No Glass Spire or Swimming Pool: Notre Dame Cathedral to be Rebuilt Properly Without Modernist Vandalism

  • Thread starter Thread starter Bill_B_NY
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
B

Bill_B_NY

Guest
I’m grateful for this.
Paris’s Notre Dame Cathedral, which was nearly totally lost to fire in April 2019, will be rebuilt as it was, the French government says, defying the calls of modernist architects to seize the opportunity to give the medieval masterpiece a glass and steel overhaul.

Within days of the enormous fire that engulfed the landmark Paris building, architects were vying to release audacious design concepts for a potential modernist redesign of the cathedral, given its roof and interior had been totally stripped out by the blaze. The possibility that this insult could be added to the injury of the fire was made greater when French president Emmanuel Macron — himself given to grandiose and even absurd ideas — said he wanted the cathedral to have an “inventive reconstruction” with a “contemporary architectural gesture”.
Click to expand...
I wish our Catholic parish churches would be committed to great Catholic architecture again. I think too many people and pastors like comfort rather than the spiritual offering that the glorious “vertical” cathedrals give.
It’s also a function of our liturgical rites, unfortunately, as I see it.
 
Me three. Great news. I had the opportunity to visit some years before the fire. I’m glad it will be restored to its original splendour.
 
I have no personal objection to modern architecture.

I do not hold the same view as some that modern architecture equals bad architecture.

However, I do not think modern architecture complements old architecture. I was not aware there had been proposals to do anything of this nature to the great Cathédrale de Notre-Dame de Paris. I would be appalled if this had been done.

I hope the promises made to restore it to its former glory are carried through and put into practice.

I have never visited Notre-Dame, always only passing through Paris, avoiding it like I would avoid my own capital London. However, when Notre-Dame is restored I shall add it to my bucket list.
 
Yes, I was there for a Mass about two years ago. Glad I made it before the fire happened.
 
Thank God. There is something about Notre Dame that is timeless. I saw both religious and secular minded people deeply upset by this fire, so I think rebuilding it to anything other than what it was would have outraged or at least disappointed the vast majority.
 
Margaret_Ann said:
“Updating” Notre-Dame is sacrilegious in my mind. (No flags, please!) That’s just my .02.
Click to expand...
I like the parenthesis. I may need to use that in every post I send.
I heard that some architect wanted a swimming pool in the cathedral - maybe to use part of it as a gymnasium?
 
I think it’s safe to say that the swimming pool on the roof idea was a non-starter - I’m no civil engineer and I suppose anything’s possible with enough effort and energy (probably) but…

Suffice to say this idea was most likely just some architect after a bit of free publicity.
 
it will be a tremendous achievement for our world and our society if we can restore it to it’s fulness of beauty and excellence. Future generations will have that treasure - and appreciate our efforts. I am so cynical about things - I am surprised and delighted that they had the wisdom to make this choice. I would not have been surprised with something sacrilegious and stupid like a swimming pool or a lot of chrome and plate-glass like a giant office building on top of the structure. Sometimes people are a lot better than we think - this is one case, so far.
 
Anrakyr said:
It’s been updated I think five times so which “update” was the most sacrilegious?
Click to expand...
That’s true. I know quite a few people who didn’t care for the 19th-century spire at all - or for the whole of the Viollet-Le-Duc alterations for that matter.
 
Based on your post, I suspect you have misunderstood my previous post, which means I probably didn’t express myself clearly enough. Therefore, please permit me to clarify.

I am not personally opposed to modern architecture. I say this because it seems to me some people object to it simply because it is modern.

I fully appreciate architecture from the past and there are innumerable wonderful examples of it.

I very strongly dislike the fusion of modern architecture on older buildings.

I, too, would be extremely upset if Notre-Dame were, as you phrased it, ‘updated’. I hope the French Government will restore it as it was. And, unfortunately, we will have to rely on what the French Government choose to do because they own Notre-Dame.
 
I’m glad to learn this. Too many of our modern Catholic churches, especially here in the U.S., look like refurbished gymnasiums. The ambiance is cold and non-inspiring. One can’t help look around for the basketball hoops. I was in one of those, and that’s the effect it had on me. It neither looked nor felt like a church.
 
Good news. It was predictable, the French people would not have stood for it being modernized. The leaders, despite what they might have wanted, knew what they had to do.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top