https://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-47941794
QuoteA fire has broken out at the famous Notre-Dame cathedral in Paris and has spread rapidly across the building.
The cause is not yet clear, but officials say that it could be linked to renovation work.
A major operation to tackle the blaze is under way at the 850-year-old Gothic building, but the cathedral's spire and roof have collapsed.
Last year, the Catholic Church in France appealed for funds to save the building, which was crumbling.
Hundreds of people have gathered in the streets around the cathedral, observing the flames in silence.
French President Emmanuel Macron, who has arrived at the scene, said his thoughts were with "all Catholics and all French people."
"Like all of my countrymen, I am sad tonight to see this part of us burn."
Mr Macron has cancelled his planned speech to the nation following the fire, an Élysée Palace official said.
A spokesman for the cathedral said the whole structure was "burning".
"There will be nothing left," he said. "It remains to be seen whether the vault, which protects the cathedral, will be affected or not."
The blaze broke out on Monday afternoon and an area surrounding the building has been cleared.
Fuck. :cry:
:o
:cry:
The windows won't survive this :(
Very sad.
Quote from: Maladict on April 15, 2019, 02:32:40 PM
:cry:
The windows won't survive this :(
If they manage to save the church it'll be a job well done at this point.
(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/D4OFOKMWkAEEHsz?format=jpg&name=900x900)
QuoteReuters news agency is quoting an official with the French firefighting team as saying: "We can now say that the structure of Notre-Dame has been saved from total destruction".
AFP is also reporting that the main structure has been "saved and preserved", citing an official.
Quote from: Legbiter on April 15, 2019, 03:25:35 PM
Quote from: Maladict on April 15, 2019, 02:32:40 PM
:cry:
The windows won't survive this :(
If they manage to save the church it'll be a job well done at this point.
It seems that they're unsure if something will be saved at all.
I'm curious to know if the presumed true Crown of Thorns, that was kept in the cathedral, has been saved, but I suppose that everything that could be moved, has been in the first hours of the fire.
L.
Quote from: Pedrito on April 15, 2019, 04:08:00 PM
I'm curious to know if the presumed true Crown of Thorns, that was kept in the cathedral, has been saved, but I suppose that everything that could be moved, has been in the first hours of the fire.
L.
According to the French press, it has, along with the mantle of Louis IX.
https://don.fondation-patrimoine.org/SauvonsNotreDame/~mon-don
Thank you
Quote from: Zoupa on April 15, 2019, 05:50:44 PM
https://don.fondation-patrimoine.org/SauvonsNotreDame/~mon-don
Just to clarify: this is a private foundation (they still do good work).
The official website for donation will be set up tomorrow.
Quote from: Oexmelin on April 15, 2019, 06:26:15 PM
Quote from: Zoupa on April 15, 2019, 05:50:44 PM
https://don.fondation-patrimoine.org/SauvonsNotreDame/~mon-don
Just to clarify: this is a private foundation (they still do good work).
The official website for donation will be set up tomorrow.
Ah, well I can donate twice :)
So are the walls still standing?
Quote from: Oexmelin on April 15, 2019, 04:10:53 PM
Quote from: Pedrito on April 15, 2019, 04:08:00 PM
I'm curious to know if the presumed true Crown of Thorns, that was kept in the cathedral, has been saved, but I suppose that everything that could be moved, has been in the first hours of the fire.
L.
According to the French press, it has, along with the mantle of Louis IX.
I'm wary of early reports. Is this definitely confirmed?
Yes. By the minister of culture. http://www.leparisien.fr/societe/incendie-de-notre-dame-quelles-oeuvres-d-art-ont-elles-pu-etre-sauvees-16-04-2019-8054457.php
According to the spokesman of the Paris firemen brigade, all artworks in the treasure part were saved, along with the bellfries.
Quote«L'ensemble des œuvres d'art dans la partie "trésor" ont été sorties»
Le lieutenant-colonel Gabriel Plus, porte-parole des pompiers de Paris, s'est exprimé auprès de l'AFP, au lendemain de l'incendie. «La priorité que l'on s'était donné, c'était de sauver les deux beffrois (partie qui supporte les tours), et les deux beffrois ont été sauvés. Imaginez : la charpente des beffrois fragilisée, les cloches qui s'effondrent, c'était vraiment notre crainte !», explique-t-il.
Il ajoute : «L'ensemble des œuvres d'art qui étaient dans la partie "trésor" ont été sorties. La plupart du temps, les pompiers de Paris s'engagent pour préserver les personnes, là, il s'agissait vraiment de sauvegarder des biens, de préserver ce qui pouvait l'être encore, donc de faire des choix.»
