Читать книгу How to plan a library building for library work онлайн

25 страница из 72

As to the quality of grandeur, I am not sure that it is even appropriate to a library. Is it not some such effect that many architects have aimed at in our bad part? It seems to me that Beresford Pite was right in saying:[18] “A regard for symmetrical purpose, a largeness of proportion and form, simplicity of detail, and great restraint and refinement of moulding and ornament, are qualities characteristic of a library, internally as well as externally.... Libraries of all buildings should be freed from the trammels of a merely archæological architecture. The architect of the present day is apt to rely too simply on precedent.” Yes, witness some of our Greek temple libraries in new America.

After all, the material to be used on the exterior is largely controlled by the limit of funds and is a matter for the architect rather than the librarian, unless he thinks the cost of the outside will stunt his accommodations.

ssss1

In the future must we face a continuous conflict between the architect and the librarian? Is it true, as was once said, that the architect is the natural enemy of the librarian? Was Dr. Garnett right when he said,[19] “Hence a continual conflict between the architect who desires a handsome elevation and the librarian who aims at practical convenience?” Yes and no. No, certainly, if we mean the word enemy in any but a Pickwickian sense. No, certainly, if we expect a bitter fight and bad feeling. But if we substitute the word “contest” for “conflict,” if we look forward to eager but friendly struggles, like athletic contests between colleges,—yes, certainly yes. If both sides are striving for the fine aims of Vitruvius, which I have taken as a motto—Firmitas, Utilitas, Venustas—there will be nothing but the amity and mutual respect of brotherly rivals. There will not at first be full accord as to any one of the three points. Sound construction, yes: but must that necessarily be the construction of precedent? Use, yes: but just the phases of use as seen by the untrained eyes of that particular librarian? Beauty, yes: but exactly the beauty of any conventional style?