France Will Host An International Design Competition To Replace Notre Dame's Fallen Spire

Let’s give them the benefit of doubt and assume a similar idea was used in the 19th century. Though they just called those contract bids back in the day.

My true feelings. This is so stupid. They can use the design from the one that just fell over. No need to recreate the wheel. People want the church back, as know through modern eyes. Not a modern church in the skeletons of a medevil cathedral. Put it back the way it was.

Oh, YEAH. Let's competish.

"Not a modern church in the skeletons of a medevil cathedral. Put it back the way it was."

Not all of it was built in medieval times, some of it was added on in the 19th century.

r4 sounds like a freeper.

R4 is correct, France will attempt to make it a multicultural project. OTOH, I'm glad to see that hideous spire retired.

Here's my suggestion.

I was totally opposite to this idea too at first, but now I actually like the idea of a new spire. It will remind future people that there was once a huge fire that destroyed the entire roof, the "origial" spire and nearly the entire cathedral. They need some sort of remembering. That's quite common with many buildings that were re-erected after WWII here in Europe. I do hope that it will be a tasteful decision, though.

Like the glass pyramid entrance to the Louvre.

It's a good idea, after all the spire itself was a replacement for a much older spire that was dismantled during the French revolution.

The French are nation of hysterics.

R9. Yeah those are really ugly. Very very small part of the museum but it makes an impression.

I’m against this. It sounds just like France. This shit is why Lepen was on the second ballot. Dumb.

I'm totally OK with IMPeis pyramid at the Louvre therev, but Notre Dame needs a spire that has the [nearly] same dimensions as the old one. Same proportions as the old one, but maybe new/different material. A modern form/interpretation of the old one that gives the entire chuch the full shappe back but is still different and new and is like a monument of that overcome fire.

Sorry for all the typos. I hate writing on my phone

The Germans never harmed a thing in Paris during the occupation yet the satanists just tried to burn down Notre Dame.

Just don't tell Daniel Liebeskind.

There's nothing odd about this. Germany had design competitions for Berlin. There was a design competition for the WTC and for the memorial.

bad idea.

humanity lost the ability to create aesthetically pleasing architecture around the time the original tower was finished.

You can't compare the WTC, r17. There was never any doubt that what was going up wouldn't remotely resemble the two towers.

Mmm, let's see...

Do fuck off, you illiterate twat at r11.

R19 that's not true...there was a huge push to recreate the WTC towers and who said that the Notre Dame steeple should be a copy? A design competition is completely normal and I just assumed there would be one.

Nah, there wasn't r22. There was a huge push to make it a park. And after that was squashed by Silverstein, he promised to incorporate a memorial into the new design. But there wasn't serious talk about replicating the towers. The feeling was that a replica might just be another target. It took about five years to settle the insurance claim too, so nothing much happened for quite some time.

Will the Catlick Church pay for ANY of the repairs?

It was probably a fleeing altar boy who tipped over a candle that started the whole thing, anyway.

In the sceme of things the steeple is a new addition to the cathedral. A competition for new design rather than recreating it is appropriate.

The original WTC was so ugly. There was a big push to rebuild the towers exactly as they were - mostly an emotional reaction to the shock off the attack. Then people remembered the huge, empty, Brutalist Style plaza, the disfunctional train connections, the 70's style underground shopping mall, the overall fatuousness of two huge, twin rectangles dominating the skyline, that they embraced the idea of a new design pretty quickly.

But, to paraphrase Glinda the Good Witch, the new design was worse than the other one.

R21 #JeNeSuisPasCharlie

r27, though you are an asshole. FOH.

Daily Wire? F&F

I hope they come up with something fresh and whimsical. The old ND was beautiful, but modernization is the way forward rather than faux cathedral.

They've lost the roof and the Spire. The majority of the interior is intact, along with the exterior. Do you really want faux Gothic, circa 2025 ?. After all, Gothic was modern & cutting edge in the 13th Century. Let's have an up to date twist on an ancient building, think Reichstag. It doesn't have to be a disastrous. I found it quite gloomy. How about a glass roof ?

"This shit is why Lepen was on the second ballot."

Huh? What does a design competition have to do with Lepen? You are dumb.

I agree that a new design would be an homage to the disaster, but the spire was really beautiful, and I'm afraid that they would fuck up the overall appearance. All you have to do is look at some of the horrible urban projects turning churches into condos. There's one in the South End of Boston that is universally vilified --a steel and glass Bio-dome superimposed over a 19th century Gothic church. Ecccchh.

