![[identity profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/openid.png){kind=small}
gingerwitch.livejournal.com posting in ![[community profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/community.png){kind=small}
acciobrick* credit for the title to u/bunnymeowcat from the Jane Austen subreddit
Thursday the Lego Jane Austen GWP special went live, in honour of the 250th anniversary of her birthday, and I reviewed the first Jane Austen tribute lego Ideas MOC from TJBricks, Barton Cottage from 'Sense and Sensibility'. Today we're going to look at the exterior of the same creator's take on Pemberley from 'Pride and Prejudice', while I introduce you to a shedload of architectural terms you aren't convinced you want to know... 😆 drum roll please
Pemberley Part One.
The first bit of genius here is using material that has entered the public domain. As with (most) of Sherlock Holmes (I recall some eager waiting for the clock to tick down to when Moriarity could be included...), doing this set now means no negotiating for rights in order to build it and no licensing fees, which helps keep the price down. More lego and build for less. Always a good thing, and in the case of Ideas submissions, factors that make it more likely that a project will be made. (Apropos of nothing, might we some day see Shakespeare sets?)
The next bit of genius is how TJBricks has navigated the difficulty of the interior proportions while capturing the façade. I'll point that out in gushing detail, some below and more in the next post, but it really needed singling out in advance as it deserves to be noted.
Again, this MOC has been submitted to lego Ideas, a platform where fans can vote for sets they like and if they reach 10K votes, lego considers them for production. There are no guarantees, but on the other hand registering is quick and free, and supporting worthy projects costs nothing and doesn't commit you to a future purchase, so please feel encouraged to support and spread the word.
TJBricks states they've chosen Lyme Park of the National Trust that played the role of Pemberley in the 1995 BBC 'Pride and Prejudice' miniseries with Jennifer Ehle and Colin Firth, an extremely faithful adaption (if we ignore Mr. Darcy emerging, dripping, from the pond 😆) and my personal favourite. The interiors from that adaptation were filmed at Sudbury Hall. I'd argue in many respects the MOC more closely recreates Chatsworth Hall, the location for Pemberley in the 2005 Pride and Prejudice film with Keira Knightley and Matthew Macfadyen, and we'll take a look at that below. Either way, the buildings are similar enough in broad strokes that I've literally seen them confused and mislabelled on travel sites, so I think that can be discounted. 😉
Pemberley in itself is an interesting choice in that far more of the novel takes place at the Bennets' home, Netherfield Park (Bingley's home), or Rosings (where Lady Catherine de Bourgh can be found in all her condescension); I'm sitting here trying to calculate the minutes of screen / page time. Pemberley does, however, remain one of the most iconic locations of the series, and a good (and romantic) choice for a P&P submission. To refresh your memories, here's what the building looks like:
TJBrick's Pemberley from Jane Austen's 'Pride and Prejudice'
More photos can be found in the Ideas submission at lego (link included at the bottom of this page). Now let's compare it with a close up of Lyme Park and a shot of Chatsworth Hall below it:
You must allow me to tell you how ardently I admire and love this build...
The first and rather obvious deviation is the use of contrasting colours on the building's exterior. Lego has done both, matching and contrasting details, in previous building designs, and fans are often divided. It makes them stand out more, whether you like that or not is a matter of taste; de gustibus non est disputandum. Ultimately you wouldn't be comparing it with the photo side by side (probably 😆), and I think it looks fine as is. If it's a bridge too far, changing it to match would be a doddle pre-production, although it depends on if some of the decorative pieces are even currently being produced in tan (brick yellow), as lego officially states not to count on using parts not presently in production. Either way, both of the original buildings are a single tone. Noted. Also worth considering: the window design, similar to TJBricks' Barton Cottage solution, uses more bricks than usual to achieve its look, but I don't think it's too inflationary, it makes the build more fun, and I suspect that window treatment would suffer were it a single colour.
The next is the reduction in size. To be clear in advance, this is't a whinge, I'm all for it; it's well chosen and well executed. Lyme Park has three windows in the centre section and six to either side. TJBricks has chosen to go with 3-3-3, which is more reminiscent of Chatsworth Hall with the same alignment. Frankly, the vast majority of us couldn't afford to pay for the larger build anyway, so this strikes me as a good choice, full stop. The windows have the same format as Chatsworth, too. They're the same on the first and second (or second and third) floors, unlike Lyme Park where they're smaller on the upper level. They're still large windows, either way, and lego hasn't got a floor to ceiling version that's two wide, and the door frame would be too wide altogether, so I think the larger window size (2x3) is the best compromise here for both levels, even if it has me thinking more along the lines of Chatsworth than Lyme. Bygones. There's also a bit of conflating the front and rear views, but then we see Lyme across the pond as Lizzy and the Gardiners approach, so that's a bit of a muddle anyway.
