5 ms·

I loved it, but I went there for the ancient Roman aspect and was kind of sad that that has been overlaid with the Roman Catholic stuff.

linksnapzz 6y ago
Had it not been for various popes, the structure would’ve been pulled down for building materials after the end of the Empire in the west.
- gadders 6y ago
  Probably true, but not the bit I was interested in or what makes the building special.
  - OnlyOneCannolo 6y ago
    The only reason it's still around is because it's been in continuous use for two millennia.
    - gadders 6y ago
      Yes, that's what the poster just above said to me as well. I'm not disputing that, but there thousands and thousands of Catholic churches but only one Pantheon.
toyg 6y ago
And you didn't even mention the tacky "King of Italy" coffins. I was discussing this yesterday with friends: the building is still a church but a few years ago it was sold to the State (so the Church doesn't have to be responsible for the upkeep...). This means the State could, in theory, throw out all the Catholic paraphernalia and ripristinate a classical-looking interior, if local government so wished. We don't have images of the original Roman statues but I'm sure there are plenty that could be moved in from other locations. It would be definitely something that would stir international attention and attract more funds (always good) and more tourists (not always good - it's debatable whether one of the most-visited hotspots in the city actually needs more attendance...) In any case, it will likely never happen; not only because of the massive outcry from religious quarters in "the" Catholic city, but also because a lot of the academic world is strongly opposed to this sort of "restauration" both on philosophical and practical grounds, after some massive missteps that lost us priceless artefacts in the previous centuries. It's a shame, I think a classical Pantheon would be superb, but that's life.
- adolph 6y ago
  When you say “classical” do you mean authentic to the way it looked when ancient Roman’s used it? It might have been just as tacky back in the day. https://www.smithsonianmag.com/arts-culture/true-colors-17888/ https://www.smithsonianmag.com/arts-culture/true-colors-1788...
  - toyg 6y ago
    It's not really the color (I agree entirely with your link), but rather that the Savoy kings weren't exactly great leaders (they failed all their direct military initiatives, more or less, at various points looked even annoyed by the responsibility they ended up with, etc etc), still they try to claim a place "among the gods" and their mausolei are very noticeable and garish. Raffaello Sanzio has a much more understated corner, and he was Raffaello bloody Sanzio.
- riccardomc 6y ago
  Besides the "tacky Kings of Italy" coffins there's also Raffaello Sanzio's tomb[1], the famous painter/ninja turtle. Did you know? Does he have more dignity to be in there according to your criteria? What is better "Reinassance" or "Ancient Rome"? You mention that there are "philosophical and practical grounds" to oppose this kind of "restauration", yet you say that "it's a shame" we cannot do it, suggesting we should indeed prefer erasing centuries of Italian history to please tourists and attract more funds. It is remarkably funny how the "return to order", "purity", "glory of the roman empire" was exactly the same rhetoric and aesthetic of the Italian Fascist party. I guess this could be counted among the massive missteps you mentioned? I think you would have a much better experience if you just enjoy the stratification of history and art that Rome, Italy and the Pantheon represent instead of projecting a subjective idea of how things should be. And yes, it's a tacky mess at times, but is not up to you, tourists, a party or even a government to decide on a scale of dignity of historic periods. edit: added Raphael's wikpedia page reference [1]https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Raphael https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Raphael
  - toyg 6y ago
    Lol, calm down - no need to godwinize. As I said, it will never happen. It would be pretty cool though, IMHO, even just as a temporary experiment. And yes, if the Pantheon were to be "restored", Raffaello should be moved too. > if you just enjoy the stratification of history and art that Rome, Italy and the Pantheon represent I can do that while still expressing a personal preference for some elements over others. > is not up to you, tourists, a party or even a government to decide I disagree on this point. Short of blowing it up, the community of today has a right to decide on the sorts of a historic building in the same way their predecessors did. Rome is a living city, not just a museum, and it has a right to change today like it did in the past. Respect for the accumulation and stratification of cultural elements does not mean the passive acceptance of everything our predecessors did, particularly when some of them were not particularly nice people either.