[quote] I found it quite gloomy.

You sound like an idiot.

R31 a true American yokel tourist without an ounce of culture.

Nice, r7, but I find this one more elegant:

r30 & r31--I hope neither of you are in decision-making roles on anything.

r35--a true, superior-acting cunt.

[post redacted because linking to dailymail.co.uk clearly indicates that the poster is either a troll or an idiot (probably both, honestly.) Our advice is that you just ignore this poster but whatever you do, don't click on any link to this putrid rag.]

They should use designs from the past to reflect the historic nature of the building, One of the best designs was created 80 years ago, but would work wonderfully for a cathedral. Very inspirational and inviting for people of all faiths.

"Whimsical" is just exactly what a major civic site of worship needs, r30. People can go to weep during a Mass for a dead loved one, but first they can enter tittering in amusement over the giant fuchsia exclamation point where the spire used to be!

Uh, design competitions happen everywhere in every country. Some of you need to get out more, but I guess some people never miss an opportunity to bash Muslims or what they think is "pc culture"

R41 I've got out more. I see more fugly waste-of-money buildings going up. Probably you were involved in the most egregious ones, so get off your pedestal. The rest of us have to live with the dreck your design competitions dream up.

To preserve what remains of the Notre Dame, it needs to be dismantled, piece by piece, and be relocated to its own museum. Otherwise, in its current state, time, gravity, vandalism, looters, and future fuck-ups will destroy it beyond repair.

Yes, doing so may take decades to accomplish; however, the construction of this cathedral involved centuries/generations to build.

That's usually how it works, r38. Doesn't mean they are unqualified.

R43 I can't believe they'll take it apart -- and if they can't even stop vandals and looters from destroying it, then it's a lost cause anyway.

I hope these architects get to design the new roof!

It'll be a monstrosity to rival/outdo the Centre Pompidou and the Louvre's Pei horror.

What an incredibly stupid idea, r43. It survived the French Revolution, WW2 and 800 years of the ravages of time. And you think NOW it needs to be spirited away?

As for r47--another idiot with no taste.

R48 truly believe she's tasteful because her mum told her so.

There's room on the Acropolis to place Notre Dame. It would draw more tourists and be a boon to the Greek economy.

Well, r49--I guess you should know all about idiocy. Except you don't because you're too stupid to know.

r49 thinks Buckingham Palace is elegant.

Today's technology and related expertise allow R43's idea to be a realistic possibility.

Wow R51 that was AWESOME. I want more wit from you, you're wicked!

r54, it's late and you're not worth anything better than that.

^^ Ladies! Shall we return to the plight of the Notre Dame, please!

^^ Cunts, not ladies.

[quote]"Whimsical" is just exactly what a major civic site of worship needs, [R30]. People can go to weep during a Mass for a dead loved one, but first they can enter tittering in amusement over the giant fuchsia exclamation point where the spire used to be!

The laugh that I needed. Thanks, R40.

Fortunately, the sacred nature of the building will prevent the choice of architectural submissions from being too frivolous.

It will do nothing, however, to stop it from being too weird.

Let's not forget that the cathedral is a UNESCO world heritage site and UNESCO is usually pretty touchy when it comes to modern additions to the enlisted sites. Years ago they even removed Dresden from the list because they felt some new bridge in the city damaged the cultural landscape. They will probably allow for the spire to be rebuilt in a different style but no way will they allow some totally modern-looking monstrosity to take its place.

Let's face it the contemporary French have the worst taste the world has ever seen. It's a point of pride for them.

Cecilia Giménez has offered her services for painting restoration.

Hopefully, if they aren’t going to replace the 19th Century flèche, they’ll replace it with something like the Medieval flèche at Amiens cathedral.

A minaret to honour France's 20% muslim population is in order.

Transgender gargoyles with visible she-nis.

The issue is going to be materials. If Macron wants the renovations completed by the time Paris hosts the Olympics, they'll need to get busy.

New stone will take ages to carve, so either new materials will need to be used like steel and glass, or reuse of any old existing stonework.

It is really a beautiful building on that isle in the seine. It is up too the French people. I think they love beauty more than anything else.

Well, the old spire was not stone, r68, so it's unlikely that even if they go traditionally that that will be a problem.

