Notre-Dame competition an extraordinary opportunity, says Norman Foster. https://t.co/uQxmDZgHbz pic.twitter.com/FPpQgUmckF
— Royal Fine Art (@RoyalFineArt) April 20, 2019
२० एप्रिल, २०१९
So wrong.
याची सदस्यत्व घ्या:
टिप्पणी पोस्ट करा (Atom)
पोस्ट्स
१३२ टिप्पण्या:
That's cool...for a train station.
The place has fantastic stained glass windows. The interior needs to be dark for them to look right.
I fully expect a proposal that the new spire be topped by a crescent moon in the interests of exclusivity.
When does the bidding start for naming rights?
It needs a retractable roof like Miller Park. And a slide.
Oy vey!
Why not let the sunlight in. If you want your worship in a tomb, you can go down into the catacombs of Paris a hundred yards away.
And you can see the fireworks on Bastille Day night.
The focus has to be directed at the Altar.
That's where the magic happens.
Knock it down and put up a parking lot.
They should just replace the spire with a minaret and get it over with already.
Restore means just that. It should look the same after completion, even if more modern materials are used to make it better.
While my two visits to Norte- Dame were dark and a bit dusty,I frankly like this inspiration for the new roof. The knave etc will remain the same and few could see the forest beams any way.
The place has fantastic stained glass windows. The interior needs to be dark for them to look right.
So why not stained glass in the roof also?
Please, no.
That's cool...for a train station.
Or Celestial Greyhound station.
The replies over there are great: “Another conference center on the outskirts of Essex”.
Maybe we should ask Butt-whatever what he thinks. He is probably pretty up his Gramsci given who raised him, and so he no doubt has a view as to what the people who want to bring the cathedral into the "modern era" are thinking. Hint: The uglier, the better. We don’t want public art and architecture to inspire any pride in the culture. In fact it should be repurposed to destroy cultural pride, maybe replace the whole thing with a bunch of twisted girders welded together and painted red, and try to keep a straight face when you tell the peasants that it’s fine art.
Of course, the stone vault is still in place, so the only "space below" that a glass roof would "illuminate" is the air gap between the roof and the vault.
Thus, the primary effect of such a roof would be to trap heat in the summer, making the cathedral less habitable and less hospitable.
Accordingly, even ignoring a judgment of the exterior aesthetics that results, only a troll or outright moron could propose something like this.
So, whoever proposed it should just be taken out and shot, for the benefit of the human race.
Appalling, but make the spire a minaret and you'll be much closer.
"Sharp British ideas for Notre Dame"
Perhaps the best reassurance that the French won't do it.
a glass roof would turn the building into a greenhouse
another case of architectural fantasy gone wild
the roof should be copper clad stainless steel using steel trusses to replace the wood beams ( fire proof )
copper clad stainless to give it a traditional green copper patina as it ages, the stainless steel for strength, durability, fire resistance
It doesn't help that the "space below" is a stone ceiling.
Britain is in a "Brutalism" phase of architecture right now.
Dalrymple has a few thoughts.
President Macron’s speech to the French nation about the fire that destroyed so much of Notre Dame contained a terrible threat: he said that the cathedral would be rebuilt, to be even more beautiful than before. This might seem an innocuous, even laudable aim, but the announcement of Prime Minister Édouard Philippe that a competition would be held to design “a spire suited to the techniques and challenges of our time” should send a chill down the spine of anyone familiar with the efforts of modern architects in Paris, the effects of which can be seen all around the city.
The monumental public buildings constructed using techniques to meet the challenges of our time include the Centre Pompidou, the Tour Montparnasse, the Opéra Bastille, the Musée du quai Branly, and the new Philharmonie, each one of which would gain at least an honorable mention in a competition for ugliest building in the world.
I would think that covers it pretty well.
Oh! The horror, the horror!
That looks like something a fourteen years old would come up with.
r/V: The knave etc will remain the same...
Inspired autocorrect.