Some other comparisons between the three: The edges of the roofs. There are no crenellations at Lyme, where the parapet is straight, unbroken, and sans ornamentation, or Chatsworth, for that matter, although there the MOC echoes the line more closely save the balusters that appear between the merlons. As it can't be done in that scale, that seems a fair enough compromise. Ok, that was a bit of architectural geekery, and I'm including a diagram to help with that below. In simpler terms: Lyme has a low, plain wall around the edge of its roof, Chatsworth has a higher, broken wall instead, with solid chunks of wall (merlons) alternating with sections with small pillars (balusters) that support the stone railing (coping) that runs throughout. Basically if you squint, the line along the roof of the MOC more closely approximates Chatsworth than Lyme in that respect. That said, Chatsworth's roof is dominated by statues, more finials than crestings, save the statues of three figures along that triangle, where Lyme only has those last three. As both buildings have those three statues, I think I'd have placed three of those statuette pieces there to represent them if possible. (Caveat: having an idea and being able to realise it aren't necessarily one and the same thing, it might not be feasible.) As for the merlons, they add some visual interest without being too costly, although a straight, single line of bricks with a tile on top (for Lyme) or a few single bricks with space between them also capped by long tiles (for Chatsworth) has to be a good bit cheaper and needn't look bad. The tympanum of the pediment at Lyme (pediments are those triangles things in the middle of the roof, the tympanum is the surface you're looking at) in this view of the building is free of decorations, so again: Chatsworth. And the MOC hasn't got chimneys which both buildings have. They don't take too many pieces and offer a bit of variety on an otherwise featureless spanse of roof, so I think I'd have added them, replete with chimney pots.
I'm not quite sold on the column solution, but this is tricky. Lyme has six (ionic) columns in the centre, Chatsworth four. They both have a mix of 3D rounded columns supporting the pediment and comparatively flat square ones (pilasters) as decorations between the windows. Lyme somewhat strangely has square pillars (confusingly also called pilasters) flanking the outermost columns in the centre, and that was always going to look a little odd with their different format and different spacing. The decorative flat pilasters between the windows have fluting (those decorative grooves) at Chatsworth, but are smooth at Lyme like Tuscan Order columns. One choice could be to use grille pieces to achieve the flat pilaster fluting, although I think that would add four pieces per pilaster and might look a little busy / choppy as they're only two bricks wide / long. In real life, they're also a little wider than the single tile's breadth, so perhaps a double width instead? That would look better in the single colour, though, I think. In white they could then be too dominant. Regardless, both kinds of pilasters have the same width at Lyme, so TJBricks' choice to use a single tile's / brick's width is consistent, but again, as a column, I think the 2 stud width might be a better choice as well, it just depends on the follow up problems that causes. That's the sort of thing I'd love to try out in a digital model to see.
The decorative keystones (the carvings / sculptures centred above the windows) are also a feature of Chatsworth and not Lyme, but I think they're a good addition to add some variety to the front, and particularly as they help change the exterior format of the windows. Again, there is no 2x4 window to use instead, so this is a clever solution (even if I'm not entirely sold on the hearts).
The entablature (that thick bit above the windows, often between floors, in this case the part underneath the roof, with a couple different stacked rows of varying details, for example a sculpted frieze at Chatsworth) is difficult to capture. TJBricks has gone with Lyme's more pared back design, which is smart. The rail piece is a good choice to achieve the varying depths, and the clips work well enough. Ish. They've used a tile to further extend the plane from the rest of the building's front, and as Lyme hasn't all the decorative detailing of Chatsworth, again that works. In the sum, it still feels a little off, though, in part because the clips extend further than the rail does, but I think that would require a deep dive into lego's approach to classical (or neoclassical) architecture for me to express that more precisely or constructively. That's just not a theme I collect.
