Chapter 15: Notes

Footnote 323:

See Note [107], Chapter 6

Footnote 324:

For a remarkable later development of the veranda outside England, see
Robertson, E. G., ‘The Australian Verandah’, _Architectural Review_,
CXXVII (1960), 238-45.

Footnote 325:

There are many examples in various English books of the first third of
the century; characteristic are those offered by T. F. Hunt, J. B.
Papworth, and P. F. Robinson. See Note [134] to Chapter 6.

Footnote 326:

See Note [132], Chapter 6.

Footnote 327:

See Note [128], Chapter 6.

Footnote 328:

See Note [133], Chapter 6.

Footnote 329:

See Note [308], Chapter 14.

Footnote 330:

See Note [132], Chapter 6.

Footnote 331:

In the _Builder_ for 15 January 1859 and in the Supplement to Kerr,
R., _The Gentleman’s House_, 2nd ed., London, 1865.

Footnote 332:

Contemporaries saw this house rather as a reaction towards the ‘Old
English’ after the ‘modernism’ of the High Victorian Gothic and the
Second Empire of the preceding decade. How conscious Shaw himself was
of the significance of his own innovations it is difficult to say.

Footnote 333:

The plan was first published by Muthesius in 1904; this does not mean
that its character was not known to contemporary architects, however.

Footnote 334:

By this time photo-lithographic processes made it possible for Shaw’s
perspectives to appear in the _Building News_ practically as
facsimiles of his originals. Had it been necessary, as in the fifties
and sixties, to ‘translate’ them into wood-engravings the transmission
of the Shavian influence abroad would certainly have been much less
effective.

Footnote 335:

See Note [133], Chapter 6. The term ‘Eastlake’ is sometimes rather
inaccurately used for the Stick Style.

Footnote 336:

See Wheeler, G., _Rural Houses_, New York, 1851, with later editions
to 1868, and his _Homes for the People in Suburb and Country_, New
York, 1855, with later editions to 1867.

Footnote 337:

See Gardner, E. C., _Homes and How to Build Them_, Boston, 1874, and
also his _Illustrated Homes_, Boston, 1875.

Footnote 338:

See Woodward, G. E., _Woodward’s Country Houses_, New York, 1865;
_Woodward’s Architecture, Landscape Gardening and Rural Art_, New
York, 1867; _Woodward’s Cottage and Farm Houses_, New York, 1867; and
_Woodward’s National Architect_, New York, 1868. Of _Woodward’s
Country Houses_ there were eight successive editions within a decade,
thus rivalling in this period the popularity of Downing’s _Cottage
Residences_ in the forties and fifties; however, it is worth noting
that the latter still remained in print.

Footnote 339:

See Sturges, W. K., ‘Long Shadow of Norman Shaw: Queen Anne Revival’,
_Journal of the Society of Architectural Historians_, IX (1950), 21-5.

Footnote 340:

Scully in _The Shingle Style_ provides evidence that the idea of a
great hall was not unknown in America well before this. It may be
unnecessary to suppose that Richardson knew of the Hinderton plan,
since one or two comparable ones can be found in books appearing in
America in the fifties; see, for example, the Nathan Reeve house in
Newburgh, N.Y., published as ‘Design No. 22’ in Vaux, C., _Villas and
Cottages_, New York, 1857. However that may be, the great hall theme
was rarely exploited in Second Empire or Stick Style houses of the
sixties. It makes a notable appearance or re-appearance, as the case
may be, in Richardson’s planning just after 1870. See Notes VI-4 and
VIII-2 in the 1961 edition of my Richardson book.

Footnote 341:

The term is Vincent Scully’s. Various themes touched on in this and
succeeding paragraphs are discussed at length in his homonymous volume
and provided there with a full roster of illustrations.

Footnote 342:

It is of interest that when the _Monograph of the Work of McKim, Mead
& White_ was prepared in 1915 almost all this early work was omitted.
It has been rediscovered by critics and historians in the last thirty
years, beginning with Mumford in the _Brown Decades_ in 1931.

