 |
 |
 |
The passage at Verona Book pp.53-57 on architectural change is presumably to be seen in the context of Ruskin’ thinking about Transition at Verona Book p.43, and as an application to architectural issues of his thoughts about novelty and romance at Verona Book pp.45-52. Unfortunately the manuscript is more than usually difficult to read, to the point that the direction of the argument is not easy to discern. At present it is not possible to suggest a transcription of some parts of these pages. It should be noted that where there are square brackets enclosing a question mark it cannot be assumed that only one word is represented. Ruskin’s hand does not always make word endings unambiguous.
He suggests that the reasons for change are partly the result of vanity, luxury and the desire for novelty, and partly the result of commercial or sanitary pressures - if a building is unhealthy or inconvenient to the point that profits are threatened then it is demolished. Architectural evidence is therefore scattered among what are now isolated remains from the past. Venice is fortunate in that respect for the past led to the preservation of some buildings which might elsewhere have been destroyed, and so it is possible to judge the work of mediocre architects as well as leading architects. However even in Venice buildings have been changed to the point that, according to Ruskin, if you look to the West from the Ducal Palace you would see nothing that was distinctively Venetian.
|
|
|
[Version 0.05: May 2008]