The ground floor windows use 30044 Window 1 x 2 x 2 2/3 with Rounded Top, rightly so, and in a perfect world there would be a piece of printed glass, opaque with window panes matching the windows above, but that doesn't exist. Instead they've selected 94161 Shutter for Window 1 x 2 x 2 2/3 with Rounded Top, which off the top of my head reminds me of the exterior of a building in the scene where Mary Bennet's singing sets a dog to howling, but I may be misremembering that. It's brief, and hardly the focus of the shot. Pemberley obviously doesn't have the shuttered lower level. By using that piece, however - and this is truly lovely - they are able to shift the level of the interior floor lower, giving the rooms more space without inflating the size of the set to capture the exterior. That lower dark grey "story" is a mere three bricks high, and they use a full two of them (less a tile for flooring) for the rooms on the lower floor, as we'll see in the next post. (We need the chef's kiss emoji again. 👩🍳💋) We can (and should) quibble about the thickness of the build up (a full 3 bricks and one tile for the floors that will all need paying for), but this particular decision works very well. Admittedly its success comes non-trivially through double walls, which are a different matter altogether and I'll address that in the next post, but let's celebrate the win first.
A further component of the switch in floor heights are the outside stairs, which raise the level by only two bricks, and therefore only require two tiles' height adjustment to reach the floor in the interior. As space is needed to accommodate the level change, that's a good shout. I think I might prefer the skeleton leg as a baluster to their solution; it offers more visual interest, and it saves a piece a pop.
There's also a water feature, perfect! I've seen some debate as to whether or not a wet-shirted Darcy should be included (as it isn't canon, some are against; but in the portraits in the Jane Austen GWP, lego have demonstrated a willingness to take film versions as canon), I think the solution is to included a duelling Darcy in his white shirt, and an alternative face that may either be taken for sweating or dripping from the pond. I'd also expect some fishing gear, as that's the point of his conversation with Mr. Gardiner, to invite him to fish, and at least a single fish in the pond. (They have those in printed flat tiles, or there's always the option of capturing one mid-leap out of the water.) There's a cute little bridge and a sign identifying the set, both fine as is. The two trees and flowering shrub are lovely, and therefore likely require too many pieces. Lego has designers aplenty who excel at plants, so perhaps that could be trimmed appropriately were they so inclined. The only build that elicits a shrug from me is the horse drawn carriage. It doesn't feel like a success? We need something, but I'm not convinced that's it. The door seems too narrow, for one. On the other hand I've frankly never been the least bit interested in carriages, don't know what it should look like or how to go about building it, so I'll keep out of it, beyond saying the carriage the Gardiner party first arrives in (I'm inclined to call it a "Droschke", which Duden tells me is a Hackney carriage, but I'm likely incorrect) hasn't got a roof and probably requires fewer pieces.
More crucially, however, the build for the ground is very high, and while that meshes with the location, it still needs to be paid for. That decision alone is likely to see lego not executing the project, regardless how much support it receives, or at least not without serious retooling. (Think 21325 the Medieval Blacksmith, but reworking a set to that extent is very rare.) Along similar lines, in the Harry Potter theme I've seen many reviews complaining that the build up for the tracks in 76405 the Collectors' Edition of the Hogwarts Express is too much and not worth the resulting price tag, tracks are boring both to look at and to build, and I strongly suspect this decision would cause much of the same backlash. The interior ground floor, despite shifting it downwards, is still three bricks (and one tile) high, which as bases go is bonkers unless driven by narrative or absolutely required. I believe you could get away with far less without the compromise being too severe, and I'd really like to know what the extra height is costing one way or another. (There's always a chance they've been sparing on the bits you can't see.)
I think those are all fair assessments of the façade and exterior of the set; for better or worse, they reflect what is, both in the original buildings and the MOC. Now on to my self-indulgent hot takes...
A small bit of (utter) irrationality on my part: In the 1995 BBC miniseries version of 'Pride and Prejudice' we see Pemberley primarily from the pond side, and there are three arches on the ground floor that would allow one to cross through (or under parts of) the building. There isn't even a door on the plane we're facing, and we most notably see Darcy leave the building into the interior courtyard, and rush through one of those arches to intercept the Gardiner party on their way to their carriage. Damn it, I miss those arches. That said, if they'd been included, I'd bang on endlessly about it. It would either throw off the proportions, or require a much larger build, and TJBricks has brilliantly solved both exterior and interior dimensions in their build. Zero quibbles, no notes. We'll simply agree to allow me to mourn the loss of those arches, while acknowledging it would be a bit of rampant stupidity to include them, and the designer has absolutely made the right choice there. End of.