linksnapzz 6y ago

Had it not been for various popes, the structure would’ve been pulled down for building materials after the end of the Empire in the west.

gadders 6y ago
Probably true, but not the bit I was interested in or what makes the building special.
- OnlyOneCannolo 6y ago
  The only reason it's still around is because it's been in continuous use for two millennia.
  - gadders 6y ago
    Yes, that's what the poster just above said to me as well. I'm not disputing that, but there thousands and thousands of Catholic churches but only one Pantheon.

toyg 6y ago

And you didn't even mention the tacky "King of Italy" coffins. I was discussing this yesterday with friends: the building is still a church but a few years ago it was sold to the State (so the Church doesn't have to be responsible for the upkeep...). This means the State could, in theory, throw out all the Catholic paraphernalia and ripristinate a classical-looking interior, if local government so wished. We don't have images of the original Roman statues but I'm sure there are plenty that could be moved in from other locations. It would be definitely something that would stir international attention and attract more funds (always good) and more tourists (not always good - it's debatable whether one of the most-visited hotspots in the city actually needs more attendance...) In any case, it will likely never happen; not only because of the massive outcry from religious quarters in "the" Catholic city, but also because a lot of the academic world is strongly opposed to this sort of "restauration" both on philosophical and practical grounds, after some massive missteps that lost us priceless artefacts in the previous centuries. It's a shame, I think a classical Pantheon would be superb, but that's life.

adolph 6y ago
When you say “classical” do you mean authentic to the way it looked when ancient Roman’s used it? It might have been just as tacky back in the day. https://www.smithsonianmag.com/arts-culture/true-colors-17888/ https://www.smithsonianmag.com/arts-culture/true-colors-1788...
- toyg 6y ago
  It's not really the color (I agree entirely with your link), but rather that the Savoy kings weren't exactly great leaders (they failed all their direct military initiatives, more or less, at various points looked even annoyed by the responsibility they ended up with, etc etc), still they try to claim a place "among the gods" and their mausolei are very noticeable and garish. Raffaello Sanzio has a much more understated corner, and he was Raffaello bloody Sanzio.
riccardomc 6y ago
Besides the "tacky Kings of Italy" coffins there's also Raffaello Sanzio's tomb[1], the famous painter/ninja turtle. Did you know? Does he have more dignity to be in there according to your criteria? What is better "Reinassance" or "Ancient Rome"? You mention that there are "philosophical and practical grounds" to oppose this kind of "restauration", yet you say that "it's a shame" we cannot do it, suggesting we should indeed prefer erasing centuries of Italian history to please tourists and attract more funds. It is remarkably funny how the "return to order", "purity", "glory of the roman empire" was exactly the same rhetoric and aesthetic of the Italian Fascist party. I guess this could be counted among the massive missteps you mentioned? I think you would have a much better experience if you just enjoy the stratification of history and art that Rome, Italy and the Pantheon represent instead of projecting a subjective idea of how things should be. And yes, it's a tacky mess at times, but is not up to you, tourists, a party or even a government to decide on a scale of dignity of historic periods. edit: added Raphael's wikpedia page reference [1]https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Raphael https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Raphael
- toyg 6y ago
  Lol, calm down - no need to godwinize. As I said, it will never happen. It would be pretty cool though, IMHO, even just as a temporary experiment. And yes, if the Pantheon were to be "restored", Raffaello should be moved too. > if you just enjoy the stratification of history and art that Rome, Italy and the Pantheon represent I can do that while still expressing a personal preference for some elements over others. > is not up to you, tourists, a party or even a government to decide I disagree on this point. Short of blowing it up, the community of today has a right to decide on the sorts of a historic building in the same way their predecessors did. Rome is a living city, not just a museum, and it has a right to change today like it did in the past. Respect for the accumulation and stratification of cultural elements does not mean the passive acceptance of everything our predecessors did, particularly when some of them were not particularly nice people either.