Notre Dame Cathedral in Paris on fire.

[Cristiano]

Translation of what he said in French:

“To the people of France I would like to say that Notre Dame Cathedral was like a gift to the human species. We share the pain but we also thank you for this gift to civilization.”

 

[Veritable Quandry]

Ironically, the fire may do more to save the building. Several recent fundraising efforts had fallen short, and they were looking for about 100 million euros for required work. If these pledges come through, the rebuilding effort will put the structure in better shape than it has been for some time.

 

[Bartholomew Gallacher]

The French ministry for Culture owns Notre Dame. So, if France really wanted, funding repairs should have never been an issue, but they had other priorities it seems.

 

[Cristiano]

The French ministry for Culture owns Notre Dame. So, if France really wanted, funding repairs should have never been an issue, but they had other priorities it seems.

Sadly it often takes something tragic to happen for people to get their priorities straight. We face that in the US with our terrible infrastructure. There's never enough funding for it until a bridge collapses and people die, then people suddenly find money for a little while until priorities shift again. Bottom line is humans are often stupid and predictable.

 

[Cristiano]

Assassin's Creed Unity may be used to rebuild Notre-Dame cathedral

Yesterday, a fire destroyed a large portion of the Notre-Dame de Paris. The cathedral roughly 800 years old and has been an important landmark for centuries. Hopefully it can be restored to its former glory soon.

www.windowscentral.com

 

[Kara Spengler]

Asshat45 has advice for every situation. Right?


"And when California burns you threaten to take away federal support... "

I loved that the Paris fire brigade tweeted back about why it was a bad idea. The report I saw made a point of saying they replied in english .... and did not even bother to say why that said a lot right there.

 

[Kara Spengler]

Oh this is horrible. I visited a few times in my youth, incredibly beautiful architecture. Man.

I have no connection at all with the people going on about spirituality or during this week of all weeks. I view it as an architectural and historical blow though. Albiet a temporary one as no doubt they will rebuild.

 

[Cristiano]

 

[Worthless Whore]

I can't believe they managed to save the Rose Windows!

 

[Kamilah Hauptmann]

Thread on disaster protocol in 1000 year old buildings. And what the Versailles Oaks were planted for.

 

[Dakota Tebaldi]

The Catholic Church does not actually own Notre Dame de Paris; it's owned by the government of France and they just let the church use it.

 

[Jolene Benoir]

I'm absolutely amazed that only a firefighter (not downplaying that, just acknowledging it) got hurt. One report that I read stated that 2,000 people had just been in it being Holy Week, that it closed at 6:45pm local time and that it started five or so minutes later. Even just a short while earlier and this may have been a tragedy of lost human life.

It was aching seeing it burn. It represents so much to so many from those who are Catholic, to those who appreciate the architecture, to those who value what it represents in achievement.

I have read of its great need of an overhaul previous to the fire. Sad that it takes something like this to get the coffers flowing, but that is sometimes how it goes.

 

[Bartholomew Gallacher]

Many people think that medieval art has been lost forever. Guess what? Wrong!

In the 18th century during a great renovation most of the medieval windows and interior was destroyed, on purpose. People thought that it is just way too dark in the church, so most windows were replaced with normal, transparent glass back then. The rest was done during the revolutions of 1794 and 1830.

So this means that the vast majority of the interior and fassade as well was made in the 19th century due to this. So this is not why Notre Dame is important; it is important, because the principles of Saint Denis were here developed much, much further, and it became a blue print so to speak for generations of following gothical cathedrals.

By the way the little tower on top of the roof which collapsed does not belong to the original plan; it was build in the 19th century. It is an element absolutely uncommon in French gothic. Now the question is, since many of the additions of the 19th century has been damaged or destroyed which did not belong to the original building - are they going to rebuild it, or just stick with the original plan? And which state of the cathedral are they going to rebuild - 1300, 1500, 1850? Tough decisions.

The roof itself is quite small, and there's tons of experience in Europe on how to rebuild such things - because it happens to churches now and then.

 

[Rose Karuna]

Many people think that medieval art has been lost forever. Guess what? Wrong!

In the 18th century during a great renovation most of the medieval windows and interior was destroyed, on purpose. People thought that it is just way too dark in the church, so most windows were replaced with normal, transparent glass back then. The rest was done during the revolutions of 1794 and 1830.