The next thing would be that at Lyme the arches align with the windows above them (although wider, the window treatments taken in total have much the same width), and the solution in the MOC, by virtue of incorporating the stairs and an entry (eminently sensible), which quite logically also includes doors wider than the windows, has changed the dimensions sufficiently that they now have used four windows in that section instead of three. They've also used 20309 Window 1 x 4 x 1 2/3 with Spoked Rounded Top, and I think I'd have preferred an empty / open arch piece instead (in a nod to the original, functional arched entryways), plus an attempt to only use three arches. The resultant wider sections to either side at Lyme feel a little like those thick, chunky cheekblocks to either side of neoclassical grand public stairs. It's perfectly alright if that bit's wider, but again, that would require some experimentation, which I suspect the creator has already done. As is, it's an acceptable compromise, just a notable standout where they've made such an effort to be true to dimensions otherwise. (Yes, I'm actually niggling about a fourth window. Either people are passionate about these things and that matters, or they aren't and it doesn't, but then they also aren't typing up a lengthy review of someone else's MOC. 😆)
A graphic from an Appendix identifying the architectural features of the U.S. Capitol from classicist.org
We'll look at the interior in the next post. Meanwhile, if you have a moment and would care to help support TJBricks' project, you can do so here by voting for their project on the lego Ideas site.
Thursday the Lego Jane Austen GWP special went live, in honour of the 250th anniversary of her birthday, and I reviewed the first Jane Austen tribute lego Ideas MOC from TJBricks, Barton Cottage from 'Sense and Sensibility'. Today we're going to look at the exterior of the same creator's take on Pemberley from 'Pride and Prejudice', while I introduce you to a shedload of architectural terms you aren't convinced you want to know... 😆 drum roll please
Pemberley Part One.
The first bit of genius here is using material that has entered the public domain. As with (most) of Sherlock Holmes (I recall some eager waiting for the clock to tick down to when Moriarity could be included...), doing this set now means no negotiating for rights in order to build it and no licensing fees, which helps keep the price down. More lego and build for less. Always a good thing, and in the case of Ideas submissions, factors that make it more likely that a project will be made. (Apropos of nothing, might we some day see Shakespeare sets?)
The next bit of genius is how TJBricks has navigated the difficulty of the interior proportions while capturing the façade. I'll point that out in gushing detail, some below and more in the next post, but it really needed singling out in advance as it deserves to be noted.
Again, this MOC has been submitted to lego Ideas, a platform where fans can vote for sets they like and if they reach 10K votes, lego considers them for production. There are no guarantees, but on the other hand registering is quick and free, and supporting worthy projects costs nothing and doesn't commit you to a future purchase, so please feel encouraged to support and spread the word.
TJBricks states they've chosen Lyme Park of the National Trust that played the role of Pemberley in the 1995 BBC 'Pride and Prejudice' miniseries with Jennifer Ehle and Colin Firth, an extremely faithful adaption (if we ignore Mr. Darcy emerging, dripping, from the pond 😆) and my personal favourite. The interiors from that adaptation were filmed at Sudbury Hall. I'd argue in many respects the MOC more closely recreates Chatsworth Hall, the location for Pemberley in the 2005 Pride and Prejudice film with Keira Knightley and Matthew Macfadyen, and we'll take a look at that below. Either way, the buildings are similar enough in broad strokes that I've literally seen them confused and mislabelled on travel sites, so I think that can be discounted. 😉
Pemberley in itself is an interesting choice in that far more of the novel takes place at the Bennets' home, Netherfield Park (Bingley's home), or Rosings (where Lady Catherine de Bourgh can be found in all her condescension); I'm sitting here trying to calculate the minutes of screen / page time. Pemberley does, however, remain one of the most iconic locations of the series, and a good (and romantic) choice for a P&P submission. To refresh your memories, here's what the building looks like:
TJBrick's Pemberley from Jane Austen's 'Pride and Prejudice'
More photos can be found in the Ideas submission at lego (link included at the bottom of this page). Now let's compare it with a close up of Lyme Park and a shot of Chatsworth Hall below it:
You must allow me to tell you how ardently I admire and love this build...
