First, I'd like to discuss the "typical Victorian design" mentioned in the reading on the Littlefield House (456).  Is there such thing as a "typical Victorian design"?  According to Ruskin, "the union of two or three of its elements is enough already to bestow a certain Gothicness of character, which gains in intensity as we add the others, and loses as we again withdraw them" (209).  Is "typical Victorian design" the perfect Victorian structure, complete with savageness, changefulness, naturalism, grotesqueness, rigidity, and redundance?  Or is it simply a combination of a few of these attributes?  Are we able to judge what is typical?  Is anything typical?  Should we evaluate architecture based on standards that require a structure to conform to a notion of typical, or based on principles, such as those mentioned by Ruskin, that help to determine the nature and degree of a structure?

            Furthermore, the description, "interior walls are a combination of natural woods (curly walnut, birds-eye maple, vertical curly pine" helps to explain how these buildings are connected with nature (456).  Just as some of UT's buildings constructed from limestone are claimed to connect the students with nature, a house adorned with natural wood would also make the building "true to nature." 

            Gothic architecture also remains "true to nature" in its foiliated traceries.  According to Ruskin, "no Gothic is either good or characteristic, which is not foliated either in its arches or apertures" (229).  On page 229 of our analogy, an example of the most common forms of foliage, radiating the leaves of vegetation, are shown.  Ruskin also explains the importance of this technique in Gothic architecture.  Therefore, Gothic architecture is typically connected to nature through foliage and the materials used in construction.  What other characteristics of the Littlefield House connect it to nature?

            Additionally, the time period when Gothic architecture originated is reflected in the design of the Littlefield House.  According to the definition of antimodernism given in our analogy, "antimodernism typically either considers technology's utilization in the modern world to be misapplied and misguided, or else that it should be regarded as a lesser priority of human endeavour than, say, social cohesion or devotion to traditional religious and other cultural values" (191).   This tendency to favor social cohesion is reflected in the Littlefield House's floor plan of "a central hall with rooms on either side.  Wide cross halls create spacious living areas" (456).  The wide and large living areas provide a place for social cohesion, dialogue, and unification.