 |
 |
 |
The first extended passage of biblical exegesis in the Notebooks beginning at Notebook M p.1 and dated Dijon, October 7th, a Sunday, starts from the Book of Proverbs, and its concern for the stability and kingliness of truth sets out a major theme of Ruskin's investigations.
In Milan at Notebook M p.5 Ruskin draws on Dante's account of Adam of Brescia to relate greed and fraud to what he sees as the debased architecture of the Duomo.
At Notebook M p.162L Ruskin derives moral judgments from the contrasting appearance of children on the earlier 4th Capital and the later 35th Capital in the Ducal Palace. Series of Capitals of Lower Arcade. He contrasts the ‘manliness and firmness’ of the earlier figures with the later figures, which are seen as ‘barbered dunces’.
The passage on Secresy at Notebook M2 p.58 and that on Prudence, which is a continuation of it beginning at Notebook M2 p.66, explore related issues, and seem of relevance to the established reputation of Venice as a place of secrets and dissimulation, see Works, 10.342 and Works, 10.428.
Notebook M2 p.109 draws on Deuteronomy, Genesis, Jeremiah and the First Epistle to the Corinthians to explore ideas of immoderation and the abuse of good in those who glory in men rather than in the Lord. The passage comes at the end of Ruskin’s stay in Venice, and provide the basis for Ruskin’s explanation of the fall of Venice.
Notebook M2 p.140 is the beginning of another lengthy passage of theological debate setting out Ruskin's views on the nature of baptism. That is a response to the Gorham judgment of which he had news on his arrival in Avignon rather than a working out of ideas about Venice.
At Notebook M2 p.176 infidelity leads to mean architecture and the ‘grinning masques’ of the ‘degraded noblesse of Venice’ are associated with the sophistication of Palladio, and the decline of Gothic, and by implication with Woods’ views on Palladio and Vicenza and Woods’ opinions about the ugliness of St Mark’s and the Ducal Palace, and with the critics of Seven Lamps of Architecture who agreed with Woods’ views.
Ruskin returns to Jeremiah on what appear to be the final pages of his notes on the tour. At Notebook M2 p.185; Notebook M2 pp.186L and 186 he draws attention to the priority of moral, religious, and political issues in the definition of good architecture, and in what seems to be the final page of notes on this journey he juxtaposes questions of efficiency and morality.
|
|
|
[Version 0.05: May 2008]