PARIS: THE GAMBETTA MONUMENT.
THE statue erected to the memory of Gambetta in the Place du Carrousel, Paris, was unveiled on Saturday, 14th July, in presence of immense crowds. We have pleasure in calling attention to the following interesting and instructive remarks about it, which appeared in The BrU'tsh ArcMtect of 20th July :— 'A model erection, it was also preceded by a model competition. One well fitted to fill our hearts with envy to hear of. Let us re-sketch an outline of that contest, which, it will be remem- bered, took place in 1884. The nation, having gathered an offering of some ^f'lSjOOO to the memory of Gambetta, designs were invited, and eighty-two came in. What a contrast to the miserable fiasco for the statues we asked for ! 'The eighty-two projects were then publicly ex- hibited, and in an apartment right worthy of them — the great hall at the Ecolc des Beaux-Arts. There, no mere handful of journalists went to discuss them as a dreary task, but every lover of art in a country of lovers of art. Again, what a contrast ! ' Then came the arrangements for an assessorship. One solitary professional man granted . One man, as a great favour, after much supplication, and on the sole condition that his award shall not in the slightest degree bind the committee of wealthy city butchers and bakers at the head of affairs ? No, no, not so. The assessorship settled upon was none less than the following fifteen uninipeacliable experts, and empowered to act with a veto supreme and binding : — MJI. Cliarles Gamier, Bailly, Guillaume, Paul Dubois, Chapu, Dreyfus, Spuller, Adrien Hebrard, Paul Strauss, Ranc, Antonin Proust, Paul Bert, Joseph Reinach, Castagnary, Isambert. Again, what a contrast ! ' These gentlemen were then set to work, and they terminated the first act of the concours by a selec- tion of six designs for a second epreuve. They were those by MM. AUar and Dutert, Falguiere and Pajol, Aube and Boileau, Dalon and Faure Dujarrie Coutan and Lambert, Injalbert and Dalou. Observe that every one of these are partnerships, and com- posed, respectively in every instance, of one architect and one sculptor, working in combination. In no case a sculptor found working without his proper helpmate, an arcliitect. In no case (as in this unfortunate country) the sculptor found fancying himself a Michael Angelo mixture of both one and the other, resulting in an infatuated state of mind which has caused our squares to be filled with statues stuck on to architectural accessories which are abortions. Again, what a contrast ! ' And then, finally, came on the second round of the battle, and the eventful awarding of the palm to MM. Aube and Boileau, whose masterful idea was, last week, unveiled to the public. ' One parting glance before we return to grimy London. We remember saying, at the outset, that there were some trifles about it we — with an egotism singular to our calling — fancied we could have done better, but we beg to say that these do not include one single line of the central figure of Gambetta himself. We have heard complaints that his podgy limbs, his styleless " go-to-meeting " coat, and other ungainly characteristics, jar on the e7isemble. We differ. Thirst for genuine truth of the ancient artists, so scantily responded to by the moderns, has been MM. Aube and Boileau's inspiration, and we have here Le'on Gambetta, represented as we actually knew liim in the flesh, to the very ungain- liness of his ungainly necktie. It will go down to posterity an actual plastic photograph of the actual man. No graceful clothes (which he never wore) nor finely proportioned bones (which ' he never possessed) have been availed of for a grand effect, which has, nevertheless, been obtained without any of these cheap and false means. ' We wish we could say the same of many another statue.'
GENERAL INDIFFERENCE TO MIODERN ARCHITECTURE.
MR. HONEYMAN, in his able article on 'The Exhibiting of Architectural Drawings,' has struck deep at the root of the lack of interest in such exhibitions. If this lack of interest were confined to architectural drawings it would be a matter of comparatively little regret, as an architect would no more desire to have a final judgment passed upon his art work from a conventional drawing representing his building from one fixed point of sight, than he would desire to have his deportment judged by a 'carte de visite' representing his person in one single aspect. He could equally well afford to dispense with both representations, or, if you prefer it, mis-representations. The indifference of true lovers of art to architectural drawings is an unpleasant fact that architects must admit, with more or less reluctance, according as they feel it, touches their art; but they might endure this neglect with calmness did it measure the full extent of the indifference. I fear, however.
