before us, and of which we ought to have begun to speak ere now. Whatever may in some instances be thought of the taste displayed in some of the subjects, it affords proof what importance the French architects attach to that species of decoration which is produced chiefly by colours, and which they have begun of late to extend to exteriors, at least to shop-fronts, or devantures de boutiques, as they term them. Most of the coloured plates here given represent such subjects, all of which have been executed in different parts of Paris, and by different designers and other artists; as, however, they are shown merely in elevations, it is impossible to judge how far they preserve their effect, when seen, not as detached objects, but in combination with other buildings. Hardly, indeed, can they fail to strike as very conspicuous ones; yet it is very questionable if, beyond that, some of the specimens here introduced can deserve to be styled attractive. In several of them dark hues, scarcely distinguishable from one another, and almost approaching to black, are allowed to predominate, owing to which, not only must the general appearance be exceedingly sombre, but the outline of the architectural members must be rendered nearly imperceptible; consequently, the contrast between light and shadow, between solid and void, be greatly enfeebled, if not utterly destroyed, and the whole become disagreeably indistinct, at least as soon as the colours lose their first freshness, after which the general effect can be little better than if the whole were of one uniform dull, or even dismal tint. Whatever may be the choice of colours, it should be regarded as a leading principle to arrange them so that they shall describe the architectural forms distinctly to the eye. Neutral tints ought, we conceive, to predominate, at any rate, in exterior embellishment of this kind, and those should be nearly of equal depth, seldom exceeding that of stone colour; and these should be relieved either by brilliant tints in smaller portions, or by darker ones-occasionally by both, yet always so as to avoid indistinctness and confusion in regard to the architectural forms unless this be done, embellishment serves little better purpose than to confound and disguise. We are further of opinion that, at best, this species of decoration is hardly calculated for street architecture, but, if at all, for external situations, where a building is quite detached from any others, and where, consequently, it will neither be affected by, nor clash with, any thing else of the kind. For shops it seems adapted almost exclusively to such as are within what the French term passages, and we ourselves arcades, that is, covered streets or galleries, especially ifuniformity were kept up in all the compartments or devantures. Nor should we hesitate to recommend it as equally appropriate and agreeable for any small court into which the windows of a sitting-room might happen to look, as, instead of dull brick walls, a highly ornamental and scenic display might

thus be produced, where there would be nothing to detract from its effect, or dispel the illusion attending it.

The most striking design of the kind here represented is one comprising two shops, with a porte-cochère between them, and an entresol above, whereby the whole composition acquires greater loftiness and importance. The architect's name is not mentioned, but it has been executed in the Rue Neuve Vivienne. The prevailing colour of the whole is a light bronze, relieved by gilding on the capitals, and in the flutings of the pilasters, also on some of the other architectural mouldings; but in the centre compartment various colours are introduced, confined with panelled surfaces, such as the jambs and frieze of the large square-headed door forming the porte-cochère, and in the panel on each side of the window above it. These colours, which exhibit a kind of fretwork pattern on a white ground, and produce an effect nearly similar to ornament in enamel, vivid as they are in themselves, do not occasion any thing like gaudiness. Taken by itself, this centre compartment leaves little to be desired, as a specimen, at least, of this peculiar mode of decoration; but the whole would have been greatly improved, had the ornamental colouring been extended, though in a less degree, to the rest of the composition. One defect, resulting from the darkness of the colour adopted as that of the ground or general material is, that there is not sufficient opposition between it and the windows, whereas, had these been set in a framing or border, so as to admit of narrow panels decorated similarly to the others, not only would the ensemble have been in far better keeping, but the apertures in question would have been properly defined, and detached from the surrounding parts. It must be confessed, however, that this and the other subjects of the same kind are shown to much disadvantage, because the windows are merely dark vacuities, entire masses of shadow, without any objects seen through them. Perhaps the better way would have been to have represented one half of each devanture with the shutters up, especially as it is of some importance to understand what ornamental finish is bestowed on them.

Upon the whole, the taste exhibited in these shop-fronts is very unequal: there are happy ideas and pleasing parts, but the general combinations are defective, and, what may seem singular, they do not so much offend the eye by gaudiness of colouring, as they do by the want of the liveliness and relief that might be produced by a skilful opposition of tints.

Considered with regard to architectural style, apart from colour, they are not more satisfactory, perhaps far less so, because some allowance is to be made for first experiments in a novel mode of decoration. In the forms themselves, there is a strange mixture of solidity approaching to heaviness, with slenderness almost amounting to fragility; also such fancies as a shop-door, let in,

if we may so describe it, into the centre of a large window, in such manner as not to divide it into two, nor afford any support to the entablature. Neither do we at all approve of what seems to be affected as a beauty, namely, of arching the heads of the divisions of the windows, by merely curving the upright slender rods which hold the glass. Instead of producing any expression of strength, it serves rather to produce an appearance of excessive slimness, where there is no occasion for doing so; while, certainly, there can be no economy in cutting away the glass to that shape.

