Abstract

The long 18th century was a period of intense investment in elite architecture in Britain which sustained an extensive craft culture in carving, modelling, and joinery. Yet decoration is largely marginalised or ignored by architectural historians. This antipathy to the enrichment of buildings is not particular to Britain and reflects a wider discourse on the architecture of many periods and places. By situating past and present attitudes to 18th-century decoration in Britain within a wider historiography, this paper reveals the prejudices which still attend the discussion of ornament and craft production in architecture. Conversely, it explores revisionist perspectives on craft and decoration and considers how they can inform architectural history and contribute to a more holistic understanding of building production. Despite a recent, widespread revival of interest in ornament, however, scholarship continues to privilege conceptual issues over the material practices of decoration. Disciplinary boundaries have militated against an integrated approach to architecture and decoration and historians of sculpture and architecture have overlooked significant common ground. Lacunae in the historiography of decoration in 18th-century British architecture call for approaches which integrate the analytical and methodological tools of architectural and sculpture history.

Highlights

  • This article examines the perception of decoration within and beyond the discipline of architectural history

  • As in Renaissance narratives, decorative surface was the instrument of architectural design but for expressive rather than tectonic and harmonic purposes

  • The plot thickens when the place of ornament is considered within wider stylistic development and decoration becomes the real villain of the piece, the nemesis of great art and architecture since antiquity

Read more

Summary

Introduction

This article examines the perception of decoration within and beyond the discipline of architectural history. As in Renaissance narratives, decorative surface was the instrument of architectural design but for expressive rather than tectonic and harmonic purposes.

Results
Conclusion
Full Text
Published version (Free)

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call