Posted on 04/21/2019 10:54:34 AM PDT by MNDude
The Telegraph published an article claiming it would be a “travesty” to restore Notre Dame as it was just a day after the fire, while Rolling Stone quoted a Harvard architecture historian as saying that the burning of a building “so overburdened with meaning… feels like an act of liberation.”
(Excerpt) Read more at breitbart.com ...
“Perhaps most controversial is a proposal in Domus, the architecture magazine, by Tom Wilkinson, for the fallen spire to be replaced with an Islamic minaret, to memorialise Algerians who protested the French government in the 1960s.
“These victims of the state could be memorialised by replacing [the spire] with – why not? – a graceful minaret,” Wilkinson insisted.
Steel and glass would certainly be more fire resistant than wood.
It survived 850 years being made out of wood.
It was the Muslim invasion it could not stand any more than our twin towers.
Weird how this stuff follows like clockwork.
Remember the Flight 93 memorial proposal? Did they actually implement that or did saner minds prevail?
I knew they would demand to rebuild it as a mosque from the minaret the fire started.
Keep anyone who has every said any positive word about “post-modern” away from the rebuilding.
I say put up a mini rollercoaster on the roof. It would be less sacrilegious than other suggestions I’ve heard.
They might as well contact South of the Border if they want to do tourist traps the right way.
Would they say the same thing if it were the al-Aqsa mosque in Jerusalem that burned down?
-PJ
Just turn it into a casino and Clinton massage parlor and be done with it.
Either you put it back the way it was or just bulldoze it.
There’s nothing worse than a liberal architect. Well, maybe not, liberal lawyers are worse.
“put it back the way it was”... you mean with a wood roof thats prone to catching on fire again? You can make it look exactly the same yet use modern building materials that are cheaper, and safer.
From my understanding the surrounding communities are 100% Muslim so a minaret would actually serve the community...
Minarets? I guess you have to put the bathrooms somewhere. That way they would easy to find.
Restoration of the classic crafts and religious veneration that inspired the Cathedral’s construction seems no longer possible in much of Christendom today.
Absent some massive pushback against islam and a restoration of Christian faith, seems becomes is.
I can’t believe it would be possible to convey the spirit of the French people without a minaret or two./
France has too many modernists who have no respect for history. Take the Louver for example. That glass entrance is just weird. Notre Dame is a church. But what it is uniquely, is a great historic example of the beginning of Gothic as it emerges from Romanesque. Strasbourg Cathedral is Gothic. Toulouse Cathedral is Romanesque. Notre Dame is the most beautiful continuing use structure which fits between the two.
The spire can go. It never has to be rebuilt. And if it is rebuild it does not matter what they do. The spire did not fit the rest of the structure. The spire was modern. At least it was modern compared to the rest of the building. So losing it was no big deal. The spire showed up 500 years after the rest of the Cathedral. Look back at it. Its a high Gothic little thing that was both out of proportion and out of style from the rest of the structure. Thankfully it was in the middle and out of view from the front. And was only in the background from the back. The french modernists of the time wanted to modernize their cathedral and make it more Gothic.
Going ahead and putting on the Islamic accouterments now would certainly save money and bother when it is converted after Merkel declares the Islamic State of Europe.
carbon fibre
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.