It doesn't help that the "space below" is a stone ceiling.
What Norman Foster has in mind involves removing that lovely vaulted ceiling. Of course, when the inside of Notre Dame is as bright as the outside the stained glass will be mostly too dark to see.
The British and the French have been mostly at peace since 1815, if Mr. Foster knows what's good for Europe (of course he does, people like Norman Foster know what's best for everyone.) he'll quietly retire somewhere and devote himself to tying flies.
R/V: You are right, the knave and all of his/her assistant knaves will remain all too intact and the same as ever. Even the English knaves are trying to help. Perhaps the German and ex-Soviet knaves will contribute their ideas as well. Make Paris Soviet again! (According to Theodore Dalrymple, a good start has been made on this already.)
It is the "nave" that is at risk here, alas, not the knaves, who are all too indestructible through any human means.
Steven at 5:48 nailed it. The pre-existent roof merely protected the stone vaulted arches and vaulted domes in the cathedral. They should (and likely will) proceed with the original renovation plans, keeping as true to the original gothic design as possible. I would hope they'd include a copper roof as it develops a lovely patina over time.
Make Cathedrals Gothic Again. -CP
I frankly like this inspiration for the new roof.
I'm surprised roesch/voltaire's Luddite politics also nastify his aesthetics.
Or maybe not...
but a darth of creativity.
Another good typo!
I'm surprised roesch/voltaire's Luddite politics also nastify his aesthetics
Gramsci.
Steven said...
"So, whoever proposed it should just be taken out and shot, for the benefit of the human race."
Yo, seconding that proposal.
Plenty of money available, but a dearth of creativity. I would hope to see something that I myself could not come up with in 15 minutes, which is all I see so far. Think outside the damned box.
"Darth" was not a typo. I'm just not a good spellur.
Why not let the sunlight in. If you want your worship in a tomb, you can go down into the catacombs of Paris a hundred yards away.
Very few French attend services, especially if they are under 70 years old.
Notre Dame is primarily a tourist destination and historical site. That plan really screws up the stained glass which is on a par with Chartres. (See Althouse's comment).
It is amazing to see what artisans achieved hundreds and hundreds of years ago.
@Quaestor:
You have *got* to be kidding me. He proposes to destroy *more* of the cathedral to "restore" it. SMDH.
I can see appropriate changes (the spire was a relatively recent addition, so...), but that is beyond the pale.
I'm so in love with vaulted ceilings. Whatever they do they must keep those.
Maybe it should have a water tower on top.
There's already a glass-roofed exhibition/trade-show venue available a few kilometers down the Seine, if one is in need of that sort of thing.
again, had there been no fire, and the restoration been completed,
why now is that intended end-result not acceptable?
the architectural version of "never let a crisis go to waste" ?
They could grow some tomatoes.
Oscar Niemeyer's churches are cautionary tales.
tradguy: Why not let the sunlight in. If you want your worship in a tomb, you can go down into the catacombs of Paris a hundred yards away.
Yeah. What Notre Dame has really been missing all these centuries is that American megachurch vibe.
First they had to save the church from the fire, now they have to save it from the "professional" architects. It's a gothic church, rebuilding it as any style but gothic is an idea so stupid it requires a lot of education to come up with. This proposal is the equivalent of "restoring" a Michaelangelo in the style of modern art, the result would be hideous.
One doesn't like to bring up the money angle, but seeing as the French government owns the building, their interest should be to preserve its attraction as a gothic masterpiece, not some narcissistic post-modern reinterpretation.
Simply another California innovation going global: find a beautiful setting and use it as a toilet
Steven is right but misses the point. The point is denigration. Imagine, to steal an image, a boot grinding the face of Abbott Suger — forever. That is the point.
grow tomatoes - lol.
Make is a greenhouse. how perfect.
Where are some other ideas?
cold pizza: Make Cathedrals Gothic Again.
Well, OK. But don't get carried away with that ultra-modern stuff. I'm more of a romanesque girl myself.