Désormais, les pompiers se concentrent sur la surveillance, afin d'être sûr qu'«aucun foyer résiduel ne se renflamme (...) et que la structure est stabilisée».
http://www.lefigaro.fr/actualite-france/2019/04/16/01016-20190416LIVWWW00001-en-direct-cathedrale-notre-dame-paris-incendie-maitrise-macron-pompiers.php (http://www.lefigaro.fr/actualite-france/2019/04/16/01016-20190416LIVWWW00001-en-direct-cathedrale-notre-dame-paris-incendie-maitrise-macron-pompiers.php)
Looks like at least one rose window survived :)
I am actually quite impressed by the medieval construction methods. The building is what, 800 years old? A fire of this scale will probably destroy many buildings built to modern standards. An 800 year old wooden and stone building still stands after enduring a such a fire isn't doing too badly.
Quote from: Maladict on April 16, 2019, 05:35:54 AM
Looks like at least one rose window survived :)
Reports now saying all three survived :worthy:
Many churches have survived fires with walls intact, I understand that this is the case here too. Since they got the fancy objects out and the wooden construction itself was 19th century I refuse to consider this a major cultural disaster.
Not that simple unfortunately, Brain.
QuoteThe greatest loss, according to experts, was the destruction of the extraordinary labyrinth of timber, dating from the 13th century and known as "the forest", that underpinned the roof.
France no longer has trees big enough to replace the ancient beams, which came from primal forests, said Bertrand de Feydeau, deputy head of Fondation du Patrimoine, a heritage preservation group.
"We don't, at the moment, have trees on our territory of the size that were cut in the 13th century."
https://www.thetimes.co.uk/edition/news/notre-dame-cathedral-in-paris-engulfed-in-flames-w7z3mw0sr (https://www.thetimes.co.uk/edition/news/notre-dame-cathedral-in-paris-engulfed-in-flames-w7z3mw0sr)
Even if trees of that size still exist somewhere in the world they are probably illegal to cut.
Quote from: Duque de Bragança on April 16, 2019, 09:42:22 AM
Not that simple unfortunately, Brain.
QuoteThe greatest loss, according to experts, was the destruction of the extraordinary labyrinth of timber, dating from the 13th century and known as "the forest", that underpinned the roof.
France no longer has trees big enough to replace the ancient beams, which came from primal forests, said Bertrand de Feydeau, deputy head of Fondation du Patrimoine, a heritage preservation group.
"We don't, at the moment, have trees on our territory of the size that were cut in the 13th century."
https://www.thetimes.co.uk/edition/news/notre-dame-cathedral-in-paris-engulfed-in-flames-w7z3mw0sr (https://www.thetimes.co.uk/edition/news/notre-dame-cathedral-in-paris-engulfed-in-flames-w7z3mw0sr)
I understood that only a small part was still medieval, but apparently not. But it's just "under the hood" damage. Sad, still not a major disaster I think.
yeah, agree with Brain. Could have been a lot worse. Shame about the roof damage, but the windows and all the valuables have been saved.
Interesting that that they don't have trees big enough anymore.
They can use laminate. That high up nobody will be able to tell the difference. Beter than cutting down a coast redwood or whatever. :sleep:
Quote from: Caliga on April 16, 2019, 12:58:58 PM
They can use laminate. That high up nobody will be able to tell the difference. Beter than cutting down a coast redwood or whatever. :sleep:
Redwood timber is not really suitable for construction anyway.
Quote from: The Brain on April 16, 2019, 09:47:52 AM
I understood that only a small part was still medieval, but apparently not. But it's just "under the hood" damage. Sad, still not a major disaster I think.
Not a major disaster just because it wasn't on display? What difference does that make?
Quote from: Maladict on April 16, 2019, 01:41:49 PM
Quote from: The Brain on April 16, 2019, 09:47:52 AM
I understood that only a small part was still medieval, but apparently not. But it's just "under the hood" damage. Sad, still not a major disaster I think.
Not a major disaster just because it wasn't on display? What difference does that make?
AFAIK the typical visitor won't notice it, so I think it makes a difference. And even if the beams were visible I still don't think having to replace them qualifies as a major cultural disaster.
If this is a major cultural disaster then what words will you use for stuff like the Louvre with collections going up in smoke? When the old castle in Stockholm burned in 1697 losses included among many other things most of the royal archives. It has been said (not unreasonably) that the Swedish middle ages were lost that day. That was a cultural disaster on a whole different level than the Notre Dame fire.
In a few years Notre Dame will have been repaired. It will have somewhat fewer original parts, but it won't look significantly different. Wear and tear, revolution, and heavy handed restoration had already made it less than all-medieval before this fire. Notre Dame will be fine and keep being a part of Paris for many years to come. As cultural disasters go this is not a major one AFAICT.
