|
Post by fumobici on Apr 18, 2019 15:50:19 GMT
Creating a deadline for the restoration to be completed seems like a bad idea to me, it seems to me it should be done correctly (for some definition of correct) in whatever time is found to be necessary. The question of whether the restoration should recreate the Viollet-le-Duc version of the building, or something more modern is indeed an interesting one -- and one with no correct answer.
|
|
|
Post by kerouac2 on Apr 18, 2019 15:54:37 GMT
As I wrote on another site, if you gave the one billion euros that have already been promised to the Chinese, they would finish the job in two years perfectly. (I also added that there would probably be no more than about 75 deaths on the construction site.)
|
|
|
Post by kerouac2 on Apr 18, 2019 16:04:03 GMT
Anyway, I am quite certain that repair will not be completed in 5 years. The issue is whether enough can be done in 5 years to at least reopen partially, and frankly I do not believe that the workers are so incompetent that it could not be done. We are quite used to half of the monuments in France having scaffolding on them at all times.
|
|
|
Post by fumobici on Apr 18, 2019 17:35:05 GMT
Has anyone proposed instead going back to a pre-Viollet-le-Duc iteration of the design? Certainly could be argued as a more authentic, if less picturesque.
The old growth beams, as everyone is saying, rule out any authentic recreation. Once a design and an appearance are settled on, the engineers need to make to make all the safety-critical decisions and having the site a closed construction zone will allow stuff to be done that couldn't while the site was open. Probably stuff that should have been anyway.
As for the look of the restoration I'd argue that the cathedral as it stood on the day before the fire should be default. I'm sympathetic to some of the arguments for significantly altering the look as part of the inevitable modernization but a visually accurate recreation with structural updates to make it good and sound for another 800 years. I assume fire suppression and a lot of modern improvements will be installed since they've got the thing apart anyway.
If you wanted to commission a significant visual update I'd recommend perhaps Viollet-le-Duc's spire. Just no LEDs please.
|
|
|
Post by kerouac2 on Apr 18, 2019 18:27:34 GMT
Ha ha... I quite understand the point of view, but LEDs will certainly be used in the new lighting rather than torches made of oily cloth. Is that a bad thing? I don't think that using (now illegal in the EU) incandescent bulbs or halogen lighting would be better. And yes, it is also obvious that modern fire safety will be installed. I don't think that anybody could contest that. The experts have said that steel or concrete beams to replace the old wood would greatly benefit the cathedral since they are both much lighter in weight and would not strain the walls... and hey, they don't burn either. Since the French are not Amish, I think that they will quickly agree that a modern restoration is in the best interest of everybody. If they want to appreciate traditional building methods, I think it would be great for them to build a new Notre Dame using traditional techniques, perhaps at Guédelon. That would be fantastic. Unfortunately, they will never have the prime ingredient of olden times -- total religious faith. That's fine with me, but it is probably a shame for art.
|
|
|
Post by bjd on Apr 18, 2019 18:58:16 GMT
When we moved to Toulouse in 1986, there was a big controversy about the renovation of Saint Sernin Basilica. It needed work but some people wanted Viollet-le-Duc's 19th century changes removed so that it would look as it had "before". But no building lasts 800 years with no changes being made, either for structural reasons (like the flying buttresses on Notre Dame) or for contemporary questions of taste. As it turned out, the 19th century additions were removed, but since anyone in living memory had not seen it differently, I'm not sure it made a difference to most people.
As for Notre Dame, 5 years is indeed a politician's promise and is unlikely to happen. As for structural changes of concrete or whatever more modern materials they would use, it wouldn't be too visible if used inside the walls.
And I think tourists should have to pay to enter the church, except during services. Too many people going into a building not designed for it, like St Mark's in Venice. The money could be used for upkeep.
|
|
|
Post by kerouac2 on Apr 18, 2019 19:11:55 GMT
The French media have been repeating (but I am unable to confirm it) that Notre Dame is (was) the most visited building in Europe, with 14 million people entering it last year. But no, I don't think that people should pay to enter. I am totally sick of timed tickets, "skip-the-queue" tickets, VIP private visits, ticket queues for us ordinary peasants and all the rest.
|
|
|
Post by mich64 on Apr 18, 2019 22:47:06 GMT
Mich,I presume you have shared that wonderful last picture with your husband. Just seen your post Lagatta! We actually both had the same reaction, the firefighter resembles my husbands cousin! So we both said his name and then talked about his son who is a firefighter, but not in Paris but up near Metz. It must have been such an emotional experience for all of those first responders, hopefully they knew early on that there were no injuries. We heard reports that a firefighter and 2 police officers were injured but have not heard anything since. I hope they are recovering from their injuries. We have been inside Notre Dame on three occasions (thankfully we took many photos) and were planning on visiting again in a few weeks. I remember being overwhelmed and amazed on our first visit and then overjoyed watching the reactions of our families on the two other visits. We were fortunate each time and never had to wait very long in line, just good timing I guess.
|
|
|
Post by questa on Apr 19, 2019 0:14:34 GMT
I hope the experts take a good look at the restorations of the Hagia Sophia and Blue Mosque in Istanbul, and look through Central Asia's repairs in Samarkand and the work done in Shiraz, Esfahan, Iran, and other wonders. The USSR did a lot of repair and renovation along the Silk Road, but much of it was rough and is now being re-done with better materials.