Footnote 343:

Just how the influence reached American architects so early is not
altogether clear. The first treatise in English on Japanese
architecture is Morse, E. S., _Japanese Homes and Their Surroundings_,
Boston, 1886; new ed., New York, 1961. See Lancaster, C., ‘Japanese
Buildings in the United States before 1900: Their Influence upon
American Domestic Architecture’, _Art Bulletin_, XXXV (1953), 217-24.

Footnote 344:

See Hitchcock, H. R., ‘Frank Lloyd Wright and the “Academic Tradition”
in the Nineties’, _Journal of the Warburg and Courtauld Institutes_,
VII (1947), 46-63.

Footnote 345:

For an unsuspected but possible influence on Wright in this façade,
see Gebhard, D., ‘A Note on the Chicago Fair of 1893 and Frank Lloyd
Wright’, _Journal of the Society of Architectural Historians_, XVIII
(1959), 63-5.

Footnote 346:

Japanese influence was more evident at the Chauncey L. Williams house
at 520 Edgewood Place in River Forest, Ill., of 1895, notably in the
use of rough boulders at the foot of the brick wall and flanking the
entrance. Wright by this time was enthusiastically interested in
Japanese prints; whether he also knew Morse’s book of 1886 (see Note
20 _supra_) is not clear.

Footnote 347:

This was very much extended, but along the original lines, in 1901, as
shown on Plate 128B. The present River Forest Tennis Club, a much
smaller structure, is not the same, though it bears some superficial
resemblance to the Golf Club. The building of 1898-1901 was demolished
in 1905.

Footnote 348:

I am grateful to John Brandon-Jones for allowing me to read the
manuscript of his unpublished monograph on Voysey. Without his
assistance of various sorts this account of Voysey could not have been
written and illustrated.

Footnote 349:

See Note [261], Chapter 12.

Footnote 350:

The ‘House at Doverscourt for A. J. W. Ward’, published in the
_British Architect_, 11 April 1890, was apparently never executed any
more than those illustrated the previous year. It is very like
Perrycroft, built in 1893, the first of Voysey’s important country
houses, thus suggesting that on paper his style had in fact largely
crystallized by this date before his Forster house was begun. It is of
interest that the plan of the Ward project is more open than those of
any of his executed houses; it may well have influenced Baillie Scott
(see below).

Footnote 351:

Brandon-Jones suggests, however, that the very plain Regency villa in
which Voysey was then living in St John’s Wood may have had some
generic influence on the Forster house.

Footnote 352:

At Perrycroft the mullions are of wood, originally painted green. At
the Forster house they were of stone, and that is true of almost all
the later houses. So also the slates here were Welsh and grey; when he
began to work in the Lake District he turned to green slates, earlier
used by Godwin on Whistler’s house. These became standard on his later
houses wherever they were built.

Footnote 353:

For a later tribute to his influence and that of Baillie Scott abroad,
see Fisker, K., ‘Tre pionerer fra aarhundredskiftet’, _Byggmästaren_,
1947, 221-32; the third ‘pioneer’, rather surprisingly, is Tessenow
(see Chapter 20).

Footnote 354:

For a remarkable later work of Lethaby, see Pevsner, N., ‘Lethaby’s
Last’, _Architectural Review_, CXXX (1961), 354-7. This church, at
Brockhampton-by-Ross in Herefordshire, was roofed with pre-cast
concrete slabs at the surprisingly early date of 1900-2; and its
simplified, rather angular, Gothic design is, in effect, already
proto-Expressionist.

Footnote 355:

See Pevsner, N., ‘George Walton, His Life and Work’, _Journal of the
Royal Institute of British Architects_, XLVI (1939), 537-48.

Footnote 356:

Voysey was also a notable designer of wallpapers and chintzes, perhaps
the most notable of his generation in England.

------------------------------------------------------------------------