[Beren]

Only shitty, feckless, uncultured arseholes would allow a tourist attraction like Notre Dame to fall into such disrepair that it bursts into flames.

Fixed for you.

[ness31]

Oh, I’m sorry. I thought we were talking about an 800+ year old structure that had surely earned its place in the history wars. Clearly not. Tourist Attraction it is

[Rancid]

https://twitter.com/mtracey/status/1117881426467143680

This is the first time in my life, that I like a tweet.

[Pants-of-dog]

As someone interested in architecture in general, and a fan of the work of Viollet-le-Duc, this saddens me.

Fortunately, the fire was limited to the roof and spire, which is common among churches and cathedrals from the Romanesque and Gothic eras.

The stonework, including the statuary and flying buttresses (which are the more architecturally significant parts) should be fine after it is cleaned. The parapets, where the wooden beams would have been supported, may have been damaged from the fire.

Rebuilding should not be a real problem. Due to the construction and its historical significance, the construction details are almost certainly well documented. Materials are also not an issue, as long as they are willing to accept composite beams instead of huge oaks. The only crazy expense will be paying the few workers who are capable of doing this work.

The fact that no portable artwork nor people were damaged is a testament to the fact that the construction was probably being done carefully.

[Beren]

Oh, I’m sorry. I thought we were talking about an 800+ year old structure that had surely earned its place in the history wars. Clearly not. Tourist Attraction it is

Notre-Dame matters the most as a tourist attraction actually, like the Eiffel Tower or the Great Pyramid of Giza does. I wonder if who care more about this, potential tourists who'd like to see the Notre-Dame once at least in a lifetime or the French themselves.

[ness31]

Materials are also not an issue, as long as they are willing to accept composite beams instead of huge oaks.

This gets to the very heart of it though It will not have the same character with a ‘composite material’

[Victoribus Spolia]

I think you should just copy and paste this sentence into every thread. Frankly, it explains most things.

Indeed, between the impact of the French Revolution (ideologically) on the one hand and Foucault on the other, one can perfectly understand why we are in the shape we're in as a civilization.

[Pants-of-dog]

This gets to the very heart of it though It will not have the same character with a ‘composite material’

The roof and spire were a later modification by Viollet-le-Duc after the Napoleonic wars.

Duc was mainly a restorer of medieval works, and his philosophy about restoring architecture was seminal in that it influenced almost all of us coming after him.

Here is a summary of his doctrine concerning restoration of historic buildings:

Viollet-le-Duc famously defined restoration in volume eight of his Dictionnaire raisonné de l'architecture française du XI au XVI siecle of 1858: "To restore a building is not to maintain it, repair it or remake it: it is to re-establish it in a complete state which may never have existed at any given moment." He then explained that it had to meet four conditions: (1) The "re-establishment" had to be scientifically documented with plans and photographs and archeological records, which would guarantee exactness. (2) The restoration had to involve not just the appearance of the monument, or the effect that it produced, but also its structure; it had to use the most efficient means to assure the long life of the building, including using more solid materials, used more wisely. (3) the restoration had to exclude any modification contrary to obvious evidence; but the structure could be adapted to conform to more modern or rational uses and practices, which meant alterations to the original plan; and (4) The restoration should preserve older modifications made to the building, with the exception of those which compromised its stability or its conservation, or those which gravely violated the value of its historical presence.[27]

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eugène_ ... c#Doctrine

Please note that the bolded phrase is an explicit support of using new materials in lieu of traditional ones.

[ness31]

What can I say? I’m persuaded PoD. May Notre Dames rebuild (whenever that may be) fulfill whatever destiny you imagine it to have.

[Finfinder]

Irony ......... Macron had to postpone his "Yellow Vest" speech.

[B0ycey]

Politically and culturally I think it will be a seminal moment, particularly for those who want to preserve a Christian heritage in Europe, those who want to wipe out Christianity, and those who would rather raze the stone edifice of Notre Dame and replace it with a mosque.

Never an opportunity missed to insult Islam I see Blackjack.

Notre Dame maybe a religious monument but it's heritage is Parisian. I suspect most who value it are not considering religion but historic merits for their feelings. So why do you think multiculturalists/muslims would aspire to recreate a mosque?

[blackjack21]

The fire won't make that much of a difference. Perhaps it'll even facilitate repairs, unless the workmen keep on torching the place out of carelessness.