The first and rather obvious deviation is the use of contrasting colours on the building's exterior. Lego has done both, matching and contrasting details, in previous building designs, and fans are often divided. It makes them stand out more, whether you like that or not is a matter of taste; de gustibus non est disputandum. Ultimately you wouldn't be comparing it with the photo side by side (probably 😆), and I think it looks fine as is. If it's a bridge too far, changing it to match would be a doddle pre-production, although it depends on if some of the decorative pieces are even currently being produced in tan (brick yellow), as lego officially states not to count on using parts not presently in production. Either way, both of the original buildings are a single tone. Noted. Also worth considering: the window design, similar to TJBricks' Barton Cottage solution, uses more bricks than usual to achieve its look, but I don't think it's too inflationary, it makes the build more fun, and I suspect that window treatment would suffer were it a single colour.
The next is the reduction in size. To be clear in advance, this is't a whinge, I'm all for it; it's well chosen and well executed. Lyme Park has three windows in the centre section and six to either side. TJBricks has chosen to go with 3-3-3, which is more reminiscent of Chatsworth Hall with the same alignment. Frankly, the vast majority of us couldn't afford to pay for the larger build anyway, so this strikes me as a good choice, full stop. The windows have the same format as Chatsworth, too. They're the same on the first and second (or second and third) floors, unlike Lyme Park where they're smaller on the upper level. They're still large windows, either way, and lego hasn't got a floor to ceiling version that's two wide, and the door frame would be too wide altogether, so I think the larger window size (2x3) is the best compromise here for both levels, even if it has me thinking more along the lines of Chatsworth than Lyme. Bygones. There's also a bit of conflating the front and rear views, but then we see Lyme across the pond as Lizzy and the Gardiners approach, so that's a bit of a muddle anyway.
Some other comparisons between the three: The edges of the roofs. There are no crenellations at Lyme, where the parapet is straight, unbroken, and sans ornamentation, or Chatsworth, for that matter, although there the MOC echoes the line more closely save the balusters that appear between the merlons. As it can't be done in that scale, that seems a fair enough compromise. Ok, that was a bit of architectural geekery, and I'm including a diagram to help with that below. In simpler terms: Lyme has a low, plain wall around the edge of its roof, Chatsworth has a higher, broken wall instead, with solid chunks of wall (merlons) alternating with sections with small pillars (balusters) that support the stone railing (coping) that runs throughout. Basically if you squint, the line along the roof of the MOC more closely approximates Chatsworth than Lyme in that respect. That said, Chatsworth's roof is dominated by statues, more finials than crestings, save the statues of three figures along that triangle, where Lyme only has those last three. As both buildings have those three statues, I think I'd have placed three of those statuette pieces there to represent them if possible. (Caveat: having an idea and being able to realise it aren't necessarily one and the same thing, it might not be feasible.) As for the merlons, they add some visual interest without being too costly, although a straight, single line of bricks with a tile on top (for Lyme) or a few single bricks with space between them also capped by long tiles (for Chatsworth) has to be a good bit cheaper and needn't look bad. The tympanum of the pediment at Lyme (pediments are those triangles things in the middle of the roof, the tympanum is the surface you're looking at) in this view of the building is free of decorations, so again: Chatsworth. And the MOC hasn't got chimneys which both buildings have. They don't take too many pieces and offer a bit of variety on an otherwise featureless spanse of roof, so I think I'd have added them, replete with chimney pots.
I'm not quite sold on the column solution, but this is tricky. Lyme has six (ionic) columns in the centre, Chatsworth four. They both have a mix of 3D rounded columns supporting the pediment and comparatively flat square ones (pilasters) as decorations between the windows. Lyme somewhat strangely has square pillars (confusingly also called pilasters) flanking the outermost columns in the centre, and that was always going to look a little odd with their different format and different spacing. The decorative flat pilasters between the windows have fluting (those decorative grooves) at Chatsworth, but are smooth at Lyme like Tuscan Order columns. One choice could be to use grille pieces to achieve the flat pilaster fluting, although I think that would add four pieces per pilaster and might look a little busy / choppy as they're only two bricks wide / long. In real life, they're also a little wider than the single tile's breadth, so perhaps a double width instead? That would look better in the single colour, though, I think. In white they could then be too dominant. Regardless, both kinds of pilasters have the same width at Lyme, so TJBricks' choice to use a single tile's / brick's width is consistent, but again, as a column, I think the 2 stud width might be a better choice as well, it just depends on the follow up problems that causes. That's the sort of thing I'd love to try out in a digital model to see.