Let the archaeologists and historians do their work first (once it is safe) This building will have lots to teach us before it is re-built.
|
|
|
Post by lagatta on Apr 19, 2019 13:11:51 GMT
Yes, I disagree with Emmanuel Macron's intent to get everything done within 5 years, but it is for historical and archaeological reasons, not political ones. It is important to secure whatever remains as soon as possible though, and France also has competent personnel, both in historical expertise and highly-skilled craft workers.
I think many Westerners are unaware of the high cultural level of many Iranians and others of the Persian-speaking world. Fortunately I have Iranian friends - one couple are both medical specialists but they know poetry and other literature as well as the people I studied with in such "useless" fields as literature and history.
|
|
|
Post by kerouac2 on Apr 21, 2019 14:08:48 GMT
|
|
|
Post by kerouac2 on Apr 24, 2019 15:30:35 GMT
The scheduled pouring rain has arrived in Paris. I'm pretty sure that they managed to cover the burned areas with plastic tarps, because they have been working like crazy to get that done before it started to rain. There was already quite a lot of water damage due to the firefighters (although that kind of damage is better than fire damage, when you have to choose), and they absolutely did not want it to get worse. The weight of the water from the fire hoses was already weakening the vaulted arches.
In a few days, they are supposed to start constructing a new protective roof over the cathedral, something that they can work under without worrying about the weather.
|
|
|
Post by questa on Apr 24, 2019 22:57:38 GMT
What an incredible job this is going to be! I see it from the numbers of artisans who will have to be employed. Engineers, stone cutters and layers, carvers of decorative stone and timber, stained glass workers and photographers to record the re-build.
It reminds me of a story (probably apocryphal) from the time St Paul's was being built in London. Christopher Wren was inspecting the progress of the work and stopped to chat with some stone workers. "What are you doing?" he asked one. "Chipping bits of stone all day" came the reply. "And what are you doing?" he asked another. "Same thing, squaring off each stone and preparing it to go into its place." "And you?" he asked a third worker, also cutting stone. "Me? Oh, I'm helping Sir Christopher Wren build St Paul's Cathedral."
|
|
|
Post by kerouac2 on Apr 26, 2019 20:10:15 GMT
|
|
|
Post by bixaorellana on Apr 27, 2019 3:11:04 GMT
Boy, when you think about all of the ugly surprises that can pop up in just any run-of-the-mill renovation job, I can just imagine the blood freezing in the veins of architectural experts and specialty renovators when Macron breezily announced it would be done in five years.
|
|
|
Post by fumobici on Apr 27, 2019 3:18:10 GMT
Thanks for the nice update, this topic, should you decide to continue it, will only get more interesting to me as the media gaze travels on.
|
|
|
Post by mossie on Apr 27, 2019 6:56:37 GMT
Yes, thanks very much for keeping us up to date. It is good to see that the tracery in the rose windows seems to be intact and hope the glass hasn't suffered too much. Cleaning is going to be one hell of a job, hope there are some keen window cleaners in Paris.
|
|
|
Post by breeze on Apr 27, 2019 11:37:58 GMT
|
|
|
Post by patricklondon on Apr 27, 2019 12:42:09 GMT
Cleaning is going to be one hell of a job, hope there are some keen window cleaners in Paris. I'd guess they'll take the windows out for a thorough overhaul as they did for York Minster.
|
|
|
Post by kerouac2 on Apr 30, 2019 13:48:58 GMT
The temporary cover is now in place, pending the construction of the longer term protection, which will apparently be painted in a trompe l'oeil design to show the missing original roof.
|
|
|
Post by kerouac2 on May 12, 2019 14:33:37 GMT
|
|
|
Post by questa on May 13, 2019 1:34:37 GMT
Another great set of photos, K2. My favourite is the one with the text above it saying 'view from the Left Bank'.It looks like a huge steel UFO about to devour a multi-legged, multi-eyed opponent.
|
|
|
Post by bixaorellana on May 13, 2019 6:01:28 GMT
Really interesting to see this sequence unfold. Hope this was okay -- I took the liberty of copying your photo in reply #18 on page one. My question: Do you know how much of the scaffolding in place before the fire has been removed/replaced/augmented? Your photo from April 16, the day after the fire:
|
|
|
Post by kerouac2 on May 13, 2019 10:06:47 GMT
It looked to me like just about all of the previous scaffolding is still there except for some that seems to have removed from the underside, but I'm not really sure at all. Right after the fire there were fears that the scaffolding might collapse if the fire had melted any or where the collapsing spire went crashing down. But if they have decided in the meantime that it is still perfectly solid, it will probably be useful during the reconstruction and save some time.
|
|
|
Post by kerouac2 on Jun 15, 2019 12:56:38 GMT
|
|
|
Post by lagatta on Jul 18, 2019 15:13:40 GMT
|
|
|
Post by kerouac2 on Jul 18, 2019 15:30:16 GMT
Quite a good article, perhaps a bit too dramatic, but that's how you get people to read this sort of information.
|
|
|
Post by kerouac2 on Sept 19, 2019 16:39:25 GMT
|
|
|
Post by bixaorellana on Sept 19, 2019 17:03:57 GMT
The logistics and engineering problems and solutions of this kind of renovation are fascinating. I'm assuming that all that wooden construction under the arched buttresses is temporary.
|
|
|
Post by kerouac2 on Dec 14, 2019 22:28:42 GMT
Here is the current condition of Notre Dame from a news report on French television yesterday. A giant crane will be installed starting next week to work on (carefully) pulling off the melted scaffolding.
|
|