I'm interested to see how they go about re building the roof. In many respects I feel as though using more modern construction methods would be entirely appropriate - they stuck a spire in the middle of the building on a whim about 150 years ago after all. It's been modified several times since it's initial construction I'm pretty certain. Giving it a more modern roof, and a different spire would be entirely appropriate. Perhaps not as bold as the pyramid at the Louvre, but certainly not a painstaking reconstruction attempt. There's an opportunity here.
I was horrified by the fire of course, and a little bit heartbroken. I have wandered around the streets around the Cathedral many times. :(
Quote from: fromtia on April 16, 2019, 02:52:39 PM
I'm interested to see how they go about re building the roof. In many respects I feel as though using more modern construction methods would be entirely appropriate - they stuck a spire in the middle of the building on a whim about 150 years ago after all. It's been modified several times since it's initial construction I'm pretty certain. Giving it a more modern roof, and a different spire would be entirely appropriate. Perhaps not as bold as the pyramid at the Louvre, but certainly not a painstaking reconstruction attempt. There's an opportunity here.
I think that would be controversial. Standards of historical preservation and renovation 150 years ago are generally frowned upon these days.
Quote from: The Brain on April 16, 2019, 01:57:54 PM
Quote from: Maladict on April 16, 2019, 01:41:49 PM
Quote from: The Brain on April 16, 2019, 09:47:52 AM
I understood that only a small part was still medieval, but apparently not. But it's just "under the hood" damage. Sad, still not a major disaster I think.
Not a major disaster just because it wasn't on display? What difference does that make?
AFAIK the typical visitor won't notice it, so I think it makes a difference. And even if the beams were visible I still don't think having to replace them qualifies as a major cultural disaster.
If this is a major cultural disaster then what words will you use for stuff like the Louvre with collections going up in smoke? When the old castle in Stockholm burned in 1697 losses included among many other things most of the royal archives. It has been said (not unreasonably) that the Swedish middle ages were lost that day. That was a cultural disaster on a whole different level than the Notre Dame fire.
In a few years Notre Dame will have been repaired. It will have somewhat fewer original parts, but it won't look significantly different. Wear and tear, revolution, and heavy handed restoration had already made it less than all-medieval before this fire. Notre Dame will be fine and keep being a part of Paris for many years to come. As cultural disasters go this is not a major one AFAICT.
I see no problem in calling it a major cultural disaster. Even if there are worse things imaginable. Actually, losing Notre Dame might actually mean more to Parisians than losing the Louvre. But I'm not sure this kind of comparison serves any purpose.
Notre Dame is one of the great cathedrals and has immense historical and cultural significance for Paris, France, Europe and the world. It also happens to retain a great deal of its original materials, some of which have now been lost. That's a major cultural disaster in my book.
Quote from: Valmy on April 16, 2019, 03:18:19 PM
I think that would be controversial. Standards of historical preservation and renovation 150 years ago are generally frowned upon these days.
It would be absolutely controversial, but I think it's a better approach then trying to faithfully re create (and it may not be possible to do so) what was built in the 13th Century. Our best hopes is that people still visit the Cathedral in 800 years time, and I wonder if they wont find it timid, cowardly even, to not rebuild the roof in a contemporary way after such a dramatic event.
A better approach at what? And is there a "contemporary way" to build a roof? And how many 21st century cathedral roofs do we have to inspire it?
Sagrada Familia?
Quote from: Maladict on April 16, 2019, 03:19:08 PM
Quote from: The Brain on April 16, 2019, 01:57:54 PM
Quote from: Maladict on April 16, 2019, 01:41:49 PM
Quote from: The Brain on April 16, 2019, 09:47:52 AM
I understood that only a small part was still medieval, but apparently not. But it's just "under the hood" damage. Sad, still not a major disaster I think.
Not a major disaster just because it wasn't on display? What difference does that make?
AFAIK the typical visitor won't notice it, so I think it makes a difference. And even if the beams were visible I still don't think having to replace them qualifies as a major cultural disaster.
If this is a major cultural disaster then what words will you use for stuff like the Louvre with collections going up in smoke? When the old castle in Stockholm burned in 1697 losses included among many other things most of the royal archives. It has been said (not unreasonably) that the Swedish middle ages were lost that day. That was a cultural disaster on a whole different level than the Notre Dame fire.
In a few years Notre Dame will have been repaired. It will have somewhat fewer original parts, but it won't look significantly different. Wear and tear, revolution, and heavy handed restoration had already made it less than all-medieval before this fire. Notre Dame will be fine and keep being a part of Paris for many years to come. As cultural disasters go this is not a major one AFAICT.
I see no problem in calling it a major cultural disaster. Even if there are worse things imaginable. Actually, losing Notre Dame might actually mean more to Parisians than losing the Louvre. But I'm not sure this kind of comparison serves any purpose.