OP obviously knows nothing about architecture or how public buildings are designed. Pretty much all designs for public buildings are selected by open competition. In fact, the contractors for most if not all public and private sector projects, from toilet paper supplier to road builder, are selected through competition. This helps secure transparency, so the contract goes to the best offer not the mayor's friend, encourages good proposals and stimulates public interest. It's been going on for centuries.

[quote]Not all of it was built in medieval times, some of it was added on in the 19th century.

Including the spire.

Would t it be adorable to have a little Eiffel Tower?

Comme ça

I never knew a Louvre without it's pyramid and I think it's beautiful and modern, it's glass anyway so it's remains relatively subdued.

Speaking of burnt masterpieces, the Louvre was the "B List" palace in Paris. THE Palace was the Palais des Tuileries which was behind the Louvre, the two connected by the Grande Galerie. Burned by the proletariat during the Paris Commune 1871. The Tuileries palace was attacked multiple times by the French people. Detectives at the Gendarmerie nationale should thoroughly investigate what happened to the cathedral.

Why not rebuild the destroyed spire in exactly the same shape but use stainless steel, bronze, copper, brass, glass. A modern glittering melange of a spire. Throw some giant crystals on it too so it really sparkles.

That town sucks!

Let's face it: r62 is a Francophobe who inserts any bullshit she can against the French because r62 is also a cuntrag.

Can't they just do a 3D print of the old one and be done with it?

[quote]The original WTC was so ugly. There was a big push to rebuild the towers exactly as they were - mostly an emotional reaction to the shock off the attack. Then people remembered the huge, empty, Brutalist Style plaza

EMPTY? You obviously never worked there. That plaza was mobbed at lunch time.

I’m reading up on articles and blog posts from before the fire and while Notre Dame was noted as one of the greatest representations of Gothic architecture, it seems to rank behind others like Cologne, Reims, Chartres and Milan. Would Notre Dame have been in your top 5 gothic structures?

Bulldoze it. Ugly thing.

This will end in tears.

R81–location, location, location

R78 is a cocksucking queen who hates women.

You need some pussy boy.

And the French have all the subtlety and style of that piece of shitstained toilet paper you walk around with trailing out of your ass.

The Bastille, The Pyramid, Tour Montparnasse and La Defense all look like the mushroom moles placed on your butthole by a sick pos God.

Someone asked why didn't the Catholic church didn't pay for the restoration. Since 1905, Notre Dame cathedral (and actually all of them in France) are owned by the French Republic, not the Catholic church.

R47 is correct that the Pompidou Centre is ghastly.

Good answer, r84. Makes sense.

[quote]Someone asked why didn't the Catholic church didn't pay for the restoration. Since 1905, Notre Dame cathedral (and actually all of them in France) are owned by the French Republic, not the Catholic church.

But Macron made a point of condoling Catholics. Those cathedrals are not soulless museums but active places of worship.

Perhaps a 6x life size monument to Jerry Lewis?

Out with the old, in with the new.

There was some scholar, now deceased, who created a detailed 3-D map of the entire structure. They should be able to use that to recreate what they have to.

I think they’ll use modern construction materials for the supporting structure, if it is not visible. No harm in that. Maybe that one steeple will be changed. It somehow always seemed to be out of scale.

I think it would be cool to see steeples built above the two bell towers, as originally designed. They could do it with modern light weight materials and only clad in stone.

Ok, it wasn’t the greatest gothic structure, but was it the largest? Or are some of the others bigger?

Now, Cologne Cathedral. That’s a gothic marvel. It burning down would be a true loss. But the Germans are to organised and efficient to allow that, thank God.

[quote] That’s a gothic marvel.

Mary!

R93 Notre Dame is not even the largest in France, that honor goes to Amiens. Cologne, Liverpool, Milan, York Minster, and others are larger outside of France.

[quote]It burning down would be a true loss. But the Germans are to organised and efficient to allow that, thank God.

Well, they do have experience with fires....ovens.....gas.

It's a miracle that Cologne cathedral even survived WWII. It was pretty much the only building left standing after the allies bombed the city. I understand why factories, railways and bridges were bombed but I'll never be able to understand why they felt the need to destroy old town centres as well.

Italians don’t play. Milan is a jewel.

Ok, the timber was super dried out and sparked because of the high temperatures.

I think they should make the roof a living roof. Could be beautiful.

