1843. That was the kind of church interior I was standing in. Now about the details, such as the type of pillars and capitals, woodwork carvings, and the casements of the doors and such like, I am not going to attempt a description of those either except to say…
1844. Except to say this. One might take from the library a book of carefully drawn illustrations of plants showing their leaves, flowers and fruit. One looks carefully at the drawings. Then, after looking at those drawing you go outside and have a look at some examples of actual leaves and flowers and you proceeded to compare the two in your mind. The actual leaf, and the actual flower always have a certain idiosyncrasy, a certain peculiar individuality, that the illustrations will always lack.
1845. That is the exact difference between inspired, perfect details in church architectural details, and the common perfunctory mechanical decorative work one usually sees in the finish of any building’s ornaments. It is also the difference between all of neo-classical architectural details, and any column base carved by the ancient Greeks that you can rest your tired eyes upon on the ground floor of the Metropolitan Museum of Art.
1846. The original column bases and capitals have the unique configurations of actual leaves and flowers, and all the neo-classical and revival architecture that came afterword look like very careful student drawings done by devoted admirers devoid of inspiration.