Notre Dame is one of the great cathedrals and has immense historical and cultural significance for Paris, France, Europe and the world. It also happens to retain a great deal of its original materials, some of which have now been lost. That's a major cultural disaster in my book.
We'll have to agree to disagree.
Quote from: The Brain on April 16, 2019, 03:35:43 PM
Quote from: Maladict on April 16, 2019, 03:19:08 PM
Quote from: The Brain on April 16, 2019, 01:57:54 PM
Quote from: Maladict on April 16, 2019, 01:41:49 PM
Quote from: The Brain on April 16, 2019, 09:47:52 AM
I understood that only a small part was still medieval, but apparently not. But it's just "under the hood" damage. Sad, still not a major disaster I think.
Not a major disaster just because it wasn't on display? What difference does that make?
AFAIK the typical visitor won't notice it, so I think it makes a difference. And even if the beams were visible I still don't think having to replace them qualifies as a major cultural disaster.
If this is a major cultural disaster then what words will you use for stuff like the Louvre with collections going up in smoke? When the old castle in Stockholm burned in 1697 losses included among many other things most of the royal archives. It has been said (not unreasonably) that the Swedish middle ages were lost that day. That was a cultural disaster on a whole different level than the Notre Dame fire.
In a few years Notre Dame will have been repaired. It will have somewhat fewer original parts, but it won't look significantly different. Wear and tear, revolution, and heavy handed restoration had already made it less than all-medieval before this fire. Notre Dame will be fine and keep being a part of Paris for many years to come. As cultural disasters go this is not a major one AFAICT.
I see no problem in calling it a major cultural disaster. Even if there are worse things imaginable. Actually, losing Notre Dame might actually mean more to Parisians than losing the Louvre. But I'm not sure this kind of comparison serves any purpose.
Notre Dame is one of the great cathedrals and has immense historical and cultural significance for Paris, France, Europe and the world. It also happens to retain a great deal of its original materials, some of which have now been lost. That's a major cultural disaster in my book.
We'll have to agree to disagree.
Agreed. :)
Quote from: Valmy on April 16, 2019, 03:34:35 PM
A better approach at what? And is there a "contemporary way" to build a roof? And how many 21st century cathedral roofs do we have to inspire it?
Sagrada Familia?
A better approach at using architecture - not just preserving it but using it over and over again and adding to it and changing it, rather than trying to preserve it perfectly at an arbitrary moment in time.
So for example the Louvre of course, the British Museum also springs rather easily to mind. That would be a much more interesting approach than trying to recreate in perfect detail the 13th century roof.
And yes, there are probably countless ways that we currently have in terms of engineering and materials that weren't known to the 13th century architects as regards building a cathedral roof. Conceptually non controversial statement I think.
One thing that may seem painfully obvious is rebuilding the roof using non-combustible materials.
Quote from: fromtia on April 16, 2019, 03:41:47 PM
Quote from: Valmy on April 16, 2019, 03:34:35 PM
A better approach at what? And is there a "contemporary way" to build a roof? And how many 21st century cathedral roofs do we have to inspire it?
Sagrada Familia?
A better approach at using architecture - not just preserving it but using it over and over again and adding to it and changing it, rather than trying to preserve it perfectly at an arbitrary moment in time.
So for example the Louvre of course, the British Museum also springs rather easily to mind. That would be a much more interesting approach than trying to recreate in perfect detail the 13th century roof.
And yes, there are probably countless ways that we currently have in terms of engineering and materials that weren't known to the 13th century architects as regards building a cathedral roof. Conceptually non controversial statement I think.
Well we physically cannot perfectly recreate the 13th century roof since they used ancient trees that we would never cut today, even if they were still around.
I guess I do not understand what exactly you are recommending. Paris is ridiculously and notorious conservative about these kinds of things generally so don't expect anything too radical from a visual perspective. I agree we should use modern techniques to rebuild the roof more sound than before.
Quote from: Valmy on April 16, 2019, 03:52:59 PM
Well we physically cannot perfectly recreate the 13th century roof since they used ancient trees that we would never cut today, even if they were still around.
I guess I do not understand what exactly you are recommending. Paris is ridiculously and notorious conservative about these kinds of things generally so don't expect anything too radical from a visual perspective. I agree we should use modern techniques to rebuild the roof more sound than before.
The fault must be mine for not articulating the idea well enough. Paris is conservative in terms of preservation, to be sure, but also has rather bold outbursts in architectural terms. ( Pomidou Center, la Defense, I.M Peis famous glass pyramid)I'm suggesting that the roof of the Dame be replaced with an entirely modern roof, or at least that's a course that should be carefully considered. There's precedent for such a course of action and it is entirely respectable from a perspective of aesthetic theory, but very controversial absolutely.
and yes a non combustible option would be desirable.