There a a number of reasons Cologne stood, but it was blown out as far as the interior. Day after interior photos of Notre Dame don't look completely catastrophic - if the walls stay up!

I know Notre Dame cause I went to school in Paris and would go there sometimes. Late 80s early 90s. It has an impressive volume inside and always a pretty good vibe. I think the side views are impressive especially from the Seine. There is an uncanny kind of modernity to the sequence and proportions of the windows and buttresses - it seems almost like it needs to be Gothic Revival, not gothic. It doesn't have all the wedding cake frilliness of some other cathedrals, either. Overall there is a blunt effect.

All surviving great gothic cathedrals are amazing. I have a preference for smaller churches and older - Byzantine or Romanesque or more modern - Early or Modern Century Gothic Revival. And Baroque. Saint Marc in Venice and Hagia Sophia Istanbul - older and more mystical. Notre Dame was good though, inside. Not just a tourist trap. At least in the time I knew it.

Reims is another that looks amazing . I’d

Not to stir shit, but I think you can’t be atheist and build such spectacular works of architecture. To this day, religious buildings remain the most subjectively beautiful constructions in world. Same with most art forms - From, Michelangelo, Leonardo da Vinci, Botticelli, Raphael to Mozart, Beethoven and Bach. You have to believe in a higher power for such artistic masterpieces to manifest in the mind. I also think Sam Cooke, or someone like him, said you need to be a believer in order to be a great soul singer.

Would be fantastic as a new spire...

Reims was just a shell after World War I, and was restored beautifully. Notre Dame isn’t nearly as bad, so as long as they don’t get “creative” with the flèche, everything should be fine.

Any updates on that neo-gothic Serbian cathedral that burned down in Manhattan a few years ago - are there any plans for renovating it? I know it doesn't have much historic value but any building like that is welcome in Manhattan, to break the monotony a bit.

r85, I don't hate women, I hate shitstains like you.

"You need some pussy boy." Really--on a gay site, you sad troll?

Luxembourg Gardens, the Tuileries, the Rodin Museum, the Eiffel Tower, to name just a few of the glories of Paris.

r85, in short, is a gash.

The damage doesn’t look so bad. How long do you think restorative works will take?

[quote]Let's face it the contemporary French have the worst taste the world has ever seen. It's a point of pride for them.

Paris is home to tacky Euro Disney and eyesore Centre Pompidou. And David Guetta, skilled genius of the play/pause and volume buttons is the biggest “music” star to ever come out of France.

R108 You can't say that person is the biggest music star to ever come out of France.

There is Debussy, Ravel, Saint-Saens, Berlioz.

I would actually not be surprised if a movement started to place a minaret on it and the left felt the need to support it.

Any recent visitor to Paris would assume the place is one third populated by people who frequently prostrate themselves in the street, have a brown smear on their forehead and speak an alien language.

^ You mean Paris is no longer your idea of Paris?

The idea of Paris is a product of much blood, sweat, and tears, R112. It has been working quite well for centuries and doesn't require or request your approval.

Hope they do a Louvre Pei pyramids kind of thing. Something completely contemporary.

Some people want an mosque minaret. To show unity.

I feel bad for the stupidity of R71. She doesn't know the difference between a bid and a competition.

Americans, remember when in November 2016 some of you said they were no longer going to be watching the news? I'm there.

Actually that's an architectural landmark R108. It was and ground breaking for its time a was Natre Dame was for its time. Google Architects Renzo Piano, Richard Rogers.

You’re saying it is loved by locals, r118? Proves the point about the bad taste of modern French.

[quote]Americans, remember when in November 2016 some of you said they were no longer going to be watching the news? I'm there.

Why?

Not what I said al all r118. I said its a landmark, often times such things are above the head of locals to appreciate what they have.

Has Juan Branco weighed in?

Restoration means nothing will change.

Macron will not let this happen. He likes old things. He even married one.

Hey-o!

R106 you are the true hateful misogynist shit stain which I repeat over and over because you are such a disgusting human being. 'Gash.' You piece of Parisian sewer slime.

It turns out the construction crews were smoking. How can you as an individual be more stupid than the French? How've you've achieved it is beyond comprehension.

And I bet a lot more interesting stuff will come out. Like I said anybody who contributes money to this calamity caused by French ineptitude and corruption is an idiot.

r126=gash.