The decorative keystones (the carvings / sculptures centred above the windows) are also a feature of Chatsworth and not Lyme, but I think they're a good addition to add some variety to the front, and particularly as they help change the exterior format of the windows. Again, there is no 2x4 window to use instead, so this is a clever solution (even if I'm not entirely sold on the hearts).
The entablature (that thick bit above the windows, often between floors, in this case the part underneath the roof, with a couple different stacked rows of varying details, for example a sculpted frieze at Chatsworth) is difficult to capture. TJBricks has gone with Lyme's more pared back design, which is smart. The rail piece is a good choice to achieve the varying depths, and the clips work well enough. Ish. They've used a tile to further extend the plane from the rest of the building's front, and as Lyme hasn't all the decorative detailing of Chatsworth, again that works. In the sum, it still feels a little off, though, in part because the clips extend further than the rail does, but I think that would require a deep dive into lego's approach to classical (or neoclassical) architecture for me to express that more precisely or constructively. That's just not a theme I collect.
The ground floor windows use 30044 Window 1 x 2 x 2 2/3 with Rounded Top, rightly so, and in a perfect world there would be a piece of printed glass, opaque with window panes matching the windows above, but that doesn't exist. Instead they've selected 94161 Shutter for Window 1 x 2 x 2 2/3 with Rounded Top, which off the top of my head reminds me of the exterior of a building in the scene where Mary Bennet's singing sets a dog to howling, but I may be misremembering that. It's brief, and hardly the focus of the shot. Pemberley obviously doesn't have the shuttered lower level. By using that piece, however - and this is truly lovely - they are able to shift the level of the interior floor lower, giving the rooms more space without inflating the size of the set to capture the exterior. That lower dark grey "story" is a mere three bricks high, and they use a full two of them (less a tile for flooring) for the rooms on the lower floor, as we'll see in the next post. (We need the chef's kiss emoji again. 👩🍳💋) We can (and should) quibble about the thickness of the build up (a full 3 bricks and one tile for the floors that will all need paying for), but this particular decision works very well. Admittedly its success comes non-trivially through double walls, which are a different matter altogether and I'll address that in the next post, but let's celebrate the win first.
A further component of the switch in floor heights are the outside stairs, which raise the level by only two bricks, and therefore only require two tiles' height adjustment to reach the floor in the interior. As space is needed to accommodate the level change, that's a good shout. I think I might prefer the skeleton leg as a baluster to their solution; it offers more visual interest, and it saves a piece a pop.
There's also a water feature, perfect! I've seen some debate as to whether or not a wet-shirted Darcy should be included (as it isn't canon, some are against; but in the portraits in the Jane Austen GWP, lego have demonstrated a willingness to take film versions as canon), I think the solution is to included a duelling Darcy in his white shirt, and an alternative face that may either be taken for sweating or dripping from the pond. I'd also expect some fishing gear, as that's the point of his conversation with Mr. Gardiner, to invite him to fish, and at least a single fish in the pond. (They have those in printed flat tiles, or there's always the option of capturing one mid-leap out of the water.) There's a cute little bridge and a sign identifying the set, both fine as is. The two trees and flowering shrub are lovely, and therefore likely require too many pieces. Lego has designers aplenty who excel at plants, so perhaps that could be trimmed appropriately were they so inclined. The only build that elicits a shrug from me is the horse drawn carriage. It doesn't feel like a success? We need something, but I'm not convinced that's it. The door seems too narrow, for one. On the other hand I've frankly never been the least bit interested in carriages, don't know what it should look like or how to go about building it, so I'll keep out of it, beyond saying the carriage the Gardiner party first arrives in (I'm inclined to call it a "Droschke", which Duden tells me is a Hackney carriage, but I'm likely incorrect) hasn't got a roof and probably requires fewer pieces.
More crucially, however, the build for the ground is very high, and while that meshes with the location, it still needs to be paid for. That decision alone is likely to see lego not executing the project, regardless how much support it receives, or at least not without serious retooling. (Think 21325 the Medieval Blacksmith, but reworking a set to that extent is very rare.) Along similar lines, in the Harry Potter theme I've seen many reviews complaining that the build up for the tracks in 76405 the Collectors' Edition of the Hogwarts Express is too much and not worth the resulting price tag, tracks are boring both to look at and to build, and I strongly suspect this decision would cause much of the same backlash. The interior ground floor, despite shifting it downwards, is still three bricks (and one tile) high, which as bases go is bonkers unless driven by narrative or absolutely required. I believe you could get away with far less without the compromise being too severe, and I'd really like to know what the extra height is costing one way or another. (There's always a chance they've been sparing on the bits you can't see.)
