xxxviii INTRODUCTION

the controversial element, and the author not needing to descend from the height of his argument to refute and correct the error and ignorance of shallow critics, the view of the whole subject is altogether larger and more lofty, and its exalted tone is sustained throughout, sounding like a hymn to architectural loveliness.”

Ruskin’s heresies on the subject of railways were a stumbling-block to other papers beside the Spectator-to the Builder, for instance, and the Globe; but the reviewer in Britannia (May 26) warned its readers against making light even of Ruskin’s “eccentricities”:-

“We so seldom in these days meet with an author of really original and independent thought, that we may be excused for dwelling at some length on this striking and able volume. Mr. Ruskin’s mind is of that vigorous and searching nature which can be satisfied with nothing less than the elucidation of pure principles in art. He will accept nothing mean because it is showy, nothing vicious because it is common, nothing false because it is specious. ... He observes and he investigates for himself; and, gaining thus very clear and very decided conceptions, he expresses himself in a strain of copious eloquence, which rivets the mind by its fulness of meaning, and fascinates the fancy by its singular appropriateness of language and richness of imagery. ... Writing like this is so rare that we cannot expect it to soon become popular; ... even its eccentricities are most acceptable and wholesome as a stimulus to mental exertion. But we must be careful not to class as eccentricity what at first appears strange and even incomprehensible. It is the distinctive province of original genius to surprise us by the boldness and novelty of its conceptions-to make discoveries which we were not prepared to receive, and which, therefore, we hesitate to adopt; and this is so true that perhaps no author well worth a second reading ever thoroughly satisfied us with a first.”

The monthly and quarterly magazines were equally appreciative of the book. Almost without exception, they noticed it, and added to favourable criticisms long extracts or a careful analysis of the author’s argument.¹ His old enemies, however, were not appeased. Blackwood still found Ruskin “verbose, tedious, obscure and extravagant,” and was especially puzzled and sarcastic with his “breaking loose” in so “strange

¹ In addition to the reviews quoted in the text, articles on the book appeared in The Art Journal (October 1849, vol. xi. p. 324), the Church of England Quarterly (July 1849, vol. xxvi. pp. 170-188), Sharpe’s London Journal (1849, vol. ix. pp. 252-256), North British Review (February 1850, vol. xii. pp. 309-353), Fraser’s Magazine (February 1850, vol. xli. pp. 151-159), the Anglo-Saxon (April 1850, vol. ii. pp. 319-336, review signed B.S.), Christian Observer (October 1850, vol. l. pp. 684-698), English Review (March 1851, vol. xv. pp. 55-76), North American Review (April 1851, vol. lxxii. pp. 294-316, article by S. G. Brown), Edinburgh Review (October 1851, vol. xciv. pp. 365-403).

[Version 0.04: March 2008]