4 ms·

I've seen some videos on TikTok by stonemasons who are re-building the decorative shapes in chunks of marble; it's very cool to watch and see them doing it. It

I've seen some videos on TikTok by stonemasons who are re-building the decorative shapes in chunks of marble; it's very cool to watch and see them doing it. It's probably not even remotely economic or "productive", but sometimes that's OK.

hef19898 3y ago
Funny, how the knowledge about cathedral building was rather well preserved. After all, all cathedrals still standing have a cadrebof employed masons and other artisans to maintain and renovate them. The actual building is dofferent, I assume an lot of that will be rediscovered during the Notre Dam restauration.
- falcolas 3y ago
  It's my belief that the underpinning design principles have not been lost - cathedrals are quite well studied by architects as I understand it. So, while some of the specifics are probably having to be identified and re-implemented, the basics are broadly understood. Stonemasons as a mass-employer has gone away, but like blacksmithing there are still individuals out there who carry on the tradition.
jfengel 3y ago
The whole building isn't economic or productive. They could probably make more money tearing it down and replacing it with a Starbucks. The vast majority of human activity isn't productive. And that's awesome. We've got so much wealth that we can afford to use it on things that are merely pretty or interesting, like video games and space telescopes and flowers. It would be nice if we could use more of it to ensure that people have the basics, but that's rarely about lack of money. It's nearly always due to some more systemic problem that can't be fought just by throwing money at it.
- ceejayoz 3y ago
  > The whole building isn't economic or productive. They could probably make more money tearing it down and replacing it with a Starbucks. It likely has economic impact vastly larger than any Starbucks via tourism.
  - barelyauser 3y ago
    And what does "economic impact" means? A bunch of people burning jet fuel to get there and spend some hours looking at it? Why not working towards helping other people?
    - ceejayoz 3y ago
      Buying from the cafes nearby. Patronizing the hotels. Going to see a show after. All the things one does in the neighborhood around a tourist attraction. A week-long golf tournament in my town brings in 200k+ people and local government touts a $190M economic impact number for that. I'm sure it's fudged to be as high as possible, but pretending Notre Dame doesn't have an economic benefit to Paris would be odd.
      - barelyauser 3y ago
        Money means nothing. Human time is what matters. Consider that back at their place of origin things did not get done. Economic impact means nothing. If I gave you $100 to watch me do nothing, what value this transaction created? There is virtually nothing to show for at the end but we created $100 of economic impact...
        ceejayoz 3y ago
        > If I gave you $100 to watch me do nothing, what value this transaction created? That seems entirely up to you.
    - lo_zamoyski 3y ago
      I have always been disgusted by this sort of low, mediocre, pseudo-moral argument. "Why build these grand churches? You could feed people with that money!" "Why put all this effort into beautiful buildings? You could build more low-income housing for the same cash!" It sickens me. We can do both. Man does not live by bread alone. Utilitarian mediocrity is satisfied with a full stomach and keeping warm.
- barelyauser 3y ago
  >but that's rarely about lack of money Yes, it is the lack of action. People are selfish. End of story. We have the tech and knowledge to fix it all, but burning a ton of kerosene to travel to the other side of the world for 2 a weeks vacation is more desirable.

hef19898 3y ago

Funny, how the knowledge about cathedral building was rather well preserved. After all, all cathedrals still standing have a cadrebof employed masons and other artisans to maintain and renovate them. The actual building is dofferent, I assume an lot of that will be rediscovered during the Notre Dam restauration.

falcolas 3y ago
It's my belief that the underpinning design principles have not been lost - cathedrals are quite well studied by architects as I understand it. So, while some of the specifics are probably having to be identified and re-implemented, the basics are broadly understood. Stonemasons as a mass-employer has gone away, but like blacksmithing there are still individuals out there who carry on the tradition.

jfengel 3y ago

The whole building isn't economic or productive. They could probably make more money tearing it down and replacing it with a Starbucks. The vast majority of human activity isn't productive. And that's awesome. We've got so much wealth that we can afford to use it on things that are merely pretty or interesting, like video games and space telescopes and flowers. It would be nice if we could use more of it to ensure that people have the basics, but that's rarely about lack of money. It's nearly always due to some more systemic problem that can't be fought just by throwing money at it.

ceejayoz 3y ago
> The whole building isn't economic or productive. They could probably make more money tearing it down and replacing it with a Starbucks. It likely has economic impact vastly larger than any Starbucks via tourism.
- barelyauser 3y ago
  And what does "economic impact" means? A bunch of people burning jet fuel to get there and spend some hours looking at it? Why not working towards helping other people?
  - ceejayoz 3y ago
    Buying from the cafes nearby. Patronizing the hotels. Going to see a show after. All the things one does in the neighborhood around a tourist attraction. A week-long golf tournament in my town brings in 200k+ people and local government touts a $190M economic impact number for that. I'm sure it's fudged to be as high as possible, but pretending Notre Dame doesn't have an economic benefit to Paris would be odd.
    - barelyauser 3y ago
      Money means nothing. Human time is what matters. Consider that back at their place of origin things did not get done. Economic impact means nothing. If I gave you $100 to watch me do nothing, what value this transaction created? There is virtually nothing to show for at the end but we created $100 of economic impact...
      - ceejayoz 3y ago
        > If I gave you $100 to watch me do nothing, what value this transaction created? That seems entirely up to you.
  - lo_zamoyski 3y ago
    I have always been disgusted by this sort of low, mediocre, pseudo-moral argument. "Why build these grand churches? You could feed people with that money!" "Why put all this effort into beautiful buildings? You could build more low-income housing for the same cash!" It sickens me. We can do both. Man does not live by bread alone. Utilitarian mediocrity is satisfied with a full stomach and keeping warm.
barelyauser 3y ago
>but that's rarely about lack of money Yes, it is the lack of action. People are selfish. End of story. We have the tech and knowledge to fix it all, but burning a ton of kerosene to travel to the other side of the world for 2 a weeks vacation is more desirable.