114 THE STONES OF VENICE

meaning, except by reference to the work itself. And, in fact, the principal reason why architectural criticism is at this day so far behind all other, is the impossibility of illustrating the best architecture faithfully. Of the various schools of painting, examples are accessible to every one, and reference to the works themselves is found sufficient for all purposes of criticism; but there is nothing like St. Mark’s or the Ducal Palace to be referred to in the National Gallery, and no faithful illustration of them is possible on the scale of such a volume as this. And it is exceedingly difficult on any scale. Nothing is so rare in art, as far as my own experience goes, as a fair illustration of architecture; perfect illustration of it does not exist. For all good architecture depends upon the adaptation of its chiselling to the effect at a certain distance from the eye; and to render the peculiar confusion in the midst of order, and uncertainty in the midst of decision, and mystery in the midst of trenchant lines, which are the result of distance, together with perfect expression of the peculiarities of the design, requires the skill of the most admirable artist, devoted to the work with the most severe conscientiousness, neither the skill nor the determination having as yet been given to the subject. And in the illustration of details, every building of any pretensions to high architectural rank would require a volume of plates, and those finished with extraordinary care.¹ With respect to the two buildings which are the principal subject of the present volume, St. Mark’s and the Ducal Palace, I have found it quite impossible to do them the slightest justice by any kind of portraiture;² and I abandoned the endeavour in the case of the latter with less regret, because in the new Crystal Palace (as the poetical public insist upon calling it, though it is neither a palace nor of crystal) there will be placed, I believe, a noble cast of one of its angles.³ As

¹ [See the reference in the Introduction, above, p. lii., to Ongania’s work.]

² [For Ruskin’s subsequent undertakings to secure portraiture of St. Mark’s, see note on p. 464 below. A view of the west front of St. Mark’s is here introduced for convenience of reference (Plate C), and photogravures of two of Ruskin’s drawings are added (Plates D and E).]

³ [See below, pp. 416, 466-467.]

[Version 0.04: March 2008]