3 ms·
Should the interior be recreated as it was, or simply rebuilt in a new way? Attempting to recreate it might result in never-ending comparisons to the original.
by human20190310 8y ago
Should the interior be recreated as it was, or simply rebuilt in a new way? Attempting to recreate it might result in never-ending comparisons to the original.
- tomatotomato37 8y agoThe interior under the vaults would be suffering from water damage rather than being burnt & collapsed, so it's (hopefully) going to be restoration job over a complete rebuild. I'm not sure what the best thing to do about the internal roof framework would be though; making the unseen structural parts historically accurate seems to invite more risk than its worth.
- bluGill 8y agoThat is a good question that is very complex to answer. This isn't just a historical building, it is a building. There was one (two?) pipe organ inside that were used for beautiful music, modern design can improve the acoustics making the music better. This was a cathedral, I assume still in use for worship, could modern design help that purpose? This was a beautiful example of historical architecture, should we recreate that exactly to add study of architecture? This is a valuable building site in the middle of Paris, they could build a skyscraper to better use the land. Those are just a few of the competing concerns. There is a good argument to be made for each (even the skyscraper), whatever you choose will be at the expense of the others. We are forced to have this argument now: expect a lot of shouting and nobody to be happy with the end result. Try to see all sides. (I was going to say help to a reasonable compromise, but then I realized that compromise is not always reasonable)
- cr1895 8y ago>There is a good argument to be made for each (even the skyscraper) I'm curious...what's the good argument towards replacement with a skyscraper?
- baud147258 8y agoPrime spot right in the middle of Paris? (though, with maximum height regulations in Paris, a skycraper there wouldn't be very tall)
- bluGill 8y agoIf you can remove yourself from bias towards history and culture this is obvious. If you cannot do that no argument will make sense. Don't get me wrong, there is value in history and culture. However sometimes being able to step outside it and see alternatives is useful.
- marcosdumay 8y agoNo compromise would be reasonable. You either preserve the cathedral, modernize it, or build the skyscraper (this one won't happen, so we can safely discuss it). Anything in between would be worse than the extrema for everybody.
- human20190310 8y agoSkyscraper will never happen. One was built at Montparnasse in the 1970s, and it was immediately regretted ("The Awful Tower"). Skyscrapers are quarantined outside the city itself, at La Defense.
- remarkEon 8y agoI cringe at the "modern" aesthetics that someone might wish to inject into that place.
- JoeAltmaier 8y agoHm. The design of Notre Dame was the highest-tech architecture of its day. I wonder if, ironically, folks resisted the Cathedral being built at all for much the same reasons above?
- asdff 8y agoWhy would they? In those days if you didn't keep your head down, it would've been chopped off.