Paris has been OVER since the 1980s, anyway. The city is a mausoleum to the past and former glories. At least ugly London with it’s ugly natives and it’s shitty food has some life, some zest, and has an artistic community that is NOW.

Sure, Jan r129. Btw, idiot, let me correct you:

its (not it's, which means "it is")

And we should listen to you why, you moron?

I'm in! Here with my squad of underlings and office intern slaves. Oh, and did you know that I was the world's greatest landscape architect also? Ask Mayor Garcetti. He knows what ass to kiss!

Anyhoo, jetting off to Paris to get dibs on the best office space.

I want Frank Gehry #metoo stories.

Oh god that puddle of Parisian sewer slime R128 is slithering behind everyone everywhere.

Better that than your gash discharge, r133.

What’s with the miserable frog in this thread? Calm down, dear.

Albert Cathedral destroyed in ww1

Albert Cathedral restored:

Btw, r133/r135, I'm neither Parisian or French, you rank and dripping gash reek.

So apparently whoever puts the biggest dick shaped object on top of their cathedral gets into heaven?

No R138 you're a dickhead.

By the way if anyone goes to Paris(not the dickhead frog) Saint-Sulpice is magnificent.

That bore who keeps squealing about gashes ought to change her tampon.

For a “great” Cathedral, I found Notre Dame kind of low-key and unimposing, which makes it appropriate for a place of worship.

There are numerous monstrosities all over Paris, rather as if those great, tasteless, Victorian barns in London were still standing and worse, revered.

If something had to catch fire, it’s a shame it wasn’t Les Halles. They keep remodelling it, and they keep making it into a fucking ugly shopping mall that attracts truanting children. Why couldn’t that burn down?

And the July column in the Bastille is downright hideous. And the ugly lion outside of Denfert Rochereau remains, when it ought to be seized and melted down for the new spire.

r140/r141--sorry, we don't take architectural advice from vadge sludge.

Les Halley is quite hideous.

That's a doozy.

r108, not Daft Punk , Air or Phoenix? The first two have scored movies as well.

That Centre Pompidou is truly hideous. Is is supposed to look like it's under construction?

r145, shouldn't you be dead? That tiresome criticism of the Pompidou was leveled way back when it was being built. You're showing your age, Gramps!

And that Eiffel Tower--what a travesty!

I miss Flunch at Les Halles.

Just hire that Chinese architect to stick a pyramid up there

When working in Paris for 2 months I had to stay at the Citadines in Les Halles and I don’t think a day went by when the Police weren’t arresting groups of boys outside. It’s truly a depressing area with awful tourist trap food.

R132 Frank Gehry's recent stuff looks like garbage.

I want those girls from the Diversity Bridge to design the new tower!

France, begging bowl in hand, netted 1.1 billion dollars in international donations. Good or humiliating?Macron wants it rebuilt in five years.

They couldn't spend the money to properly protect and fireproof the church. Not enough money to follow proper procedure to follow regulations but now 1 billion to build a fake and phony church built by a people of as much intense spiritual Catholic faith as a tourist board.

And now they've be given 1 billion by suckers who refuse to give money to their own communities to help the impoverished sick, educational needs and decent living conditions and medical aid for the elderly.

1 billion for building contracts where a bunch of Frenchman destroying their own legacy will make a pile of money from emotional bullshit appeals.

People are donating because it’s French, it’s traditional, it’s Christian, it’s WHITE.

It’s a backlash against the African and Muslim Population of France.

These magnificent European cathedrals were able to be built with volunteer skilled labor for the simple reason that - since usury (the lending of money at interest, esp to governments) was forbidden at that time - a man had to work only four months per year to meet all of his needs.

The French were once at the forefront of engineering, but now, as a whole, not so much.

I don't know what happened.

The same thing that happened to the rest of Paris and France, r157. Economics rationalist values, a service industry based workforce and few artistic movements of value for the past 50 years.

Zzzzzzzzzzzz, r154/r155.

REICHSTAG FIRE

Grease fire for some.

R159 is the disgusting misogynist whose favorite word is gash. What a fucking pig.

That's right, r162. That's me, except for the misogynist part, which is bullshit. Don't try and shame me, hunty. Won't work.

I don't need to shame you. You do all right on your own.

Hunty? You misogynist pig.

And you're a self-righteous cunt.

If they fuck up Paris will one day end up looking like Dubai.

In no world will Paris end up looking like Dubai.