Here's a link to an example of the kind of approach to architecture that Im talking about : https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Queen_Elizabeth_II_Great_Court (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Queen_Elizabeth_II_Great_Court)
I get what fromtia is saying. Burning is a part of the natural life cycle of cathedrals, or so it has been until modern day. Almost all major cathedrals are an amalgamation of styles from multiple centuries as they were built, added to, burned, and rebuilt. Trying to freeze the cathedral into what it was in say 1950 takes a bit of the vitality out of both it and Paris (just as using architectural codes that borrow heavily from 1870 creates a Paris that is quite attractive and pleasant to visit, but also something of a museum versus vibrant city center).
Damn kids and their newfangled cathedral ideas these days.
Quote from: The Brain on April 16, 2019, 01:57:54 PM
In a few years Notre Dame will have been repaired. It will have somewhat fewer original parts, but it won't look significantly different. Wear and tear, revolution, and heavy handed restoration had already made it less than all-medieval before this fire. Notre Dame will be fine and keep being a part of Paris for many years to come. As cultural disasters go this is not a major one AFAICT.
If it was only going to be a few years, I would agree with you. But reports are it is going to take decades. A generation or two will not be able to enjoy it. That is a cultural disaster.
Quote from: crazy canuck on April 16, 2019, 04:48:12 PM
Quote from: The Brain on April 16, 2019, 01:57:54 PM
In a few years Notre Dame will have been repaired. It will have somewhat fewer original parts, but it won't look significantly different. Wear and tear, revolution, and heavy handed restoration had already made it less than all-medieval before this fire. Notre Dame will be fine and keep being a part of Paris for many years to come. As cultural disasters go this is not a major one AFAICT.
If it was only going to be a few years, I would agree with you. But reports are it is going to take decades. A generation or two will not be able to enjoy it. That is a cultural disaster.
Which part of the work will take decades? Not rhetorical.
Quote from: crazy canuck on April 16, 2019, 04:48:12 PM
Quote from: The Brain on April 16, 2019, 01:57:54 PM
In a few years Notre Dame will have been repaired. It will have somewhat fewer original parts, but it won't look significantly different. Wear and tear, revolution, and heavy handed restoration had already made it less than all-medieval before this fire. Notre Dame will be fine and keep being a part of Paris for many years to come. As cultural disasters go this is not a major one AFAICT.
If it was only going to be a few years, I would agree with you. But reports are it is going to take decades. A generation or two will not be able to enjoy it. That is a cultural disaster.
Yes, it could take the best part of a generation to rebuild; unless they choose a radical solution as suggested by Formtia, though given it's conservative religious nature, I think it'll be rebuilt to a medieval standard.
Quote from: The Brain on April 16, 2019, 05:32:07 PM
Quote from: crazy canuck on April 16, 2019, 04:48:12 PM
Quote from: The Brain on April 16, 2019, 01:57:54 PM
In a few years Notre Dame will have been repaired. It will have somewhat fewer original parts, but it won't look significantly different. Wear and tear, revolution, and heavy handed restoration had already made it less than all-medieval before this fire. Notre Dame will be fine and keep being a part of Paris for many years to come. As cultural disasters go this is not a major one AFAICT.
If it was only going to be a few years, I would agree with you. But reports are it is going to take decades. A generation or two will not be able to enjoy it. That is a cultural disaster.
Which part of the work will take decades? Not rhetorical.
when repairing traditional buildings, you want to use materials that are as close as possible to the originals. Say, you want electricity and heating in a mill, you will try to find a way to dissimulate the wires and conduits behind "false" walls, you need lots of woods, you try to avoid any kind of plastics or shiny metals. That takes a while.
If I wanted to build a shining new cathedral, I'd probably use a steel structure, or a liminated wood structure and I would likely not build it so high because I don't really need to, if I want a solid structure, unlike 13th century building styles.
Getting the proper material for, well, everything, will take a while. Then assembling it is longer than bolting&welding pieces of metal together. Just doing a renovation instead of a new building takes longer, since you have to consider what is in place, work with constraints you don't have when there is nothing standing.
It's not that one specific part takes longer than any other, it's just a combination of everything that adds up.
Otherwise, you tear it down and build a new cultural center... but really, what would be the point, then? I'm sure Paris has more than enough churches. You don't need to rebuild it for a functional use, only the cultural use.
I think the most difficult part is going to be securing the funding. It is going to have an effect on the French budgets.
Quote from: Monoriu on April 16, 2019, 07:45:56 PM
I think the most difficult part is going to be securing the funding. It is going to have an effect on the French budgets.
It's a trivially small amount in comparison to the national budget.
Besides a French billionaire has coughed up a couple of hundred million euros already, Total has pledged 100 million. I think the fund already stands at 650 million and that's even before the world's general public contributions have been collect.