Ken B: Imagine, to steal an image, a boot grinding the face of Abbott Suger — forever. That is the point.
Speaking of stealing, I'm gonna steal that line.
People are having fun.
This won't happen, because the tourists would hate it and it's completely obvious that the tourists would hate it.
This won't happen, because the tourists would hate it and it's completely obvious that the tourists would hate it.
Pompidou.
looks too futuristic, like something from "Planet of the Apse"
It's a little like putting a big glass pyramid in front of the Louvre. Luckily nobody would do something that crazy.
Leave the roof off and put in a big ol' roller-coaster.
Getting a little light in there would keep the altar boys safer.
Not only should they delete that image from the server, they should hunt down every extent copy of the Times of London where that image appeared and burn it. And hack into archive.og and destroy any copies there.
Restoring it is regressive. Modernizing it is progressive. Tear it down and put up a parking lot.....
R/V is a fool among knaves.
I doubt that the wooden beams that supported the roof are available.
As I recall, over 50 acres of forest were clear cut to provide the builders with those beams.
So, rebuilding it as before is probably not an option. At the least, the wooden beams probably have to be replaced with steel.
Nothing wrong with using steel beams instead of wood. But as to the spire? Just put up a minaret and have done with it.
Who's going to get up there an squeegee off the pigeon poop?
looks too futuristic, like something from "Planet of the Apse" Heh heh.
Those saying, satirically, that they should put up a minaret, should read the link. The first sentence of the article states that a minaret is indeed one of the proposals.
Well, it worked for the Karlskirche in Vienna
I saw this coming. Predictable. Horrible But there will be worse. Btw isn’t there supposed to be a minaret in all competition designs?
At least people are awake to the forces trying to destroy them.
The problem is the catholic church is one of the groups involved in destroying western culture.
I hope the renovations include a Starbucks...
"you will get the architecture you deserve" (apologies to T-Jeff)
Needs solar panels.
The Powerline weekly cartoons had one that fits here. Pic of the Cathedral, with the captions above:
"Keep Architects away from Notre-Dame"
"Restoration, not Redesign"
Seriously, an architectural competition would yield those grandiose ego-driven designs that are the model for our Presidential Libraries, and the Eisenhower Memorial.
The beams can't be replaced in wood. There are no old growth Oak forests left in Europe.
Let the competition be focused on modern engineering tech to replace the same look of the old roof and steeple.
A Minaret? Obscene joke.
The spire simply doesn't belong. It clashes with the rest of the architecture. Just leave it off.
It needs a geodesic dome, escalators, and a coffee bar.
I'm okay with it so long as there's a resident Homer Simpson like guy who occasionally crawls around on the glass,
https://deadhomersociety.files.wordpress.com/2018/05/natural-born-kissers11.png
The proposal for a glass roof is too modest. Do away with the flying buttresses -- they're SO 13TH CENTURY! Wholly unnecessary with modern building techniques and materials.
There's always the Caspar David Friedrich option:
Don't fix the roof.
Here is the latest entry from America's architects.
Notre Dame, the mecca of tourism will also be the mecca of shopping. On Sunday, an area will be cordoned off for the people who still cling to their religion. Tourists and shoppers are welcome to watch the spectacle of medieval ceremonies.
The spire simply doesn't belong. It clashes with the rest of the architecture. Just leave it off.
It and the buttresses are the best part. It's a pleasing contrast with the heavy stone. Much better than a big square tower like the National Cathedral since it isn't on a hill and can't be seen from miles.
To get people onto the observation deck, they need a Quasimodo robot to toss them up to the roof.
McCullough@5:19PM Do the Brewers still have the guy who slides into the glass of suds whenever someone parks one? I can see that at the new improved Notre Dame- when it's time for communion, Jesus slides down into the chalice of wine. Body of Christ, baby! Gimme an A! Gimme an M! Gimme an E! Gimme an N! Goooo Catholics!
