has an intimate feeling throughout, and it furnishes the delightful
suggestive note of old age, of historical interest, without which it
would never have been convincing.

Aside from the outdoor features, the building, exclusive of the county
annex, discloses a very fine talent in a very happy combination of
classic tradition and modern tendencies. The building is altogether very
successful, in a style which is so much made use of but which is really
devoid of any distinct artistic merit. Most of the examples of the
so-called "Mission style" in California are very uninteresting in their
decorative motives, however big their ground plans may be in their
liberal use of space.

The Oregon building is just across the way from the California building,
and as an object of artistic analysis it is a most interesting single
unit. Personally, I am not enthusiastic over it. It was most decidedly a
very illogical idea to select a building to represent Oregon from a
country which has nothing whatever in common with this northern state.
One could hardly discover a more arid country, devoid of vegetation,
particularly of trees, than Greece; and to compare it with the
apparently inexhaustible wealth of virgin forests of Oregon makes the
contrast almost grotesque. Besides, a building like the Parthenon,
designed to grace and terminate the top of a hill, is surely not adapted
for a flat piece of ground like the Exposition field. And in the choice
of material used in its construction it shows a lack of appreciation for
the fitness of things generally. The Parthenon was designed to be made
in stone, as much for the construction as for the light color effect of
the marble. Only the light color play of its exterior would do against a
placid blue sky to relieve the otherwise exceedingly simple rigidity of
its massive forms of construction. To make an imitation of this great