the doorway, and badly spaced, but are faithful to the

epoch. One must not expect too much of a Transitional house. The part of

the window shown belonging to No. 23 Bond Street--(see Plate XLVIII),

has better proportions, though the doorway beside it is not half as

beautiful as the one on Fourth Street. Still, we owe it to an uncommon

episode that this doorway has been photographed at all, and to which my

acknowledgment is given, though I do not altogether approve the

sentiment of the episode.

No. 23 Bond Street was once the property of a great beau of the

Transitional period named Harry Ward. He had money besides. Now, it is

very easy and natural for a great beau of any epoch, with money besides

to believe that because the Sabbath was made for man, the six other

days were made for him, also. Alas! no mistake could be more

unfortunate, and of this the doorway has long stood as mute evidence. In

coming into possession of No. 23 Bond Street, in his time a fashionable

neighborhood, Harry Ward decorated and refurnished the house in a way

which may be said to have been the last word upon the subject of

household art of the period; and, to recur to a Transitional

colloquialism, “he had his girl picked out.” But there were inimical

circumstances which precluded the nuptial celebration, so they could not

live in the house. Then Mr. Ward died, and, I believe, bequeathed No. 23

Bond Street, in fee-simple, to his sweetheart. This sweetheart, like

Edith Bartlett in “Looking Backward,” rode on the top of the coach, and

consequently she also coveted the six days that were not made for man,

very much. The dispensation seemed unnecessarily cruel. We may not judge

of the motives that induced her to rebel, and to keep the house as long

as she lived a sacred memorial to Mr. Ward and to have nothing moved or

changed from the way he had ordered it during his lifetime; but we know

that without

PLATE XLIX.

[Illustration: SUN-DIAL, GRACE CHURCH RECTORY, NEW YORK CITY.]

a superabundance of wealth, she could not have gratified a sentiment

wherein a sinister and selfish side out-weighs its virtue. You see, how

very few of us may be trusted with money! For it would have been a so

much finer monument to Mr. Ward had this house been bestowed by his

legatee upon some poorer though deserving couple whom the Lord had

destined to be of use to Him:--it would have been infinitely better

dedicated as a museum of the Transitional period for its didactic

benefit to art students; but I fear I am the only human being, excepting

the care-takers perhaps, who has derived any tangible satisfaction from

No. 23 Bond street since the sad dénouement which closed it so tightly

to the busy stream of life constantly passing.[6]

I suppose the finest specimen of Transitional domestic architecture

extant in the United States is the Bennett house on County Street in New

Bedford (see Plate LI, also Frontispiece), erected about 1840, for a

full description of which I would respectfully refer the reader to the

_Architectural Review_ (Boston) for July, 1901. There is nothing

disappointing about this Transitional exemplar; it was one of those

grateful notes of hope at a season of national melancholia. Wonderfully

imposing from its great size, it will grieve the reader to learn that

the magnificent pile is already crumbling from lack of appreciation, and

it will not be long before the dealer in second-hand building materials

carries it away, piece by piece, to his yard, so little do the people of

New Bedford care for the most interesting building by far that their

city possesses to-day. The Bennett house is the only successful

adaptation of the Greek-temple motive, _pur et simple_, to domestic

purposes that has come to my knowledge.

And here I want to say a single word about restoration. If by any chance

you live in a house of the Transitional period that illustrates as good

architecture

PLATE L.

[Illustration: HOUSE OF MRS. RICHMOND-DOW, WARREN, R. I.]

[Illustration: HOUSE OF MRS. RICHMOND-DOW, WARREN, R. I.

View from the Close.]

PLATE LI.

[Illustration: HOUSE ON HIGH STREET, MIDDLETOWN, CONN.]

[Illustration: THE BENNETT HOUSE, COUNTY ST., NEW BEDFORD, MASS.]

as that of the de Zeng house on High Street in Middletown (see Plate

LIII), don’t try to make it Colonial as I have seen a tendency among

ill-advised people to do of late. Let me say to you that you have

something already so much ahead of average modern Colonial--“as she is

spoke”--that it would be a sin against the decalogue of art to alter or,

indeed, do other with it than religiously to guard. Just keep your

Transitional exemplar in the same admirable state of repair in which you

see the de Zeng house at Middletown--and enjoy it. You will thereby have

fulfilled your duty to art and to the future generations who will rise

up and call you blessed.

The foregoing paragraph applies equally to the Roberts mansion at the

northeast corner of Rittenhouse Square in Philadelphia (Plate LIII). For

the sake of goodness, don’t try to colonialize it! There are several

houses in Philadelphia that resemble the Roberts house--the

Dundas-Lippincott house and the Willstack house being two of them, but I

think neither so admirable.