So this means that the vast majority of the interior and fassade as well was made in the 19th century due to this. So this is not why Notre Dame is important; it is important, because the principles of Saint Denis were here developed much, much further, and it became a blue print so to speak for generations of following gothical cathedrals.

By the way the little tower on top of the roof which collapsed does not belong to the original plan; it was build in the 19th century. It is an element absolutely uncommon in French gothic. Now the question is, since many of the additions of the 19th century has been damaged or destroyed which did not belong to the original building - are they going to rebuild it, or just stick with the original plan? And which state of the cathedral are they going to rebuild - 1300, 1500, 1850? Tough decisions.

The roof itself is quite small, and there's tons of experience in Europe on how to rebuild such things - because it happens to churches now and then.

I felt devastated seeing such an architectural icon of historical significance burn but I was heartened to see that so much was saved too. I agree, I think though that we will see a lot of debate going forward on how to restore it simply because like a lot of historical buildings in Europe, it was changed throughout the centuries.

The same sort of thing happened after the Great Flood of 1966 in Florence Italy. They are still debating some of those restorations to this day.

 

[Sid]

The French ain't exactly cultural barbarians, so I guess they will find the right answers to make a great restoration effort, in a way that the church will still show its medieval origins as well as some of the 19th century views that were visible before the fire, mixed with some modern influences where possible and needed.

 

[detrius]

The Catholic Church does not actually own Notre Dame de Paris; it's owned by the government of France and they just let the church use it.

Those billionaires who donated hundreds of millions of Euros also don't own Notre Dame.

Didn't stop them from giving money.

So, once more, the Catholic Church turns out to be just a bunch of takers. Maybe France should reconsider who gets to use Notre Dame once it's rebuilt.

 

[Kaimi Kyomoon]

Maybe France should reconsider who gets to use Notre Dame once it's rebuilt.

You've got me considering. In the first 45 seconds of thinking about it:
I think I heard long ago that France was so Catholic that all newborns, by law, were named after Christian Saints. Anyway a historically important component of the site is Catholics worshipping. So continuing to allow the Roman church to do their business there seems fair. I wonder how the Vatican and indeed most French voters would think about allowing other religious groups to also use it.

 

[Innula Zenovka]

Those billionaires who donated hundreds of millions of Euros also don't own Notre Dame.

Didn't stop them from giving money.

So, once more, the Catholic Church turns out to be just a bunch of takers. Maybe France should reconsider who gets to use Notre Dame once it's rebuilt.

Seems to me that the repairs and renovations won't be paid by any one body, but by several sources -- the Catholic Church, the French Government, whoever insured the building, whoever insured the contractors, private and public donations and quite possibly grants from UNESCO or someone.

I just don't see the point of arguing about who should pay for it, since in practice lots of different organisations and individuals will.

 

[Sid]

So, once more, the Catholic Church turns out to be just a bunch of takers. Maybe France should reconsider who gets to use Notre Dame once it's rebuilt.

Due to France’s laws regarding secularization, the French government owns all churches built before 1905, including Notre-Dame. The government lets the Archdiocese of Paris use the building for free, and will continue to do so in perpetuity. The Archdiocese of Paris is responsible for the upkeep of the church, as well as for paying employees.

With 12 to 13 million visitors annually, Cathedrale Notre-Dame needs an awful lot of employees. And: No admittance fee like St. Pauls in London.
Bottom line: This cathedral costs the Catholic church an awful lot of money every year, just to keep it open.
And that is the story of every old and historically significant cathedral and church around the globe.

Yes, the Catholic church is very rich if you look at all their historical buildings and tons of art in it. But most of it is unsellable (Sistine Chapel, anyone?) but very very costly to maintain.

 

[Veritable Quandry]

France announces contest to redesign Notre Dame spire

France will launch an international architectural competition to redesign the roofline of Notre Dame Cathedral after a huge fire gutted the oak-beamed structure and sent its 300ft spire crashing into the nave, the prime minister has said.

Édouard Philippe said the competition would give the 850-year-old building “a spire suited to the techniques and challenges of our time”.

It will be interesting to see what comes out of this. There are years of assessment and stabilization ahead, so they have time to think about how to proceed. Many wooden roofs have been replaced with metal (which may require additional bracing, that would help with the wreaked walls where the heat may cause cracking and deformation). But apparently there is a grove of oak trees set aside if they wish to put another stack of kindling on top of the building. They can also explore hiding a fire suppression system inside the structure if they go with wood.