[quote] Frank Gehry's recent stuff looks like garbage.

Frank Gehry is the most famous living architect on the planet right now, he has won numerous awards for his work. Open an Architectural book for god sake. Some of his buildings are stunning.

Frank Gehry's - Bilbao Museum

Any weird stuff looks digestible if it's placed in its own garden or in its own space.

But if you place it in an ordinary street (like the Gehry's dumpy thing in Sydney hemmed in by orthodox buildings) well it just looks like a Jihadist's bombing mission.

R166, R167

Paris won't look like Dubai because it already looks like the grubby streets of Mecca, Baghdad, Libya and Lahore.

R154. They aren’t rebuilding a fake and phony church, as the entire Medieval fabric has survived. The only thing that was destroyed was the wooden roof, the 19th Century flèche, and a few vault compartments. Hopefully they’ll rebuild the roof with fireproof materials. The rest of the building is stone, so it’s already fireproof.

All I know is with 1 Billion dollars, that new roof better be made out of Lalique Crystal!

^ Also, it’s not just a soulless museum that no one cares if the government alters or modernises. It remains a place of worship, a Catholic cathedral where actual Catholics attend mass and the seat of the Archdiocese of Paris.

Zzzzzzzzzz, r171.

Boston just reopened it’s Cathedral after a complete rebuilding campaign - including modern fire suppression infrastructure.

[quote]it’s not just a soulless museum that no one cares if the government alters or modernises. It remains a place of worship, a Catholic cathedral where actual Catholics attend mass and the seat of the Archdiocese of Paris.

Yes, you uneducated dip shit. Architect Richard Meier's Jubilee Church - Italy. Where actual Catholics attend.

[quote]Any weird stuff looks digestible if it's placed in its own garden or in its own space. But if you place it in an ordinary street (like the Gehry's dumpy thing in Sydney hemmed in by orthodox buildings) well it just looks like a Jihadist's bombing mission.

Ever hear of juxtaposition? Google it, you might learn something.

The most interesting article about the fire.

Before and after pictures show the damage wasn’t as bad as many believed. It’s actually in much better shape than when it was desecrated during the French Revolution and very little of historical value was lost.

Seven alternative spires proposed by architects. Some are truly awful, especially the French and Cypriot ones

You know, I was already thinking when they announced a competition, glass would be a big part of the design. It looks like I am not the only one with that vision. You heard it here first, my DL prediction is the final design when selected will have glass as its main element.

You weren't the only one who thought of it r182 because glass in architecture today is a cliche, not an original or profound idea.

There may be some glass in the final design, as a kind of skylight, but I'm not sure to what extent it will be the main element for a spire.

Skylights would be fun, but only if they were installed in the same configuration as the old roof, as in following the traditional lines of the structure.

The spire must be of a conservative design

They might as well let [italic]the Facts of Life[/italic] girls re-design it.

DL's submission....

^ Atl-right douchebag.

The Catholic Church alone should decide. This is not a mall or a museum we are talking about.

R187 Did you actually look at the video ?

R185 video is a Trumpeter, just look at his other videos. Attacking AOC, Micheal Moore, San Francisco, Portland and modern architecture for some reason.

Does he have a background in Architecture? But is he an expert on it? Apparently in his mind he is. Just like all Deplorable even ones in the UK the talk more then they think.

You know, he had a point about modern architecture, but didn’t say what he’d like to see. And yes, he’s a deplorable who knows nothing about architecture.

I think they should make a green roof with a public park on top, à la the High Line in NYC. Then they could sprinkle it with colored glass skylights to create a heavenly ambiance inside.

Agreed, r190. This douchebag posts some lame Youtube video with some fool in it as "proof" of his position, which is merely an opinion based on nothing but his uneducated views. What a bore.

Donation backlash.

That's very old news, r194. As for backlash, I'm sure the billionaires who have pledged money to rebuild Notre-Dame are very worried about what the public thinks. Fuck the backlash. There's backlash every year with every Oscar favorite. Who fucking cares?

So if the French government owns Notre Dame? How is it a Catholic Church and not just a museum?

The douche Bro R185 posted just another Trumpeter hater of all things new. As someone pointed out, where are his solutions, all he did was criticize modern architecture. And, without any actual knowledge of the subject.

Those who can't create something good for the world are the first to criticize what everyone else does.

Modern architecture IS ugly. It literally hurts to look at it. Stomach-churning eyesores that make me wonder why more people aren't environmentalists.

