_sui generis_, and, therefore, being only found in Switzerland, might be
considered as a national building; though it has none of the mysterious
connection with the mind of its inhabitants which is evident in all
really fine edifices. But there is a reason for this; Switzerland has no
climate, properly speaking, but an assemblage of every climate, from
Italy to the Pole; the vine wild in its valleys, the ice eternal on its
crags. The Swiss themselves are what we might have expected in persons
dwelling in such a climate; they have no character. The sluggish nature
of the air of the valleys has a malignant operation on the mind; and
even the mountaineers, though generally shrewd and intellectual, have no
perceptible nationality: they have no language, except a mixture of
Italian and bad German; they have no peculiar turn of mind; they might
be taken as easily for Germans as for Swiss. No correspondence,
consequently, can exist between national architecture and national
character, where the latter is not distinguishable. Generally speaking,
then, the Swiss cottage cannot be said to be built in good taste; but it
is occasionally picturesque, frequently pleasing, and, under a favorable
concurrence of circumstances, beautiful. It is not, however, a thing to
be imitated; it is always, when out of its own country, incongruous; it
never harmonizes with anything around it, and can therefore be employed
only in mimicry of what does not exist, not in improvement of what does.
I mean, that any one who has on his estate a dingle shaded with larches
or pines, with a rapid stream, may manufacture a bit of Switzerland as a
toy; but such imitations are always contemptible, and he cannot use the
Swiss cottage in any other way. A modified form of it, however, as will
be hereafter shown, may be employed with advantage. I hope, in my next
paper, to derive more satisfaction from the contemplation of the
mountain cottage of Westmoreland, than I have been able to obtain from
that of the Swiss.