RATIONAL GOTHIC.

Ruskin and Viollet-le-Duc: Englishness and Frenchness in the analysis-inquiry of gothic architecture

When Gothic Revivalists were prominent mainly in the British mainland, Ruskin’s analytical and rationalistic approach towards Gothic proper, though sentimental and nationalistic in undertones were the foundations of their ideology. The emphasis was on the mutability and rationality of gothic, as well as the position of gothic workers- the effect they impose on the final outcome, its savage-Nordic nature and its material honesty to name a few. Though the elements were there, all analyzed and ready-to-use as to set an example to new architecture of the era, it worked as the torch for the mimic-revival of the era to come up eventually.

Viollet-le-Duc on the other hand strips his thoughts of emotionalism of this sort; defines strictly his intention not as the imitations of Gothic art¡ and injects a structural, material and aesthetic rationalism within which concepts ‘satisfaction of the eye’, ‘indisputable beauty’, ‘effect’ and ‘honesty’ immersed as sentimentality yet to remain until modernism of a latter age . But in no way does his derivations indicate obsolescence or have a historical romanticism to them. Rather they are guidelines and a means to study by the ‘modern laymen’ and his inquiring, analyzing, rationalistic nature. And gothic is favoured because it ‘has broken with antique traditions, and because it is fertile in applications.’ and its principles ‘permit the use of materials given by nature and industry in virtue of their own qualities’ as well as its ingenuity, all in tune with the modern spirit of the aforementioned laymen. 

Gothic construction mentality is the modus operandi of a modern architecture -and art- ‘yet to be invented’, ‘despite its defects, its errors, its attempts, and perhaps because of all these’. But, just as we can never judge a book from its cover-0r the typeface- we can not judge the book of stone, that is architecture by how it is ornamented, and refuse to associate ourselves with its underlying rationality. Or at least that is what le-Duc tries to advise to his contemporaries.

Belief in the idea that humans of his age supersede over past all in but one aspect: the ability to give the building a definite character and expression, much admired in the works of predecessors, seems to be the manifestation of Zeitgeist in their age . As well as the motive to realize those qualities by adapting forms to the emerging materials without any contemplation over their nature.

The nature of the materials and the methods of production is presented to be the two main parametres of form, rather than the  conventional-traditional approaches. As new materials emerge, thus should new forms that harmonize with their nature and methods. And it is a rather superficial attempt to do otherwise as in the case of furniture design example set forth- makers of which takes the use of materials contrary to their nature as being triumph of art. 

Clear expressive quality of the overall design, of its function and strength is also essential, and a corbel that shows its strength will be better than an ‘undecided’ form that hides it, and it will give the same satisfaction of the Gothic  buttresses of the Auxerre Cathedral. 

It’s striking to see how much Viollet’s anticipations have been verified within the course of history, especially his foretelling about the prefabrication and architect’s role in planning every detail before the construction commences. His portrayal of an ideal and thus productive construction, reflects an eerie vision of the contemporary construction sites. 

The dialogue between Epergos and Doxius the antagonist and protagonist depict