Olivier Babeau, an economics and management professor in the University of Bordeaux, in an op-ed in Le Figaro published Thursday: "... In reality this [this series of debates over the reconstruction of Notre-Dame] is not a fight of Christians against the other religions, of believers against the non-believers, but of an opposition between those who recognise the importance (and the existence!) of our roots and the apostles of the new egalitarian faith. According to these last, the old order must be subjected to a systematic damnatio memoriae so that it can be replaced by the smiling face of an inclusive modernity, progressive, lasting, and self-celebratory...." He is quite good about the useful idiocy of wind turbines and the votaries of the religion of Mother Earth, too.
Just please put back what was destroyed, using more modern materials (maybe some high-tech laminated wood beams - stronger and more fire resistant than steel - to replace the forest) and maybe a sprinkler system.
But please, no modern, interpretive desing incorporating modern esthetic. It was built from 1160 to 1260 as a Gothic Cathedral, and that is what it should be once restored.
If you want glass ceilings and spires - build them yourself on your own site.
Of course there are people who want to do what the fire did not -- destroy Notre Dame.
Better that the fire had reduced it to rubble than to profane it with this anti-God modernist crap.
Notre Dame is primarily a tourist destination and historical site.
Notre Dame is primarily a cathedral and house of God, even if there are secularists who want to steal it for their own purposes, the same as the thieving Muslims did with the Hagia Sophia in Constantinople.
And it is specifically a Catholic house of God -- non-Catholics don't get a say into how it is rebuilt.
This proposal is the equivalent of "restoring" a Michaelangelo in the style of modern art, the result would be hideous.
They want to do what that cleaning lady did with the painting of Ecce Homo a few years ago, making the image of Jesus to look like a monkey.
Spire is 19th century. Debate in Ubisoft: to add spire or not to French Revolution game Unity? 21st century people expect the spire. The company has many models taken by experts, and will likely share them for the reconstruction. btw- if you play, Ubisoft allowing free downloads of the game until April 25th. Images of Notre Dame in the game.
https://news.ubisoft.com/en-us/article/348227/supporting-notre-dame-de-paris
"Senior level designer Caroline Miousse spent a full two years making Unity's version of Notre Dame, obsessing over every brick and working with a historian to make sure that the structure in the game was both as accurate a recreation as physically possible and something that modern players would be able to recognize. The end result was stunning: the giant cathedral sits in the centre of the city, replete with sculpture, stained glass, architectural detail and more. The goal was to make this as close to a perfect recreation as possible, and that took time and effort. As Destructoid reported at the time:
Seeing that the Notre Dame was prioritized in the development of Unity, a main goal was to recreate it 1:1 to stay as true as possible. That means that Miousse was almost literally putting the cathedral together brick by brick. The size seems to have been a welcomed challenge that she reveled in. "I want the player to feel tiny when scaling it," Miousse stated."
https://www.forbes.com/sites/davidthier/2019/04/17/ubisoft-is-giving-assassins-creed-unity-away-for-free-to-honor-notre-dame/#4c3e514a2ec2
Will it have a Starbucks?
Damn, IgnoranceIsBliss beat me to it!
Then I want a Chik-Fil-Et.
Happy Easter...
I think California should donate sufficient redwood beams to supply rebuilding of the complete roof “forest” at Notre Dame. Seriously.
Surely some of the second-growth redwood forests which have regrown since the demise of the glory days of Western lumbering exhibit large enough trees to be suitable for the task; and even if it should take 50 acres (or more!) worth of trees: a) these aren't old-growth trees; b) 50 acres (0.078 square mile) is an extremely tiny part of the redwood habitat (more than 3,000 sq. mi.) in California; c) all the wood would rather quickly be regrown into (once again) second-growth redwood forest; while d) all the wood taken would then be sequestered away in the roof of the restored Notre Dame cathedral — a permanent carbon-reserve respository against global warming. Win-win!