Most of the non-stone parts of the roof are gone. Fortunately, they were able to save a lot of the art work.

I was there about 10 years ago and I remember thinking I should have went canyoning.

Not much for humanities either, eh?

Sounds like the center was completely destroyed but a couple towers remain.

The stone work remains. They will have to carefully examine the stone work around the buttresses though. High heat followed by cold water can crack stones and render them structurally deficient.

About those relics : I visited a church in Europe as a teenager and saw behind glass containers with fluid and inside they kept teeth and bones and there were some skulls as well. This is truly a medieval custom.

Indeed it is Medieval.

There really must be something beyond the fact that an old Gothic building with some historic and cultural meaning caught fire during renovation. I wonder if it will make the news for a week, symbol of Western Christendom.

Christians are under assault pretty much everywhere these days, so many will take it as a sign of the times. Additionally, Macron has faced nearly 6 months of protests, which I expect to continue throughout the summer months. Keep in mind Notre Dame is more popular than the Eiffel Tower.

Irony ......... Macron had to postpone his "Yellow Vest" speech.

Macron's concessions will be expiring just in time for summer, and as oil prices have climbed. So I don't think he will succeed in quelling the protesters.

Never an opportunity missed to insult Islam I see Blackjack.

Where was the insult of Islam? I don't follow. Generally, I'm respectful of religions, except atheism of course. I work with Muslims, as I work in high tech. I have a number of Muslim friends--one of them is black from Cameroon.

Notre Dame maybe a religious monument but it's heritage is Parisian. I suspect most who value it are not considering religion but historic merits for their feelings.

I think it makes people reflect on what they value, and many have put much value on secularism only to be disappointed. That is a common feeling throughout the EU now, as the government openly refuses to reflect the will of the people. Work continues on the Sagrada Familia in Barcelona, for example. Do you think the funding for that has no religious consequence? The Spanish civil war curtailed progress and anarchists set fire to it and tried to destroy the plans. This is not uncommon in history.

So why do you think multiculturalists/muslims would aspire to recreate a mosque?

Multiculturalists often hate Christianity, and they make no secret of it. Religions very often build on the ruins of other religions. For example, the Pantheon was used as a Catholic church for a long time. The Al Aqsa Mosque was built at the site of the Jewish temple. The Hagia Sophia was an Eastern Orthodox Cathedral, was converted to a Catholic Cathedral and later used as an Ottoman Mosque. It is an historical site now, but Erdogan has considered turning it back into a Mosque as of last month. This is a recurrent theme throughout history, which any educated person would readily understand. It does not follow that coverting the use of a religious facility to another religion involves insulting the succeeding religion in the least.

ISIS seemed pleased with the events:

'Have a nice day': ISIS fanatics revel in Notre Dame's destruction days before Easter as they describe the inferno as 'retribution and punishment'

Is it insulting Islam to mention how ISIS reacted to this event?

[anarchist23]

The spire that burned and collapsed was only 200 years old....

Many artifacts were saved before the fire spread to other parts of the cathedral. Because of the ongoing renovation, the copper statues that were normally on the now collapsed spire had been removed from the building a week prior. The stone vaulting that forms the ceiling of the cathedral remained largely intact, preventing the burning timbers falling into the building below.

Edit:
Part of York Minster roof was destroyed by fire during renovations twenty five years ago. It took three years to repair. It's roof was destroyed completely in the mid nineteenth century by fire caused by lightning as well.

[B0ycey]

Is it insulting Islam to mention how ISIS reacted to this event?

It is insulting as your OP mentioned an unfounded and unsupported reaction from those who don't support medieval Christian values for Notre Dame. It maybe a religious building but it's attraction is historic. Also nobody is calling for the building convertion into a mosque so a mere mention of such a thing has to have an alternative motive. Why else mention it? Although to quote ISIS is laughable. Don't they celebrate anything that is anti West? Are we to tarnish Christians with the brush of Tarrant?

[Beren]

Additionally, Macron has faced nearly 6 months of protests

Now he faces a tough election campaign, so Notre-Dame will make the news for even more than a month.

So I don't think he will succeed in quelling the protesters.

He will not succeed in quelling the protesters if they keep protesting after the EP-election anyway, because they clearly protest for the sake of protesting then.

