I agree with you, but the French are seriously cool, they have style and an instinctive understanding of aesthetic sensibility. If they did do a hybrid restoration, I reckon they would pull it off like what they did with the Pyramid at the Louvre. After all, it's the 21st century now ........
Enjoy your holiday, France in the Spring must be really lovely. ToS
yeah, sometimes you have to be bold and ruthless. Guess a historic correct reconstruction would take much longer than that five year window allows.
However the Eiffel-Tower was supposed to be disposed to the junk yard after the world exibition ends then and now it is an iconic symbol of France...
So who knows what would happen with the 'new' Notre Dame?
Just them but not others? Wait till Italians hear that.
Sorry ....
What I meant is, if they restore it to identical state as before, it still wouldn't be the real thing but a fake.
So you can go the other way and restore it in a sense that keeps the surviving part but complement it with a total hyper modern structure. Be bold!
I expect them to do just that, rather than copying.
The Germans restored the cathedral (Dom) at Cologne which was heavily damaged by allied bombings in 1944, 1945, to identical state. A different way of looking at these things.
Jan
Attachments
Last edited:
Oh, the PYRAMID!
It's the seemingly incongruous juxtaposition, that against all the odds, actually works. And works and works, and that is the point of it.
OK?
Last edited:
It is an appalling tragedy that will no doubt be shown to be caused by some inept human not doing their job properly, which given the age of the structure only gives one a sense of awe as to how well the original craftsman did their job to enable such a great age to be reached.
Can you imagine how difficult this cathedral would be to build, entirely by hand and muscular effort? Mind blowing really!
It is this that makes its reconstruction so important.
Can you imagine how difficult this cathedral would be to build, entirely by hand and muscular effort? Mind blowing really!
It is this that makes its reconstruction so important.
and the Frauenkirche in Dresden was restored 2005 as well, yet the Kaiser-Wilhelm-Gedächtniskirche in Berlin had gone a different way and was extended by a modern building. I think both ways are valid.
In my opinion the fire is a part of Notre Dames history now and there is no way to turn the time back.
Indeed. Lots of manual labor and lots of time. Ancient Pyramid, Parthenon, Pantheon, Roman Colosseum,... etc.
Except France launches global contest to rebuild Notre-Dame spire
Why not be bold, a glass onion dome for example?
I do not think anything other than an identical reconstruction of Notre Dame would be acceptable, with the caveat that the oak roof would be impossible to replicate due to the lack of suitably sized timbers. Maybe different woods could be substituted, if so, it would be a fantastic challenge to replicate medieval carpentry techniques to rebuild the roof to the original design.
Attachments
I think you probably mean Westminster Abbey, not Westminster Cathedral.
Westminster Cathedral is (to my eyes) a rather hideous brick building on Victoria Street (though John Betjeman apparently liked it). It was completed in 1903.
Most of the building we call Westminster Abbey, over the road from the Palace of Westminster (i.e. Parliament), dates from the 13th century, though the Abbey proper was founded probably in the 7th century. The coronations of all British and English monarchs, since at least William the Conqueror, have been at the Abbey.
Entry to Westminster Abbey is now more than £20. I haven't been inside for donkey's years. The place is dripping with history, however, and I would certainly hate to see it go up in flames.
Stephen