If less striking on the score of mere novelty, the specimens of interior docorations in shops are more successful: in fact, they exhibit more of taste than of decided novelty, except as regards the actual application, all partaking, more or less, of the style of painting in vogue at Pompeii. Milletot's, the confectioner's shop, plates 49 and 50, is an exceedingly pleasing example of this mode of embellishment; tasteful in design and rich in effect, although the colours employed are little more than browns and greys upon a white ground. Plate 66, a linendraper's shop, No. 29, Place de la Bourse, is, although very different from the preceding, another agreeable subject. The Café Gaulois, Rue Poissonnière, is a more ambitious display of the Pompeian style; but, as that plate is uncoloured, it is impossible to form any idea of that upon which the effect mainly depends. For purposes where mere general effect is required, this mode of decoration may very eligibly be adopted; but it is not very favourable to other species of art, because it excludes framed pictures, with which it would very ill agree, even were spaces for their reception provided for before-hand in the design; while it is hardly to be wished that subject-pictures should be made to combine with it, by being similarly painted on the walls themselves, because it is our opinion that, were such practice to be brought into vogue, it would tend to deteriorate art by giving currency to a flimsy, meretricious style-a specious, shewy mannerism-and nothing more. We are now taking into view the consequences, supposing it were to become the fashion among those who occupy not family mansions but rented houses, to encourage such pictorial embellishment on the walls of their rooms. As such paintings could not be removed, and could scarcely have value as available property, it is hardly to be supposed that real talent would ever be employed in producing them. Besides, a superior collection of pictures may be formed by degrees; but, in this case, an entire series would have to be paid for at once, and, if not of first-rate quality, of such quality, at least, as to stand the test of critical examination as works of art, and would be no better, perhaps some degrees worse, than the same surface decorated with simply ornamental figures; if merely for the reason that it would have more pretension, yet be unable to support it.

Of purely decorative painting, applied to the walls and ceilings

of rooms, examples are here furnished from a ball and billiardroom, executed, at Paris, for Baron Rothschild, in 1820, by Picot and Gosse. The ceiling of the second-mentioned apartment, in the style of the baths of Titus, is rich, yet chaste and harmonious, and many of the other parts, taken by themselves, show much taste, yet how far the tout-ensemble may be satisfactory, can only be guessed at; even allowing it to be so, it is questionable whether it is one that can safely be recommended for general purposes. It is certainly one that calls for much previous consideration and foresight as to its results. It is one that may be carried too far, and which is liable to great abuse, unless it be put under the check of correct artistical judgment and feeling. Still we could wish to see it encouraged to a certain degree in this country, were it only because our architects would then, almost of necessity, be led to bestow more attention than they at present do on what they ought to understand; and, if properly taken up, it would tend greatly to widen the scope afforded to design.

ON THE GENIUS OF SHAKSPEARE.

Ueber Shakspeare's Dramatische Kunst und sein Verhältniss zu Calderon und Göthe. (On Shakspeare's Dramatic Art, and his relation to Calderon and Göthe.) By Dr. Hermann Ulrici. Halle, 1839, 8vo.

False is that criticism which sneers contemptuously at the temporary popularity of a poet; false, as all sneering ever has been, and will be: it betrays ignorance of the poet's mission, ignorance of the nature of man. Shakspeare, whose literary history has been as pregnant with interest as that of most poets, could not have flourished under the Restoration or Queen Anne; even to make him presentable, he must be Drydenwise "adapted," furnished with Restoration elegance, and Dryden bombast. To us this naturally appears sad depravity of taste, but it were wiser in us rather to consider the cause, than dismiss it with condemnation; for it is obvious that the Restoration looked upon the taste of its predecessors with as contemptuous an eye as we cast upon it. The cause is simply this: the poet's mission is to utter the wisdom of his age; to be its mouthpiece, and at the same time its elevator. Lucretius and Seneca might have philosophised to the Romans under Tarquinius Superbus, but would they have been listened to, even in speculative corners? suredly not; so the Lucretius of the moment uttered his doctrine, which, being manufactured but for the moment, was used, and, when worn out, cast aside. Lucretius and Seneca owe our admiration, in a great measure, to accident; fortunately for us, the former has real merits, and the latter one must put up

As

with, because he is an indication of his time. If, therefore, the poet utters the "wisdom of his age," his mission is fulfilled; if he wishes for fame, he must add something more than mere temporary doctrine; he must found his hopes on deep and unvarying forms of human nature, on the eternally true, the beautiful in itself.*

There is a theory for the solace of small geniuses, which they are most energetic in spreading, to wit, that great poets have always been neglected by their contemporaries, whence we might be led to infer that the "neglected of contemporaries" are very great poets indeed. It is scarcely worth while to refute this hypothesis, which is also applied to Shakspeare; yet we may refer to Homer, Pindar, the Greek Dramatists, Dante, Ariosto, Tasso, Calderon, Camoens, &c. The instances of Milton and Shelley, which in some measure favour the opinion, were owing to political causes. How little Shakspeare was neglected we

shall see anon.

So trite has the subject of Shakspeare's neglect in England become, so anxious are we to recognise the "injustice" of this neglect, and to do our poet honour, that a temperate consideration of him has scarcely found room. It is still more a matter of obsequious submission to high authorities, with the majority, than a self-earned conviction, than any well-defined idea of his peculiar merit; and on this head we are still, therefore, to imitate the Germans, to study as well as to praise him; and to the Germans we are still to look for the best understanding of the English poet.

The work of Dr. Ulrici, therefore, comes to us with a strong recommendation, although it does make the thousand and first book on this inexhaustible subject. Inexhaustible indeed! inexhaustible as Nature herself, for from her bosom did the poet draw his materials.

In his preface, Dr. Ulrici tells us that his object is "to make known the results of the new English historical researches, and to combine them with the German criticisms," and this part of his object he has so well accomplished, as not only to have produced a valuable work for Germans, but one also which may be consulted with advantage by the English themselves; since he has, in the first part of his work, not only selected and assembled the historical researches of Collier, Drake, Skottowe, &c., but also furnished the best Life of Shakspeare that we have seen. Dr. Ulrici is a man of learning, and of more judgment than usually falls to the lot of such commentators as himself; and he has patiently investigated the facts upon which he founds his con

Of all men, Shakspeare was, at the same time, the most temporary, and most eternal. He is the very spirit of his age, not alone in its superficial indications, but in its deepest truths, and we may safely say that, had he not been the mirror of his age, he would never have been the delight of this.