The devious structure should be replicated as exactly as records, images and prior measurements allow. Then it should be reconstructed using the most advanced structural materials known to us in 2019 (as a record of the state-of-the art at the time of the fire)
Anything else is wanking.
*previous, not devious.
HoJo. Go with orange.
Oh just pick the top 3 proposals and order them randomly (Hi Jessica!)
If you build it, Islam will tear it down. And the French lack the will to protect it.
Rebuilt then burnt to the ground, 3.0 rebuilt and then exploded, 4.0 nuked.
he said that the cathedral would be rebuilt, to be even more beautiful than before.
Oh. That Guy. Yah, he pulled a similar stunt some years ago. Something involving a golden apple and "the most beautiful". Resulted in a lot of running and screaming in the end. Was known as The Judgement of Paris I think.
Ah, the more things change...
Please allow me to introduce myself, I'm a man of wealth and taste
Talking about blowing up churches, Muslims (supposedly) just blew up a few, and some five star hotels, in Sri Lanka. 169 dead so far.
What does AOC think? She should decide!
Maybe if they incorporated a water park?
Will there be rides?
Re: Sri Lanka bombing...Trump fumble tweeted "138 million people killed" condolences then deleted and retweeted with the correct-at-the-time "138 people killed" and the media is obsessively and dutifully still spilling pixels over it. Seriously, they are making sure to point out what he initially tweeted, then telling you he deleted and issued a new tweet. What utter wankers. What. Is. The. Point?!? People have died in a horrible manner. But, let's be sure to screw over Trump when we report it.
Oh, and that glass is a monstrosity. It's a Gothic cathedral. To "modernize" something that had such beauty in its original and subsequent restorations work is people thinking they are too clever by half. Let the woke brigade uglify something that was glorious and awe inspiring because progress!
The sides are being drawn between those who understand that Notre Dame is a cathedral that people like to visit and those who think it’s a tourist attraction that used to be a church.
The spire simply doesn't belong. It clashes with the rest of the architecture. Just leave it off.
But it does belong.
The spire wasn’t added in the 19th century. It replaced the original which dated from the 1300’s and was torn down in the 18th century due to wear.
Metalman said...
"a glass roof would turn the building into a greenhouse
another case of architectural fantasy gone wild
the roof should be copper clad stainless steel using steel trusses to replace the wood beams ( fire proof )
copper clad stainless to give it a traditional green copper patina as it ages, the stainless steel for strength, durability, fire resistance"
Is stainless structurally string enough? A structural ateel box beam wouldbe cheaper and they could let it rust for a wood effect. My choice would be custom microlam beams. and replace the lead or copper roof.
How about a roof like the Baptistery of the Pisa Cathedral (Battistero di San Giovanni)? Half of it is lead sheathing and half is terra cotta. And while we are at it, why not titanium beams to support the new roof? That really should be modern and strong.
"The place has fantastic stained glass windows. The interior needs to be dark for them to look right."
Also, the current ceiling is stone. The Wood roof was on top of that. You would have to pull off the current stone ceiling. They are going to screw it up.
(eaglebeak)
I am surprised these modernist putzes haven't suggested burning down all of Europe's Gothic cathedrals to get that "natural light" look.
Talk about the barbarians at the gates!
Meanwhile, for others, there's a terrific book called The Cathedral Builders by Jean Gimpel which intensifies appreciation for these incredibly beautiful buildings.
Christ is risen.
"... and the gates of hell shall not prevail against him."
Cold soulless modernism to replace a prayer in stone and glass.
You should have a look at St Boniface Cathedral in Winnipeg. The original Gothic style building burned out, leaving the stone facade standing. So they left the walls and built a new, smaller chapel behind it. It's an impressive approach; a dialog between the generations that built the two structures.
Spire is 19th century.
The history of the spire:
1. Completed in the 13th century
2. Removed in the late 18th century as it was falling apart
3. Recreated in the 19th century because hey, spire.
4. Burned down in a more recent century.
I was confused because early accounts--some of which are still up--said the spire was a relatively recent addition, but I stumbled across some art many hundreds of years ago showing the spire. The full account started popping up several days later. Less confused now.
