New-York tribune., 1922-01-08
G crowded Galleries
Opening the New Year

firm themselves, showing a quantity of
Photographs at the Wildensten gal
lery. With the ground thus broken. it
is probable that others will follow
their example. Why not? Is not the
architect an artist? Why on earth
should he not detach himself from his
fellows in this way, atfording. oppor-
tunity for the isolated study of his in
dividual traits? The objection that an
independent exhibition savors of the
art Of advertising, of something be-
meath the dignity Of the profession, is
pure nonsense. 1t suggests, indeed,
that the architect regards himself not
as an artist, but as a business man,
operating on an absolutely commercial
basis. For our own part we cannot
regard the architect as in any light
save that Of art The practical issues
of planning are part and parcel of a
tect must stand or fall by his service
to beauty. His plan is the soul Of his
facade. His opportunity lies in the
expression Of himself in unit of de-
sign Is this not matter of sufficient
interest to justify the making of a pub
lie exhibition?
The first architectural exhibition Of
this personal sort that is put before
us possesses, as it happens. an interest
not precisely personal That is to saw.
it raises questions of broader nature
than those which apply to the exhibitors
themselves. Messrs. Walker and Gill
lette might be described as architects
de luxe. The designs they offer US
here are all designs for the mansions
of the great.
In Hanadu did Kubla Khan
= stately pleasure dome decree.
Where Alph, the sacred river. ran
through caverns measurcless to man
lown to q sunless sea
only these "pleasure- -domcs" orc set
BY sunny seas, with blthe gardens
around them, and suggest nothing
"neasureless,' save the JOY of living.
They constitute problem by them
selves, the expression of certain
mundane success and magnficence.
How shall Mncenas be enframed :?
When Hans Holbcin painted his great
portrait of Georg Gisze, that hangs in
the gallery at Berlin, he brought the
symbols Of the successful merchants
occupation into the picture. Nothing
like that can be done in the making of
a house. The only solution would seem
to be the expression of taste When
the Medici built their palazzi they re-
nenbercd their coat of arms and stuck
it about here and there, but otherwise
they simply gave themselves up to
luxury. SO it is in the days of our
modern Medci, with difference. Their
predecessors could draw upon the taste
Of their time. They draw upon the
taste of Messrs. Walker and Gillette,
which is fundamentally dateless and
synchronizes itself with any period, as
required. To state this truth is to criti-
c!ze adversely neither architect nor
client, but TO recognize the prevalence
of seemingly irresistible conditions.
Architecture is the most advanced Of
all the arts in the United States, and
it has produced few strongly marked
individualities, but only few. The
genius OF the art is, with us, eclectic.
Probably the purest architectural strain
we have is that which comes down to us
from the Colonial period, but who shall
assert that is to-day fully expressive
Of our social development? The truth
is that if you look narrowly to what
might be called the twentieth century
state OF mind in America it is reflect
ed with far more truthfulness in the
melange of old French and Italian ira
ditions recalled in this exhibition
Messrs. Walker and Gillette are not in
sensitive to Colonial ideas. The
Georgian style is charmingly echoeNn
more than one of their designs. But
even on these racier occasions they
arc faithful to the general mode ex-
emplifed in their adaptations Of the
Tudor manor or the Renaissance villa
a mode that is subtly archaeological, a
mode Of sumptuous reconstruction.
Their exteriors are illustrated, but
the emphasis is placed upon rcoma