The sun. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1833-1916, 1914-01-04
ST. JOHN THE DIVINE.
Criticism Of the Original plan and 'e'
fence OF Mr.. Grams Alterations.

fence OF Mr.. Grams Alterations.
To THE EDITOR OF THE SuS--Sir: The
worried tone OF your editorial article to-
day on the Cathedral Of ST. John the
Divine suggests the comforting reflection
that the completion of the cathedral may.
when all Is said and done, be safely left
In the hands Of the consulting architect.
Mr.. Cram Is the choice Of the many. not or
the few. He lis not the favorite OF a
clique; he is acknowledged master Of
church building In this country by every
person who can tell a king post from a
king bird.
But there are In your editorial one or
two misconceptions that cannot allow to
go entirely unchallenged. First. your
are substituted for the single and domi-
nant central tower Of the original design
have no apparent reason for being" Has
your writer studied Mr.. Grams view of
the completed cathedral from the north
east? This shows that the two towers in
question have q very real and very APP
parent reason for being. Mr.. Cram has
taken the rising line OF the hill
and through the ascending grades Of the
cathedral profile, chapels. choir and CEN
trial tower has carried II up to a inagnif-
cent climax In the two high towers.
Viewed from the Morningside quarter.
which is. after all, the show side OF the
church. this effect, when completed would
have no peer In ecclesiastical architecture
on this Or the other side of the Atlantic.
A short survey OF the great cathedrals
on high places--Laon, Lincoln. Durham
will show this continuance OF natural lines
In architectural ones to be the secret Of
their impressiveness. II will also show
that the best effect has always been OBJ
tanned, not by one tower or spire. but by a
, judicfous grouping of them.
Again. the central Sprp OF Mr.. la
Farge's plan is described by you as rich"
Rich? "NouveAu richie would be an
apter epithet, since 1t would be the first
spire OF that angle In history TO give that
effect. II church builders medieval and
modern. have learned one thing, 1t IL that
n blunt, thickset spire like Mr. LA Farges
cannot successfully be used 20 crown Il
great mass. It never gives the desired
effect of dignity. but Is merely heavy and
awkward. One has but to run ones eye
over the great spires OF Europe. such as
those Mt Salisbury. Lichfield, Norwich
.Grantham, Coutances, Charities. Strass-
burg. Cologne. Tim and Ratisbon, to see
that their angles average only about hall
that of Mr.. La Farge's spire.
But OF course the trouble lies much
! deeper than this. The chief fault found
with st. Johns has always been. not that
| II is too Gothic or not Gothic enough. but
! that II lis neither Gothic nor Romanesque
| II Mr.. La Fargo had designed 8 straight
forward Romanesque church with such
models as Durham. Journal. Speye
or the Byzanto- Romanesquc churches Of
| southern France In the back of his mind
| he would probably still he the consulting
architect Of the cathedral. But for sons
reason he compromised he gave us Goth,
with round arches. Hence these tears
l cannot understand your writer wler
| he talks OF Gothic In the railroads.&c.
! sense. I never can follow talk thar run,