I know this will completely dumbfound you Mono, but, please take a seat just in case, but people can at time be generous! :gasp:
I'd guess the French state will have to find very little of the rebuilding costs.
Quote from: mongers on April 16, 2019, 07:53:04 PM
Quote from: Monoriu on April 16, 2019, 07:45:56 PM
I think the most difficult part is going to be securing the funding. It is going to have an effect on the French budgets.
It's a trivially small amount in comparison to the national budget.
Besides a French billionaire has coughed up a couple of hundred million euros already, Total has pledged 100 million. I think the fund already stands at 650 million and that's even before the world's general public contributions have been collect.
I know this will completely dumbfound you Mono, but, please take a seat just in case, but people can at time be generous! :gasp:
I'd guess the French state will have to find very little of the rebuilding costs.
It is going to take decades. The bulk of the costs will go toward paying the salaries of the workers. In this case, the costs will be high because (i) the longer it takes, the higher the salaries costs and (ii) this is no ordinary construction project. A lot of specialists are going to be needed.
QuoteMacron's promise won't come cheap. Early estimates put the cost of rebuilding in the multi-billion euros.
https://www.ccn.com/cost-rebuilding-notre-dame-cathedral-catastrophic-fire
Financing is really about choice. You only have a finite number of dollars, and these have their designated uses. Some go to healthcare, some go to education, etc. Suddenly you need to allocate some of these dollars to rebuilding this cathedral. It means you have to give up something else. Somewhere, somebody is going to wait longer to see a doctor. The troops will have fewer tanks to work with. Etc. It is the political part of making someone sacrifice something that is the really difficult part.
Yeah but tourism is one of France's most lucrative industries. You cannot leave a hulking wreck what was one of Paris' top attractions. So it is really that big of a sacrifice or a necessary investment?
Not fixing it might cost quite a bit as well....I mean so long as we are talking in such straight monetary terms.
Quote from: Valmy on April 16, 2019, 08:28:20 PM
Yeah but tourism is one of France's most lucrative industries. You cannot leave a hulking wreck what was one of Paris' top attractions. So it is really that big of a sacrifice or a necessary investment?
Not fixing it might cost quite a bit as well....I mean so long as we are talking in such straight monetary terms.
They have to fix it. It is a given. Only question is how to find the money.
Quote from: The Brain on April 16, 2019, 05:32:07 PM
Quote from: crazy canuck on April 16, 2019, 04:48:12 PM
Quote from: The Brain on April 16, 2019, 01:57:54 PM
In a few years Notre Dame will have been repaired. It will have somewhat fewer original parts, but it won't look significantly different. Wear and tear, revolution, and heavy handed restoration had already made it less than all-medieval before this fire. Notre Dame will be fine and keep being a part of Paris for many years to come. As cultural disasters go this is not a major one AFAICT.
If it was only going to be a few years, I would agree with you. But reports are it is going to take decades. A generation or two will not be able to enjoy it. That is a cultural disaster.
Which part of the work will take decades? Not rhetorical.
I am not sure. But that is what architects are saying
I would think that rebuilding a flying buttress cathedral will take a bit more time than an overpass stretch of interstate or somesuch. First of all, the stones needed are not going to be poured from concrete, they will be cut stones, the timbers may well be amalgams of woods, but I would bet they will be not so easy to make as assumed, etc. etc.
The point is that they will be remaking a Gothic cathedral, using modern knowledge and understandings of not only what works but what the original builders used or wanted. Why? It is grandfather's pocket knife - sure the blade is new, but handle was his and that blade was made properly. They are not making a new structure, but instead salvaging a partially destroyed monument from a bygone period. To do it justice they should not simple repave or replace, but instead find a way to be true to the intentions of past times - even if earlier changes, fixes, destructions were not so gentle.
To do it right, proper, and good means that it will be harder than some think.
Quote from: PDH on April 16, 2019, 11:09:56 PM
I would think that rebuilding a flying buttress cathedral will take a bit more time than an overpass stretch of interstate or somesuch. First of all, the stones needed are not going to be poured from concrete, they will be cut stones, the timbers may well be amalgams of woods, but I would bet they will be not so easy to make as assumed, etc. etc.
The point is that they will be remaking a Gothic cathedral, using modern knowledge and understandings of not only what works but what the original builders used or wanted. Why? It is grandfather's pocket knife - sure the blade is new, but handle was his and that blade was made properly. They are not making a new structure, but instead salvaging a partially destroyed monument from a bygone period. To do it justice they should not simple repave or replace, but instead find a way to be true to the intentions of past times - even if earlier changes, fixes, destructions were not so gentle.
To do it right, proper, and good means that it will be harder than some think.
The first difficult decision will be, "to what era should the building be reconstructed?"
