INTRODUCTION
rooted in elementary creative and imitative instincts, surround us to
the same extent as architecture, act upon us so incessantly and so
ubiquitously. We can avoid intercourse with what people call the
Fine Arts, but we cannot escape buildings and the subtle but pene-
trating effects of their character, noble or mean, restrained or
ostentatious, genuine or meretricious. An age without painting is
conceivable, though no believer in the life-enhancing function of
art would want it. An age without easel-pictures can be conceived
without any difficulty, and, thinking of the predominance of easel-
pictures in the ipth century, might be regarded as a consummation
devoutly to be wished. An age without architecture is impossible
as long as human beings populate this world.
The very fact that in the ipth century easel-painting flourished at
the expense of wall-painting and ultimately of architecture, proves
into what a diseased state the arts (and Western civilisation) had
fallen. The very fact that the Fine Arts to-day seem to be recovering
their architectural character makes one look into the future with some
hope. For architecture did rule when Greek art and when, mediaeval
art grew and were at their best; Raphael and Michelangelo still con-
ceived in terms of balance between architecture and painting.
Titian did not, Rembrandt did not, nor did Velasquez. Very high
aesthetic achievements are possible in easel-painting, but they arc
achievements torn out of the common ground of life. The ipth
century and, even more forcibly, some of the most recent tendencies
in the fine arts have shown up the dangers of the take-it-or-leave-it
attitude of the independent, self-sufficient painter. Salvation can
only conic from architecture as the art most closely bound up with
the necessities of life, with immediate use and functional and struc-
tural fundamentals.
That does not, however, mean that architectural evolution is
caused by function and construction. A style in art belongs to the
world of mind, not die world of matter. New purposes may result
in new types of building, but the architect's job is to make such new
types both aesthetically and functionally satisfactory—and not all
ages have considered, as ours does, functional soundness indispensable
for aesthetic enjoyment. The position is similar with regard to
materials* New materials may make new forms possible, and even
call for new forms. Hence it is quite justifiable, if so many works on
architecture (especially in England) have emphasised their impor-
tance. If in this book they have deliberately been kept in the back-
xx