I'd go the retractable roof route. Like Miller Park. Talk about a tourist attraction!
Or just build a mosque. Save the local muzzies, who will run the country soon, from blowing it up and rebuilding it themselves.
Where are the solar panels and wind turbines?
While we are at it, the Lascaux caves could use an facelift.
I was confused because early accounts--some of which are still up--said the spire was a relatively recent addition, but I stumbled across some art many hundreds of years ago showing the spire. The full account started popping up several days later. Less confused now.
Even so, it was added as an afterthought. ;-)
Architect 1: Well, we're almost finished with this magnificent Gothic structure!
Architect 2: Hey, why don't we add a spire? I hear they're going to be the latest thing in cathedrals. And now we have the technology!
I could see a glass roof but it would have to blend with gothic, obviously. Darker glass, not modern looking at all. Etc.
I’m sure it’s doable, architects can do amazing things when pointed in the right direction.
Seems cruel to mock poor Hillary by building yet one more glass ceiling.
mockturtle: Even so, it was added as an afterthought. ;-)
It's my understanding that in the original design the towers were to have spires. These were never built, but the single spire that was built makes more aesthetic sense imagined in that context.
Mark: And it is specifically a Catholic house of God -- non-Catholics don't get a say into how it is rebuilt.
Yes, but as a physical property it's owned by the state. And judging from the modern track record of Catholic architectural choices when it comes to both restoration and new church building, one can't, alas, be too confident that the Catholics in charge would be less likely to plump for an abomination than the French state.
The beams can't be replaced in wood. There are no old growth Oak forests left in Europe.
I don't know how the forests of Limousin are doing anymore, but America could probably supply the wood, and Russia has vast untouched forests if they wanted to cooperate with the RCC and France. Probably only to exact concessions...Engineered wood solutions are in my mind the answer. Call the Forestry Products school at Virginia Tech.
the right tech might be laminated wood girders. the plywood equivalent in beams. strong yet flexing
"I don't know how the forests of Limousin are doing anymore"
French oak wine barrels
I wouldn't be surprised if wood is also important for the sake of acoustic qualities. Many times a redo of the interior of a concert hall or other venue results in undesirable changes to the sound qualities of the place.
The Drill SGT. That's what microlam beams are. Very thin strips of wood glued together. They can be made to any thickness and bent and shaped any way the customer wants.
I'd imagine that more fire proofing should be the major change. An observation tower, LOL. Yeah, that's what the the Tomb of the Unknown Soldier and the Holocaust Museum in DC needs too.
Basically, people go for the Stained Glass Windows, the 1st Floor, and the Tower made famous by Victor Hugo. We don't need a "glass roof".
I mean if we're going to put in a glass roof, why not a go for a French Space Needle and a revolving restaurant?
Late again - just ran across this. Few points follow.
1) is there a wood microlam glue that is good for 800 years?
2) if the replacement is wood, will it be treated with borate fire retardant?
3) old growth redwood is mostly available only as salvage due to logging moratorium
4) second growth redwood not as fire resistant nor as strong as old growth redwood, more so compared to oak, and probably grades lower due to knots
5) under the roof beams are vaulted stone ceilings which probably would maintain acoustics regardless of roof beam material
my vote for roof beams, cor-ten weathering steel box beams (stable rust layer prevents further rusting) and would look closer to eight century old oak
(an issue with any different material than wood is making sure the replacement roof framing doesn't cause large forces on the stone walls due to temperature swings)
my next vote, first, kill all the architects, then the lawyers next (apologies to WS)
Seems cruel to mock poor Hillary by building yet one more glass ceiling.
Keep your eyes open for an article on how the new glass ceiling is just more signaling by institutional patriarchal blah blah blah.
I'm taking "Why Notre Dame is Sexist" at 3-1.
टिप्पणी पोस्ट करा