I do not know that I should ever build myself a house to live in after

the manner of the Transitional period even after such delightful and

exceptional models as are supplied by the Bennett, Roberts or de Zeng

houses, but if I already possessed one, I should rest content that its

architecture could not be improved by any material alteration I could

suggest.

In the _Architectural Review_ for February, 1902, the reader may read

about the Transitional houses of lower Fifth Avenue, New York City, also

of that celebrated row facing Washington Square. The Waterbury house

(see Plate LIV) was demolished last winter, so that its entrancing attic

windows screened by the crosses of St. Andrew will no longer delight the

visitor who returns to the old neighborhood.

The venerable Colonnade on Lafayette Place (Plate LV) probably makes its

last public appearance in this review as among the remains of our

Transitional period. Half of it is already gone, while the other half is

in imminent danger. This row of dwelling-houses should not be confounded

in any way with that other row known as London Terrace of Chelsea

village (Twenty-third Street), because the Lafayette Place

PLATE LII.

[Illustration: DOORWAY, NEW YORK CITY.]

PLATE LIII.

[Illustration: THE DE ZENG HOUSE, MIDDLETOWN, CONN.]

[Illustration: THE ROBERTS HOUSE, RITTENHOUSE SQUARE, PHILADELPHIA.]

houses were the “real stuff,” those of the London Terrace are sham in

comparison.

In the Colonnade there dwelt at different times many noted individuals.

When the first John Jacob Astor decided to devote some of his money to

art, the Astor library and other gracious projects, he looked about him

for some men of a gentler type than those with whom he had rubbed elbows

in the accumulation of his wealth--men of some literary and artistic

achievement who would be competent to direct the proposed outlay. Such

spirits were rare in the forties, and Mr. Astor had difficulty in

finding them. He induced the poet Halleck to become his protégé, and

Washington Irving to pay him extended visits. I am not sure that

Washington Irving was considered a guest of Mr. Astor when he lived in

apartments at the Colonnade, but as he was often entrusted with various

commissions in matters of literature and art, and the financing of same

for Mr. Astor, who lived just over the way, it was nearly the same

thing.

Washington Irving spoke and wrote the English language correctly, an

uncommon accomplishment in his time, and for which the American people

paid him nearly a quarter of a million dollars in royalties. He was the

dilettante par excellence of his epoch, who, without having anything in

particular to say, said it very gracefully. They did not pay according

to real genius in the Transitional period, for otherwise, Poe should

have made a fortune with two of his poems alone--namely, “The Raven” and

“The Bells,” which we know, as a matter of fact, he did not. However,

Washington Irving had his own mission to perform, though it must have

been with extreme reluctance that he quitted his snug bachelor quarters

at Wolfert’s Roost for the then palatial surroundings of the Colonnade

even to serve Mr. Astor. For if you accept the hospitality of very rich

people--and if you can do anything worth while you do not want for

invitations--you are generally expected to return every penny’s worth of

it in some way. Niecks in his “Life of Chopin” relates how when the

“grand artiste” was asked to play after dinner at the hôtel of an

opulent host, he begged off, pleading that he had eaten so very little,

which was true enough, for the malady from which he suffered sadly

PLATE LIV.

[Illustration: GOOD ARCHITECTURE OF THE TRANSITIONAL PERIOD IN LOWER

FIFTH AVENUE. NO. 1 FIFTH AVENUE.]

[Illustration: WATERBURY HOME, FIFTH AVE. AND 11th ST.]

PLATE LV.

[Illustration: REMAINING HALF OF THE COLONNADE.

Its Positively Last Appearance]

[Illustration: TYPICAL ARCHITECTURE OF THE TRANSITIONAL PERIOD.]

impaired his appetite. But we are not all such consummate masters of our

art as was Chopin of his, and do not dare say such things, however well

merited they may be. Washington Irving saw that he could be of service

to his country by telling the “old gentleman,” as he alludes to his

patron in the “Life and Letters, etc.,” how to avoid banality and

vulgarisms, and the Astor library was the largest and most important

public charity that had yet been attempted.

In an age when the anatomy of charity is under the microscope of many a

millionaire as to-day, it seems discouraging that its secret is yet

likely to remain unrevealed. But let us acknowledge to ourselves, are we

not hindered to a very great extent by that awkward condition imposed

upon us by every religion that one hand is not to know what the other is

about? And of course, you know, that really takes all the fun out of

charity.

American renaissance; a review of domestic architecture · 第 7 / 12 章