ABSTRACT
The historical school: the neo-Gothic, Dutch Renaissance, and the ‘official style’ To please the public would mean the end of art - but not pleasing the public could mean the end of the artist. This quandary was the crux of the problem faced by the architects who were trying to develop a contemporary style. The cultural relationship between the artist and his public was severed; they were on a different wavelength. And, of course, there was no such thing as the architect. The fact that architecture was frequently considered just another commodity illustrates the wide diversity of opinion within the profession. Who came off best, mattered: the ‘real’ architect with his aesthetic ‘rules’ , or the public with its own standards. But there were still many architects who continued to idealize, verbally, their elevated artistic position, their ‘aspiration and dedication to the beautiful, the sublime!’ These architects also tended to foster a negative image of the public: ‘the appreciation of art is not an innate trait of the practical Dutchman; so those who teach aesthetics have to face fierce resistance’ .1 In this respect the artist and the public were poles apart, and any encounter might precipitate a fierce battle.