[blackjack21]

It is insulting as your OP mentioned an unfounded and unsupported reaction from those who don't support medieval Christian values for Notre Dame. It maybe a religious building but it's attraction is historic. Also nobody is calling for the building convertion into a mosque so a mere mention of such a thing has to have an alternative motive. Why else mention it?

What? Are you like 21 years old and educated by leftists? The Mosque of Notre Dame in Paris: 2048 was an award-winning dystopian novel published in 2005 that sold around the world, but couldn't find a publisher in France because of political correctness. The Mosque of Notre Dame in Paris: 2048. I swear sometimes you guys are almost completely illiterate (in the humanities sense), but colleges regularly churn out debt ridden ignoramuses who think they are brilliant these days.

Tarrant wasn't looking to further fundamentalist Christianity whereas ISIS is seeking to build a state based on strict Sharia law, so I think conflating Tarrant's act is a pretty weak retort. The media's take on Tarrant is that he was a white supremacist.

[B0ycey]

What? Are you like 21 years old and educated by leftists? The Mosque of Notre Dame in Paris: 2048 was an award-winning dystopian novel published in 2005 that sold around the world, but couldn't find a publisher in France because of political correctness. The Mosque of Notre Dame in Paris: 2048. I swear sometimes you guys are almost completely illiterate (in the humanities sense), but colleges regularly churn out debt ridden ignoramuses who think they are brilliant these days.

Tarrant wasn't looking to further fundamentalist Christianity whereas ISIS is seeking to build a state based on strict Sharia law, so I think conflating Tarrant's act is a pretty weak retort. The media's take on Tarrant is that he was a white supremacist.

I can't say I have even heard of the novel. But even if I had, I am literate enough to know the difference between fiction and fact. So what exactly happening in 1984 to you?

Also the ideology of a fundamentalist is merely rhetorical. The only difference between ISIS and white supremacy is religion. What I find amazing from the Islamophobes is how quickly they distance themselves from white terrorists but can't help grouping all Muslims into one group.

[blackjack21]

What I find amazing from the Islamophobes is how quickly they distance themselves from white terrorists but can't help grouping all Muslims into one group.

Who's classifying all Muslims into one group, and how do you classify people as Islamophobes? I can think of numerous Islamic sects offhand: Sunni, Shia and Sufi among others. Within Sunni Islam there are more conservative groups like Wahabists and Salafists. There are some trying to reconcile their faith with the modern world like Islamic Modernism. There is also the Mevlevi Order in Turkey made famous by the so-called "whirling dervishes." I would characterize them as one group, and don't know anybody who would.

[Red_Army]

It's cool how this thread is all about muslims

@Victoribus Spolia I do find it funny when Americans shit all over the French in a "cheese eating surrender monkey" fashion after the yellow vest revolt shows that they are literally willing to fight in the streets over policy they disagree with while Americans sit around doing nothing. I know that your dislike of the French has more depth than that, but it is something to remember.

[blackjack21]

It's cool how this thread is all about muslims

It's not, except to B0ycey, who seems to think Islam was somehow insulted and it is his duty to defend Islam as some sort of Jihadi or a part of the mujahideen. I believe Paul Joseph Watson mentioned that some people were celebrating the fire, and he was called out for singling out Muslims which he didn't do as there were a lot of leftists celebrating the fire. He substantiates his rebuttal very cogently here:

B0ycey and others also contend that Notre Dame is an historical museum, when in fact it is an active church. Here is a video of its Palm Sunday celebration a few days ago:

@Victoribus Spolia I do find it funny when Americans shit all over the French in a "cheese eating surrender monkey" fashion after the yellow vest revolt shows that they are literally willing to fight in the streets over policy they disagree with while Americans sit around doing nothing.

Well, there is a significant difference between the Emmanuel Macrons of France and average Gilets Jaunes protesters. At least a dozen people have been blinded in one eye, others had hands or fingers blown off, and some have even died at the hands of the French police.

Lost eyes... hands blown off: Injuries from 'yellow vest' clashes with French police mount

My point was and is that Notre Dame is a symbol of Western Christendom. Watson points out that there are literally 10 times as many attacks on Christians and Christian churches in France than against Muslims or Mosques, but the media doesn't cover it. He also notes that Jews are fleeing France, which they are--I generally don't sympathize with the fleeing Jews, since they tend to vote as a bloc and tend to favor the very policies creating this 'multicultural' milieu that leaves them feeling unsafe and unwelcome in France.