With regard to the first of these practices:  it is much more foolish than the Analysis method; and is little short of blasphemy against the Great Designer.  He has determined how each plant shall grow:  how, within limits of cultivation, its stems and branches shall separate, each to seek its own share of air and sunshine; how its leaves shall stand erect or droop, each according to its function; and always in perfect beauty.  And further:  how each family of plants shall have its own method of branching; which is as much a part of its character and often of its beauty as are the Flowers and Leaves.

The second practice, which generally produces a result similar to the first, is quite as unthinking.  It is more often practiced; and is responsible for many of the labored and uninteresting designs which are common.  If the Pattern-artist deck-out the old worn-out and common place spirals with leaves and flowers borrowed from Nature—­the result is like the “voice of Jacob and the hands of Esau;” it is merely a Disguise of Artificiality.

An example of this method is given in Fig. 3.  It was generally practiced in Germany; and books like “Das Vegetabile Ornamente,” by K. Krumbholz, show it at its best.

[Illustration:  FIG. 3.]

If this treatment were universally followed—­there would soon be an end to design with natural foliage.  The spectator might observe one border which appeared to be a Rose, another a Tulip, the third a Thistle, and the fourth a Fuchsia; and, on examination, discover that these were not Rose, Tulip, Thistle, and Fuchsia; but merely that very artificial old friend—­the Spiral-scroll—­in disguise.

An apologist for this method remarks:—­” ...  In such matters as the ramification of plants, ... nature is always making angles and elbows [sic] which we are obliged, in decorative treatment, to change into curves for our purpose;...”.  This opinion needs only to be applied to animals in order to exhibit its absurdity; and with regard to plants, it will be seen that this tampering has not even the poor merit of success.

Sec. 7.—­NOTE ON SYMMETRY.

A desire for Symmetry often accompanies these two treatments.  This is a quality to be avoided whenever possible in Natural foliage design.  The so-called “Turn-over patterns” are an economy in Weaving-design, but the economy is of the wrong kind.  An artist should spend his thought to spare material or cost in working.  When he spares his thought—­making the least amount of thought cover the greatest amount of surface—­then is his work worth to the world just what it has cost him, i.e., very little.

So injurious is the influence of Symmetry in Natural foliage design, that it might almost be a test question—­“Is the design symmetrical?” When the exigencies of Machine-reproduction necessitate this with Natural foliage—­it is a hardship which the Artist regretfully accepts, and no one would willingly make a design for Hand-reproduction which was symmetrical; rather would he spend himself to insure the worthier result which ensues from Balance.