R197 Well, you say R185 can't create something good and is among the first to criticize what everyone else does.

I'm wondering who you would suggest as someone creating something good today.

IMO, most modern building is painful to look at.

[quote]Modern architecture IS ugly

Sorry Gramps, you are out of touch with the world including Architecture and Design. All Architecture was considered "modern" at some point in time. It's no 1850 anymore, we have things like cars, smart phones, and modern architecture that is obviously way above your level of comprehension.

[quote]IMO, most modern building is painful to look at.

Well that's your opinion and you are entitled to it but it's not inline with the rest of the educated world. Have you ever studded Architecture? Have you ever built one of your design? Do you even understand what architects are trying to accomplish today? Do you understand every Architect is different and there is no single look that they are all trying to conform too?

Before you ask, yes, I know what I am talking about because unlike you, I have created work that is built, including some that have awards.

"I have created work that is built, including some that have awards. "

Ohhh! Get HER!

I was sitting on the toilet today and was playing with the folds of my old hanging balls and taint, making interesting forms with them. It came to me like a lighting bolt! I had folded and streched my ball skin into a shape that I have now decided as the renovation to Notre Dame! It will be my lifework and my biggest billing opportunity other than the LA River thing that keeps the kiddies in the office busy. My skin is actual transformative into architecture! I AM architecture.

Zzzzzzzzz, r203.

R200 is insulting while R201 is pretentious.

But both are incapable of naming a recently-constructed building that demonstrates their claims.

Yes, please, r200 and r201--"demonstrate" your "claims" to appease the douche at r205. After all, Datalounge is a highly rigorous atmosphere of educated arts and architecture scholars, all with doctorates and buttplugs.

Most of the major donors want it rebuilt as before even as others argue for something more modern.

I’m thinking France wants it to be ready in time for when Paris hosts the Olympics in 2024?

Modern architecture IS shit. Look at the London skyline. Look at all the ugly buildings going up in Paris. Look at what happened to midtown NY. There was a sane time when harmony was encouraged. Glass shards are unsightly. Yet they are being erected everywhere. Why do tourists crowd Italian cities that remain basically the same? And Prague? People who think there are any beneficial values to these monstrosities are mentally ill. Even Godard was complaining about what Paris was doing to itself all the way back in Breathless.

Why does everyone want everything to look like Fort Lee NJ condo buildings?

^Surely their must be at least one work of modern architecture that you find appealing?

We are presently posting from our Paris residence and shall be for the next few days!

One assumes that you are also shitting in your Paris "residence" Erna.

It’s a restoration, not a redesign. It will look exactly the same as before.

The problem is it will not be built by faith. I'm an atheist myself but I'm not so cynical to look at magnificent cathedrals and not be moved by the spiritual aspirations that created them.

That’s a good point. Religious faith has been responsible for nearly all of the greatest art in history. A Sistine Chapel wouldn’t happen in this day and age.

[quote]Religious faith has been responsible for nearly all of the greatest art in history.

Yet most American synagogues I've been in feel like a time warp from the early 1960s.

Nothing beautiful about American architecture because the US is a Protestant country and their style is drab and austere. Catholics, Orthodox Christians, Jews, Muslims, Hindus, Buddhists ... every other major world religion build beautiful houses of worship.

The Guardian newspaper has some gall complaining that American houses of worship are "drab".

Everything about The Guardian newspaper is negative, drab and whiney.

The Modernist-Bauhaus-Brutalist movement for houses of worship was a terrible mistake throughout the U.S. A house of worship should inspire, delight, give a sense of awe, it shouldn't look like a car dealership.

[quote]a ‘megazine’ of structures reminiscent of shopping malls or warehouses,

Ouch! But pretty much sums up American architecture.

It was built for free by volunteers because back then usury (lending of money at interest to individuals and governments) was forbidden and not practised. As a result a man had to work for only three or four months to meet all his needs for the year.

I know it’s off topic but I really want to discuss why American churches and architecture in general are so ugly. Does it have something to do with ugliness of their sermons?

In my dreams, PETA meets the NRA and both are vaporized by the antimatter collision.

And, btw, R222 don't like to Fux news, you dolt.

Experts urge Macron to abandon the 5-year deadline.

@AP

Notre Dame Cathedral's melted roof has left astronomically high lead levels in the plaza outside and on adjacent roads.

sounds very expensive

Looks like they’re going with the glass.

