,, I .•, i' I "· Book Reviews Figure 1. N. W. Overstreet, Bailey Junior High School,Jackson MS, 1936. Rendering of main facade (Manuscripts Division, Special Collections Department, Mitchell Memorial Library, Mississipi State University, reprint courtesy of Mississippi Museum of Art). Charles E. Brownell et al., The Making ofVirginia Architecture , Richmond: Virginia Museum of Fine Arts, 1992, xiii + 457 pp. (465 illus.). Louise Joyner et al., Palladia in Alabama, Montgomery: Montgomery Museum of Fine Arts, 1991, 80 pp. (98 illus.). Michael W. Fazio et al., Overstreet & Overstreet, A Legacy in Architecture, Jackson : Mississippi Museum of Art, 1993, 16 unnumbered pp. (20 illus.). In the last 20 years, the architectural exhibit has become an important part of the repertoire of art museums. The research behind these exhibits, chronicled in the exhibit catalogs, has made a substantial contribution to architectural history. The three catalogs reviewed here are the most recent southern representatives of this phenomenon. The three exhibits and their catalogs are so different in scope and topic that they are best considered separately. The Making of Virginia Architecture is a large and beautifully produced catalog, full of significant and apparently impeccable scholarship, that marks a major advance in our knowledge of architecture in Virginia. It was motivated by the belief that Virginia has made its greatest artistic contribution in the field of architecture. The catalog is divided into three sections: three essays on different periods in Virginia's architecture; two chapters on architectural drawings (the chosen medium of the exhibit); and a survey of the exhibit. This format works well, although the reasons behind the periodization are unclear, and one of the authors even admits that it was devised for expediency of production. 56 William M.S. Rasmussen's essay on Virginia colonial architecture is an excellent review of the period, using the vast body of scholarship on 18th-century Virginia produced during the last 20 years. It is particularly suited to the theme of the book because it explicitly addresses what was uniquely Virginian about colonial houses, churches, and public buildings in the Commonwealth. Charles E. Brownell's essay on the period from the Revolution to 1870 is a thoughtful discussion of the neoclassicaltraditioninVirginia -itssources, itsepitomization in the architecture of Thomas Jefferson, and its 19th-century classical modes. No mere chronological survey, this essay explores a sequence of themes such as the orders, the temple type, and the theory of architectural character, and offers intriguing insights into Jefferson's architecture. The essayis an importantaddition to architecturalscholarship. Richard Guy Wilson closes this section of the book with an essay on trends in Virginia architecture during the last century. His is the hardest job because this period witnessed an explosion in styles and trends as well as a self-consciousness about architecture, seen perhaps most clearly in movements such as post-modernism and historic preservation. Like his previous scholarship, Wilson's essay is most important for the connections it makes between architectureand broadersocialand historicalforces. All three authors contribute to a long chapter on the process and product of architectural drawing and other representation, and Calder Loth provides a chapter on the ARRIS Volume 4: 56-60. 1993 search for drawings of Virginia architecture. Besides giving insight into the process of architecture, these chapters establish a context for the drawings that follow. The survey consists of excellent short essays, the majority by Brownell and Wilson, on particular architectural drawings. Forthe most part, the surveyselectionsare well coordinated with the period essays. But the scarcity of surviving colonial drawings weakens the representation of this period, and Brownell's focus on the classical tradition slights such movements as the Gothic Revival, which is actually well represented in the catalog. If there is any general problem with this splendid book, it lies in defining what makes a state's architecture unique to that territorial area-in other words, what is Virginian about Virginia's architecture? Several of the authors wrestle with this issue. Wilson even admits that "wide divergences and little commonality exist among the many buildings constructed within the fictive boundaries of the Commonwealth," although he aims to identify "certain patterns that appear to be uniquely Virgininan." But beyond a certain mode of the colonial revival, which consciously...
Read full abstract