THE NINETEENTH CENTURY.
Those who study the remains that have come down to us from ancient and mediceval times are often tempted to think, and even to assert, that Architecture now is a degenerate art—that, whereas the civilizations of old had styles of their own, we have none, and that in this utilitarian age we never take the time or unite in the effort necessary to execute great works equal to the temples of Egypt, Greece, or Rome, to the amphithea tres, baths, and basilicas of the last-named city, or to the grand cathedrals of the Middle Ages. There is some truth in the allegation, but much of error. The world has now but two great civilizations—that of Europe (to which America's belongs) and that of Eastern Asia. The latter has its own style and is far behind its Western competitor. The civilization of Western Europe tends to become cosmopolitan; it has conquered America and the East Indies, and, while accepting some decorative hints from Japan and China, bids fair to conquer them also. It is impossible now, in this age of steam and of electricity, to keep any style or manner pent up in its original home: the irruption among us of Japanese decorative motifs is enough to teach us this. If the modern age is to have a style, it will be a universal one. It is true that such a style has not as yet devel oped, but this is because our present cosmopolitan civilization is too mod ern to permit of its formation.
Revivals of is customary to think of the end of the fifteenth century as the commencement of the modern age, but the present century siuce the end of its fourth decade has seen changes far greater than those which marked the end of medievalism. The Renaissance was the revival of the classic, and was naturally succeeded by " revivals" of other styles, including a revival of itself. Since the requirements of the sixteenth century were more similar to those of the present age than were the requirements of any previous age, it was perceived that the points of dif ference between the Renaissance and the classic were precisely those which made the former more applicable to modern But new wants kept constantly cropping out, and the styles of architecture employed have had to be adapted to them. Notwithstanding all the re-use of various phases of ancient ornament, the purpose of the building and the constructive necessities of that purpose have impressed themselves on the exterior as well as on the interior.
Decadence of the best buildings of the present age express their purpose. The bank, the office-block, the railway-station, the picture-gallery, the warehouse, have features as distinctive as those of the church and the dwelling-house. Upon all these classes of buildings there is evident a general tendency to use ornament freely, to mix the various styles somewhat, to take what suits and to let the rest go. On all these structures the larger features are characteristic, and not even the purposeful imitation, for example, of the five orders of Rome can make a five-storeyed warehouse or block of stores look like a Roman temple or amphitheatre. This deliberate imitation of the orders is becoming every day rarer. The abandonment of the false screen of pilasters and entabla tures marked the change from the ancient to the mediaeval styles, and its abandonment now is a step toward the formation of a modern style.
Modern new advance, the age of steam and electricity, is less than half a century old, and never in the world's history has a style been formed in that space of time. The multiplicity of kinds of build ings and the vast amount of material that is available make the progress toward a definite modern style slow, but nevertheless it is sure. The charge that grand works are not now executed cannot be accepted. It is true that the great works of the present age are not so grand in proportion to the numbers and wealth of the community as were those of former ages, because both numbers and wealth are vastly greater than in olden times, and also because entire communities are not now, as in the days of the temple- and cathedral-builders, possessed by one spirit and one idea, but by many. Yet edifices as grand as those of ancient times, and utilita rian works far grander than they, are now erected. If the modern church is not equal to the mediaeval one, the " " Palais de Justice," or " Rathhaus " is more magnificent than its ancient representative. Paris, that finest of all cities, can set the new Louvre and the opera house against Notre Dame; London has its Law Courts, its Westminster Palace, its Albert Hall, and many other great buildings of the past fifty years to oppose to the Abbey of Westminster, which was the slow work of centuries; and so with other cities.