I think those are all fair assessments of the façade and exterior of the set; for better or worse, they reflect what is, both in the original buildings and the MOC. Now on to my self-indulgent hot takes...
A small bit of (utter) irrationality on my part: In the 1995 BBC miniseries version of 'Pride and Prejudice' we see Pemberley primarily from the pond side, and there are three arches on the ground floor that would allow one to cross through (or under parts of) the building. There isn't even a door on the plane we're facing, and we most notably see Darcy leave the building into the interior courtyard, and rush through one of those arches to intercept the Gardiner party on their way to their carriage. Damn it, I miss those arches. That said, if they'd been included, I'd bang on endlessly about it. It would either throw off the proportions, or require a much larger build, and TJBricks has brilliantly solved both exterior and interior dimensions in their build. Zero quibbles, no notes. We'll simply agree to allow me to mourn the loss of those arches, while acknowledging it would be a bit of rampant stupidity to include them, and the designer has absolutely made the right choice there. End of.
The next thing would be that at Lyme the arches align with the windows above them (although wider, the window treatments taken in total have much the same width), and the solution in the MOC, by virtue of incorporating the stairs and an entry (eminently sensible), which quite logically also includes doors wider than the windows, has changed the dimensions sufficiently that they now have used four windows in that section instead of three. They've also used 20309 Window 1 x 4 x 1 2/3 with Spoked Rounded Top, and I think I'd have preferred an empty / open arch piece instead (in a nod to the original, functional arched entryways), plus an attempt to only use three arches. The resultant wider sections to either side at Lyme feel a little like those thick, chunky cheekblocks to either side of neoclassical grand public stairs. It's perfectly alright if that bit's wider, but again, that would require some experimentation, which I suspect the creator has already done. As is, it's an acceptable compromise, just a notable standout where they've made such an effort to be true to dimensions otherwise. (Yes, I'm actually niggling about a fourth window. Either people are passionate about these things and that matters, or they aren't and it doesn't, but then they also aren't typing up a lengthy review of someone else's MOC. 😆)
A graphic from an Appendix identifying the architectural features of the U.S. Capitol from classicist.org
We'll look at the interior in the next post. Meanwhile, if you have a moment and would care to help support TJBricks' project, you can do so here by voting for their project on the lego Ideas site.
(no subject)
Date: 2025-06-22 07:55 pm (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2025-06-23 12:59 am (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2025-06-22 08:01 pm (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2025-06-26 05:45 pm (UTC)If it doesn't make it to an official build (😕) , I vote we lobby them to release the bridge on rebrickable. 😘
(no subject)
Date: 2025-06-24 02:44 am (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2025-06-26 05:45 pm (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2025-06-24 02:45 am (UTC)This world of Austen is one I can fully get behind! I am going to vote right now :D
(no subject)
Date: 2025-06-26 05:55 pm (UTC)Thanks for supporting the project. 🥰 When people go to so much effort making a build and launching a campaign, I like to at least see them succeed on the popular vote. Lego themselves is obviously another issue, largely outside the sphere of fan influence and with very different "laws of physics", but a resonance with the public seems a key thing so you're not left feeling you're just creating into the great void. Goodness knows I've been there. 😆
(no subject)
Date: 2025-06-29 01:19 am (UTC)I wouldn't be surprised if LEGO went with it, They've certainly branched out with the flowers and Eiffel towers and race cars. Trying to entice the older customer, I suspect. Women our age, and much younger or older, don't want to be treated like "Friends is enough for the females of the world!"
Also...if I'm not mistaken, Pride and Prejudice is in the public domain, so that would be a good incentive for them. Anyway, fingers crossed!!
By the way, I am rereading Beyond Wandpoint. I've been away for so long, it is all fresh and amazing. I'm about to get the part where a bunch of Slytherin kiddos are introduced along with the rest of the castle and I remember that being super fun. ❤️
Thank you!
Date: 2025-07-03 12:45 pm (UTC)This is another great fun read! So helpful.
Totally agree that I should have included statues and chimneys! Shocking that I missed those.
I don't know why I made four arches! Totally agree that it should have been three.
Also, the floor hight was inevitable, but I am also not pleased with it, and will love to figure out a solution.
If ever LEGO Pemberley get's approved, I will ask the LEGO designer to read through this helpful review!
Looking forward to the interior review!