I'd simplify and shrink that spire a bit -- the proportion is off putting.

I like the glass roof, however.

It looks like something you'd want to throw rocks at.

Macron would love an eco-friendly, modern design. I’d expect him to try to put his weight behind such submissions.

I wonder how the roof will effect the interior? I don’t think anyone would want to see the cathedral opened up with light. The dark environment showcased the stained glass and gave an aura of gravity and mystery.

Remember the ceiling (on the inside) is made of stone vaults, so whatever they do for a roof (on the outside) won’t be visible from the inside.

I thought we saw the fire burn through the ceiling?

No. You saw the fire burn the wooden roof. The ceiling is stone and lives under the roof. In fact, the stone ceiling was built to protect the interior from the burning roof.

Ceiling open to sky

Those two of the three sections of vaulting that collapsed.

*are

The largest gap in the vaulted ceiling is where the spire fell as it collapsed.

[post redacted because linking to dailymail.co.uk clearly indicates that the poster is either a troll or an idiot (probably both, honestly.) Our advice is that you just ignore this poster but whatever you do, don't click on any link to this putrid rag.]

R177 is grotesque. Atheists cannot build beautiful cathedrals. It has to be restored as it was or they might as well destroy it. Some tacky post modernist glass add-on would be an insult.

The Gehry post-modern ego buildings are grotesque and do not fit in any setting.

That trashy look with the glass makes it look like a Dubai shopping mall.

It make sense that some of the stone ceiling crumbled since it wasn't designed to hold weight more than itself -- the roof was supported by the flying buttresses and the inner stone is just to enclose the sanctum and hold the stained glass.

I’m concerned that if they put in a glass roof that there may be old art in there that will be damaged from heat or sunlight.

They can tint the glass, but of course they won’t, because somehow it will be overlooked until the inside is damaged by excessive sunlight. It’s not enough to just lightly tint to block UV rays, the stuff inside is probably fragile and you have to block bright light from hitting it. Glass is also not a good insulator, and the rubber gaskets crack and leak from cold and heat. It’s constant maintenance, which isn’t possible up there. So then it leaks.

Then if the interior is damaged, or the stone can’t take the heat fluctuations from having heat escaping from the poorly insulated roof, everybody will be surprised. Who could have imagined sun damage is a thing, when you’re dealing with antiques and paintings that are hundreds of years old?

And since you’re building something that’s supposed to last hundreds of years, what happens if the glass cracks, and cold and rain gets in? How hard is it to get up there and fix it? It sounds like they couldn’t even get up there to put a fire out.

Let's hope to hell Geary doesn't win it.

R244. The glass ceiling would be invisible from the interior. They will be repair the stone vaulted ceiling. There would be a garden beneath the glass roof, but above the vaulting. The roof that burned was completely invisible from the floor of the cathedral, like the attic in a house.

Cross section of a gothic cathedral, since people seem to not understand the inconsequential nature of a cathedral’s roof being destroyed. Note that the wooden roof is invisible from the interior, and far above the actual ceiling. Notre Dame’s vaulting will be repaired, anything they place above that will have no effect on the interior.

This rooftop pool idea would be very practical, with all that water available in case of another fire.

Thanks r248.

Now I can do the stations of the cross in my mankini!

This, I should think, is it.

The French Senate is right. Reproduce it exactly as it was, with the most up-to-date fire detection system available. That's where they need to modernize--not with the building, but with protecting the building.

Too bad Gaudi is no longer alive to design it.

And maybe a lighter metal than lead.

That’s good news, R250. They also voted to have it completed by 2024.

Macron still wants it ready by the Olympics in 2024.

[quote]R177 is grotesque. Atheists cannot build beautiful cathedrals

Agree with r240. Atheists can’t make good art because they just don’t believe. The Sistine Chapel wouldn’t happen if Michelangelo was atheist.

Make it as old as possible. No fancy, schmanzi shit. Rebuild in the tradition of the olden days.

Not really r256, considering Michelangelo was deeply immersed in the arts of pagan ancient Greece and is known for his humanist values.

Michelangelo was explicitly Catholic, r258. He was no atheist.

[quote]Atheists can’t make good art because they just don’t believe. The Sistine Chapel wouldn’t happen if Michelangelo was atheist.

There are so many stupid assumptions in these two sentences, it can't even be addressed.