black: its motion becomes useless; for the idea of stillness is no
longer desirable, or, at least, no longer attainable, being interrupted
by the nature of the building itself: and, finally, the associations it
arouses are not dignified; we may think of a comfortable fireside,
perhaps, but are quite as likely to dream of kitchens, and spits, and
shoulders of mutton. None of these imaginations are in their place, if
the character of the building be elevated; they are barely tolerable in
the dwelling house and the street. Now, when smoke is objectionable, it
is certainly improper to direct attention to the chimney; and,
therefore, for two weighty reasons, _decorated_ chimneys, of any sort or
size whatsoever, are inexcusable barbarisms; first, because, where smoke
is beautiful, decoration is unsuited to the building; and secondly,
because, where smoke is ugly, decoration directs attention _to its
ugliness_.

64. It is unfortunately a prevailing idea with some of our architects,
that what is a disagreeable object in itself may be relieved or
concealed by lavish ornament; and there never was a greater mistake. It
should be a general principle, that what is intrinsically ugly should be
utterly destitute of ornament, that the eye may not be drawn to it. The
pretended skulls of the three Magi at Cologne are set in gold, and have
a diamond in each eye; and are a thousand times more ghastly than if
their brown bones had been left in peace. Such an error as this ought
never to be committed in architecture. If any part of the building has
disagreeable associations connected with it, let it alone: do not
ornament it. Keep it subdued, and simply adapted to its use; and the eye
will not go to it, nor quarrel with it. It would have been well if this
principle had been kept in view in the renewal of some of the public
buildings in Oxford. In All Souls College, for instance, the architect
has carried his chimneys half as high as all the rest of the building,