ABSTRACT
It lost ground in another area too, in a development that also had its origin in the changing society that was relentlessly advancing on the architectural world and forcing it to abandon its traditional ideas. This development related to the meaning that beauty held for society, interpreted according to the old tradition that art edifies society through its beauty. In 1867-8, Rose must have had an inkling of some fundamental change taking place when he wrote that the experience of beauty had no universal character. For, he argued, whereas the public usually assumed that beauty produced an agreeable experience, the expert, the architect, knew that beauty existed only if there was truth - and truth was not necessarily agreeable.2
