Talk:The Seven Lamps of Architecture

Ruskin's aphorisms

Starting with the third edition, Ruskin singled out certain passages, as aphorisms, and had them printed in Clarendon type, to stand out in the text; there are thirty-three. They form an outline of his salient points and have played a (too-prominent?) role in subsequent characterizations of Ruskinian thought. When this article is rich enough not to be overwhelmed, some might be discussed.--Wetman (talk) 21:31, 22 July 2009 (UTC)

1. We may always know what is right; but not always what is possible (Introductory)
2. All Practical laws are the exponents of moral ones (Introductory)
3. The arts of our day must not be luxurious, nor its metaphyics idle. (Introductory)
4. All architecture proposes an effect on the human mind, not merely a service to the human frame (Sacrifice)
5. Domestic luxury is to be sacrificed to national magnificence (Sacrifice)
6. Modern builders are capable of little; and don't even do, the little they can.
7. The guilt and harm of amiable and well meant lying (Truth)
8. Truth cannot be persisted in without pains; but is worth them. (Truth)
9. The nature and dignity of imagination (Truth)

   (all the above from [1])

10. To speak and act truth with constancy and precision is nearly as diffcult, and perhaps as meritorious, as to speak it under intimidation or penalty; and it is a strange thought how many men there are, as I trust, who would hold to it at the cost of fortune or hfe, for one who would hold to it at the cost of a little daily trouble. And seeing that of all sin there is, perhaps, no one more flatly opposite to the Almighty, no one more' wanting the good of virtue and of being', than this of lying, it is surely a strange insolence to fall into the foulness of it on light or on no temptation, and surely becomingan honourable man to resolve, that, whatever semblances or fallacies the necessary course of his life may compel him to bear or to believe, none shall disturb the serenity of his voluntary actions, nor diminish the reahty of his chosen delights. (p.33-34 Truth)
11. This rule is, I think, that metals may be used as a cement, but not as a support. For as cements of other kinds are often so strong that the stones may easier be broken than separated, and the wall becomes a solid mass, without for that reason losing the character of architecture, there is no reason why, when a nation has obtained the knowledge and practice of iron work, metal rods or rivets should not be used in the place of cement and establish the same or a greater strength and adherence, without in any wise inducing departure from the types and system of architecture before established ; nor does it make any difference except as to sightliness, whether the metal bands or rods so employed, be in the body of the wall or on its exterior, or set as stays and cross-bands ; so only that the use of them be always and distinctly one which might be superseded by mere strength of cement ; as for instance if a pinnacle or muUion be propped or tied by an iron band, it is evident that the iron only prevents the separation id the stones by lateral force, which the cement would have done, had it been strong enough. But the moment that the iron in the least degree takes the place of the Btone, and acts by its resistance to crushing, and bears superincumbent weight, or if it acts by its own weight as a counterpoise, and so supersedes the use of pinnacles or buttresses in resisting a lateral thrust, or if, in the form of a rod or girder, it is used to do what wooden beams would have done as well, that instant the building ceases, so far as such applications of metal extend, to be true architecture.
12. highest greatness and the highest wisdom are shown, the first by a noble submission to, the second by a thoughtful providence for, certain voluntarily admitted restraints. Nothing is more evident than this, in that supreme government which is the example, as it is the centre, of all others. The Divine Wisdom is, and can be, shown to us only in its meeting and contending with the difficulties which are voluntarily, and for the sake of that contest, admitted by the Divine Omnipotence : and these difficulties, observe, occur in the form of natural laws or ordinances. which might, at many times and in countless ways, be infringed with apparent advantage, but which are never infringed, whatever costly arrangements or adaptations their observance may necessitate for the accomplishment of given purposes. The example most apposite to our present subject is the structure of the bones of animals. No reason can be given, I believe, why the system of the higher animals should not have been made capable, as that of the Infusoria is, of secreting flint, instead of phosphate of lime, or, more naturally still, carbon ; so framing the bones of adamant at once. The elephant or rhinoceros, had the earthy part of their bones been made of diamond, might have been as agile and light as grasshoppers, and other animals might have been framed, far more magnificently colossal than any that walk the earth. In other worlds we may, perhaps, see such creations ; a creation for every element, and elements infinite. But the architecture of animals here is appointed by God to be a marble architecture, not a flint nor adamant architecture ; and all manner of expedients are adopted to attain the utmost degree of strength and size possible under that great limitation. The jaw of the ichthyosaurus is pieced and riveted, the leg of the megatherium is a foot thick,and the head of the mylodon has a double skull ; we, in our wisdom, should, doubtless, have given the lizard a steel jaw, and the mylodon a cast-iron headpiece, and forgotten the great principle to which all creation bears witness, that order and system are nobler things than power. But God shows us in Himself, strange as it may seem, not only authoritative perfection, but even the perfection of Obedience—an obedience to His own laws : and in the cumbrous movement of those unwieldiest of His creatures, we are reminded, even in His divine essence, of that attribute of uprightness in the human creature; ' that sweareth to his own hurt, and changeth not.' (Truth p. 45-46)
13. so great a painter as Michael Angelo would always stop short, in such minor parts of his design, of the degree of vulgar force which would be necessary to induce the supposition of their reality ; and, strangely as it may sound, would never paint badly enough to deceive. But though right and wrong are thus found broadly opposed in works severally so mean and so mighty as the roof of Milan and that of the Sistine, there are works neither so great nor so mean, in which the limits of right are vaguely defined, and will need some care to determine ; care only, however, to apply accurately the broad principle with which we set out, that no form nor material is to be deceptively represented. (Truth p.47-48)

My word his style is tediously prolix.....breaking for air......--Joopercoopers (talk) 10:53, 24 July 2009 (UTC)

Plates

The plates are gorgeous! - I'm going to upload them...... --Joopercoopers (talk) 09:38, 23 July 2009 (UTC)

Hmm gallery is too large - we need to be selective. any favourites? --Joopercoopers (talk) 10:54, 23 July 2009 (UTC)

Much more illustrative than that (pirated?) New York edition title page.--Wetman (talk) 05:15, 24 July 2009 (UTC)

"His nine pencil drawings that illustrate the principles he examines" - We've got 14 plates, I'm confused by that. I thought originally perhaps the later editions contained more plates (I think the versions I've uploaded are from the 3rd ed), but the preface to the 1st addition refers to at least plate XI......what does the nine refer to? Perhaps those executed without the aid of photography? --Joopercoopers (talk) 12:22, 25 July 2009 (UTC)