I advocate the use of a
long table--four by seven feet is not too long--and a number of good
chairs that are alike in style, but not _exactly_ alike.
The chairs should not be the conventional dining-chairs. The idea that
the only dining-room chair possible is a perfectly straight up and down
stiff-backed chair is absurd. In a large house where there is a family
dining-room the chairs should be alike, but in an informal living-room
the chairs may be perfectly comfortable and useful between meals and
serve the purposes of dining-room chairs when necessary. For instance,
with a long oak table built on the lines of the old English refectory
tables you might have a long bench of oak and cane; a large high back
chair with arms of the Stuart order, that is, with graceful, turned
legs, carved frame work, and cane insets; two Cromwellian chairs covered
in some good stuff; and two or three straight oak-and-cane chairs of a
simple type. These chairs may be used for various purposes between
meals, and will not give the room the stiff and formal air that
straight-backed chairs invariably produce. One could imagine this table
drawn up to a window-seat, with bench and chairs beside it, and a dozen
cheerful people around it. There will be little chance of stiffness at
such a dining-table.
It should be remembered that when a part of the living-room is used for
meals, the things that suggest dining should be kept out of sight
between meals.
Pages:
96
97
98
99
100
101
102
103
104
105
106
107
108
109
110
111
112
113
114
115
116
117
118
119
120