425

CHAP. XXIV.

GARDENING AND ARCHITECTURE.

T

HE books that have been compofed upon architecture and upon embellishing ground, abound in practical instruction, neceffary for a mechanic: but in vain would we rummage them for rational principles to improve our taste. In a general fyftem, it might be thought fufficient to have unfolded the principles that govern these and other fine arts, leaving the application to the reader: but as I would neglect no opportunity of fhowing the extenfive influence of these principles, the purpose of the present chapter is to apply them to the favourite arts of gardening and architecture; but without intending any regular plan, which would be unfuitable to the nature of this work, and not less fo to the inexperience of its author.

Gardening was at firft an ufeful art: in the garden of Alcinoous, defcribed by Homer, we find nothing done for pleasure merely. But gardening is now improved into a fine art; and when we talk of a garden without any epithet, a pleafure-garden, by way of eminence, is understood: the garden of Alcinoous, in modern language, was but a kitchen-garden. Architecture has run

the

I

the fame course it continued many ages an useful art merely, before it afpired to be claffed with the fine arts. Architecture therefore and gardening must be handled in a twofold view, being ufeful arts as well as fine arts. The reader however will not here expect rules for improving any work of art in point of utility; it being no part of my plan to treat of any useful art as fuch: but there is a beauty in utility; and in difcourfing of beauty, that of utility must not be neglected. This leads us to confider gardens and buildings in different views: they may be destined for use folely, for beauty folely, or for both. Such variety in the destination, bestows upon gardening and architecture a great command of beauties, complex not lefs than various, which makes it difficult to form an accurate tafte in thefe arts: and hence that difference and wavering of tafte, which is more remarkable here than in any art that has but a fingle destination.

Architecture and gardening cannot otherwise entertain the mind, than by raising certain agreeable emotions or feelings; and with these we must begin, as the true foundation of all the rules of criticism that govern the arts mentioned. Poetry, as to its power of raifing emotions, poffeffes justly the first place among the fine arts; for fcarce any one emotion of human nature is beyond its reach. Painting and sculpture are more circumfcribed, having the command of no emotions but what are produced by fight: they are peculiarly

peculiarly fuccefsful in expreffing painful paffions, which are display'd by external figns extremely legible *. Gardening, befide the emotions of beauty by means of regularity, order, proportion, colour, and utility, can raife emotions of grandeur, of sweetness, of gaiety, melancholy, wildness, and even of furprise or wonder. In architecture, regularity, order, and proportion, and the beauties that refult from them, are still more confpicuous than in gardening: but as to the beauty of colour, architecture is far inferior. Grandeur can be expreffed in a building, perhaps more fuccessfully than in a garden; but as to the other emotions above mentioned, architecture hitherto has not been brought to the perfection of expreffing them diftinctly. To balance this defect, architecture can difplay the beauty of utility in the highest perfection.

Gardening indeed poffeffes one advantage, never to be equalled in the other art; which is, that it is capable, in various fcenes, to raise fucceffively all the different emotions above mentioned. But to operate this delicious effect, the garden must be extensive, fo as to admit a flow fucceffion for a fmall garden, comprehended at one view, ought to be confined to one expreffion †; it may be gay, it may be fweet, it may be gloomy; but an attempt to mix thefe, would create a jumble of emotions not a little unpleasant,

See Chap. 15.

+ See Chap. 8.

For

For the fame reafon, a building, even the most magnificent, is neceffarily confined to one expreffion.

Architecture, confidered as a fine art, instead of rivaling gardening in its progrefs towards perfection, feems not far advanced beyond its infantftate. To bring it to maturity, two things mainly are wanted. First, a greater variety of parts and ornaments than at prefent it seems provided with. Gardening here has greatly the advantage it is provided with fuch plenty and fuch variety of materials, that it must be the fault of the artist, if the spectator be not entertained with different scenes, and affected with various emotions. In architecture, on the contrary, materials are fo fcanty, that artifts hitherto have not been fuccefsful in raifing emotions, other than thofe of beauty and grandeur: with refpect to the former, there are indeed plenty of means, regularity, order, fymmetry, fimplicity, utility; and with refpect to the latter, the addition of fize is fufficient. But though it be evident, that every building ought to have a certain character or expreffion fuitable to its deftination; yet this is a refinement which artists have scarce ventured upon a death's head and bones employ'd in monumental buildings, will indeed produce an emotion of gloom and melancholy; but every ornament of this kind, if thefe can be termed fo, ought to be rejected, because they are in themfelves difagreeable. The other thing wanted to

bring the art to perfection, is, to afcertain the precife impreffion made by every single part and ornament, cupolas, fpires, columns, carvings, ftatues, vafes, &c.: for in vain will an artist attempt rules for employing these, either fingly or in combination, until the different emotions they produce be diftinctly explained. Gardening in

this particular hath alfo the advantage: the feveral emotions raised by trees, rivers, cafcades, plains, eminences, and other materials it employs, are understood; and each emotion can be defcribed with fome degree of precifion, which is done occafionally in the foregoing parts of this work.

In gardening as well as in architecture, fimplicity ought to be the governing taste. Profufe ornament hath no better effect than to confound the eye, and to prevent the object from making an impreffion as one entire whole. An artift deftitute of genius for capital beauties, is naturally prompted to fupply the defect by crowding his plan with flight embellishments: hence in a garden, triumphal arches, Chinese houfes, temples, obelifks, cafcades, fountains without end; and in a building, pillars, vafes, ftatues, and a profufion of carved work. Thus fome women devoid of taste, are apt to overcharge every part of their dress with ornament. Superfluity of decoration hath another bad effect, by giving the object a diminutive look: an island in a wide extended lake makes it appear larger; but an artificial lake,