I suspect that most will say that the late 19th century version that it essentially was before it burned. I would like to propose an older version of the building - with a more inclusive use - when it served as the "Temple of Reason".
Quote from: PDH on April 16, 2019, 11:09:56 PM
I would think that rebuilding a flying buttress cathedral will take a bit more time than an overpass stretch of interstate or somesuch. First of all, the stones needed are not going to be poured from concrete, they will be cut stones, the timbers may well be amalgams of woods, but I would bet they will be not so easy to make as assumed, etc. etc.
The point is that they will be remaking a Gothic cathedral, using modern knowledge and understandings of not only what works but what the original builders used or wanted. Why? It is grandfather's pocket knife - sure the blade is new, but handle was his and that blade was made properly. They are not making a new structure, but instead salvaging a partially destroyed monument from a bygone period. To do it justice they should not simple repave or replace, but instead find a way to be true to the intentions of past times - even if earlier changes, fixes, destructions were not so gentle.
To do it right, proper, and good means that it will be harder than some think.
Yeah, and I also don't see any need to use new methods, for the most part. The roof timbers that burned were supposedly the originals--if that's accurate, then I don't think there are any new methods that could be used that could be expected to last any longer than the originals did.
Now, it may not be possible to find oaks of the appropriate size and all anymore, requiring them to rebuild it differently, but using a different method out of necessity is different than making a deliberate choice to do so.
Are they going to do everything by hand in the original way (as understood by historians)?
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2019/apr/16/notre-dame-fire-is-devastating-but-iconic-cathedral-will-live-on
QuoteNotre Dame fire is devastating – but iconic cathedral will live on
The history of beloved, culturally significant buildings is inextricably connected to a history of destruction – and very often fire. Less than a century after building of the present Notre Dame began in 1163, fire damage is thought to have prompted the remodelling of parts of the cathedral. The Gothic structure replaced an earlier church that had been built on the site of a Roman temple to Jupiter. By the 19th century the building was in a state of deep neglect: almost a ruin and lacking its spire.
A complete restoration in the 1850s by the architects Jean-Baptiste Lassus and Eugène Viollet-le-Duc reversed the cathedral's dire situation. Viollet-le-Duc also added a replacement spire in the style of, though more elaborate than, the original.
By this stage, the medieval spires of the Amiens, Reims and Rouen cathedrals had already been destroyed – Rouen's by fire caused by lightning in 1822.
Notre Dame, before Monday's fire, was not a 12th-century time capsule, but consisted of layers of remaking and reworking – in the case of Viollet-le-Duc's work, based on careful, loving research and a deep respect for the methods of the medieval builders. Which is not to minimise the tragedy and loss involved in the terrible damage to this numinous building, but rather, to suggest that there is hope: Notre Dame can, and surely will, live on.
On 19 September 1914, Reims cathedral – another edifice of huge symbolic importance to the French nation, where generations of monarchs were crowned – was hit by German shells, setting wooden scaffolding on fire, melting lead in the roof and causing fire to consume wooden fixtures and pews. The cathedral sustained yet more damage through the first world war, but its ruins rose again after a huge post-war international effort, to which Rockefeller millions contributed. It reopened in 1938.
"Nous rebâtirons Notre-Dame" (we will rebuild Notre Dame), promised the French president, Emmanuel Macron. Donors such as the billionaire luxury brand owner François Pinault have already pledged funds.
But many questions lie ahead. What, precisely, will rebuilding mean? To what extent could, or should, the damaged parts be re-created precisely? In any case, what might "re-creation" consist of in a building that to a degree mingles the medieval and the 19th century, and serves a society so different to that of the 12th century? What modern building materials and methods should be introduced? How could a cathedral's spiritual atmosphere be evoked afresh? Should the restoration retain traces and memory of the fire damage – for example, in the way the architect David Chipperfield, in his celebrated work on Berlin's Neues Museum, preserved some of the scars that the building sustained during the second world war?
The damage is seemingly not so complete as to require the radical solution offered in the case of St Paul's Cathedral in London, when a medieval edifice was replaced with a bold new building in a fresh baroque style after the 1666 fire. But it is certainly possible that a rebuilt Notre Dame could, and perhaps should, contain architectural and artistic gestures that speak of our own time.
There are lessons to be learned about buildings and shared cultural memory. The causes of the fire are unknown and will be until the proper investigations are completed. What is well understood, however, is that complex, multi-layered historic buildings that are undergoing building or restoration work – as was the case for Notre Dame – are at particular risk from fire.
No city understands this better than Glasgow. The School of Art, Charles Rennie Mackintosh's masterpiece, was gutted by fire for the second time last summer during the final stages of its rebuild, after a first fire ravaged the school in 2014. The causes of the blaze have not yet been – and may never be – precisely determined, though it was recently reported that investigators were considering the theory that linseed-oil soaked rags, used to treat the school's wooden panelling, may have been to blame.
The cost of neglect of buildings can be unspeakable: the Museu Nacional in Rio, for example, which was destroyed by fire last summer along with most of its contents, had been starved of funds and was palpably incapable of protecting its collections, which represented the memory of a nation.
Some observers, within hours of the Notre Dame tragedy, have turned their attention to the dilapidated and dangerous state of the Palace of Westminster. Its restoration, which may cost more than £3.5bn to renovate and make safe, has been delayed through political inaction for years. Some may feel that if the Houses of Parliament, where fires break out regularly and is monitored 24 hours a day, were to burn there would be little to mourn. But people might feel rather differently if the worst were actually to happen. The sight of Parisians lining the Seine bridges to watch the flames on Monday night recalled similar scenes – the night of 16 October, 1834, when Londoners gathered to watch, aghast, the medieval Palace of Westminster burn down.
Whatever happens to Notre Dame, the restoration has the capacity to be an act of archaeology and study as well as an act of remaking. Researchers would have the chance to learn much about the building that would in turn inform its future. It could be a training ground for a new generation of craftspeople and a cradle of art. France already shows signs, by sheer force of will, of transforming this moment of grief into a moment of optimism.
Money won't be a huge issue, it's a matter of national pride.
Just seasoning the huge oak timber the old way could take decades.
Quote from: The Larch on April 17, 2019, 05:58:02 AM
Money won't be a huge issue, it's a matter of national pride.
And not just a local concern
Macaroni says it will be rebuilt even more beautiful and he wants it done for the 2024 Olympics.
https://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-47957400
It's a new construction, so no apples-to-apples, but La Sagrada Familia has essentially had all the money they needed for the past two decades, are using a ton of modern building techniques, and still won't be finished until the 2030s. There's only so much you can rush this kind of structures. Particularly erecting a spire.
Quote from: alfred russel on April 17, 2019, 07:25:10 AM
Macaron says it will be rebuilt even more beautiful and he wants it done for the 2024 Olympics.
https://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-47957400
Fixed! :)
Sounds like more wishful thinking by Macaron, unfortunately.
Quote from: jimmy olsen on April 17, 2019, 03:52:27 AM
Are they going to do everything by hand in the original way (as understood by historians)?
most likely not. But some of the apparent pieces could be.
Quote from: PDH on April 16, 2019, 11:09:56 PM
I would think that rebuilding a flying buttress cathedral will take a bit more time than an overpass stretch of interstate or somesuch. First of all, the stones needed are not going to be poured from concrete, they will be cut stones, the timbers may well be amalgams of woods, but I would bet they will be not so easy to make as assumed, etc. etc.
The point is that they will be remaking a Gothic cathedral, using modern knowledge and understandings of not only what works but what the original builders used or wanted. Why? It is grandfather's pocket knife - sure the blade is new, but handle was his and that blade was made properly. They are not making a new structure, but instead salvaging a partially destroyed monument from a bygone period. To do it justice they should not simple repave or replace, but instead find a way to be true to the intentions of past times - even if earlier changes, fixes, destructions were not so gentle.
To do it right, proper, and good means that it will be harder than some think.
Ship of Theseus, yeah.
Quote from: Duque de Bragança on April 17, 2019, 08:17:29 AM
Quote from: alfred russel on April 17, 2019, 07:25:10 AM
Macaron says it will be rebuilt even more beautiful and he wants it done for the 2024 Olympics.
https://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-47957400
Fixed! :)
Sounds like more wishful thinking by Macaron, unfortunately.
Yeah. If it were just an issue of funding, I might put some stock in what he has to say about it, but articles I've seen where architects and construction people talk about it say 20 years at least, 40 years more likely.
According to multiple posts on FB, my sister in law thinks we should feed all the starving kids in the world and clean up plastic garbage on the beaches before anything is done to restore the cathedral.
Quote from: derspiess on April 17, 2019, 02:16:30 PM
According to multiple posts on FB, my sister in law thinks we should feed all the starving kids in the world and clean up plastic garbage on the beaches before anything is done to restore the cathedral.
If she wants to troll, she should suggest that as Notre Dame is owned and maintained by the government and France is now quite multicultural, the reconstruction should incorporate design elements from all religions in France, as well as from the agnostic and atheistic.
Quote from: alfred russel on April 17, 2019, 02:23:28 PM
Quote from: derspiess on April 17, 2019, 02:16:30 PM
According to multiple posts on FB, my sister in law thinks we should feed all the starving kids in the world and clean up plastic garbage on the beaches before anything is done to restore the cathedral.
If she wants to troll, she should suggest that as Notre Dame is owned and maintained by the government and France is now quite multicultural, the reconstruction should incorporate design elements from all religions in France, as well as from the agnostic and atheistic.
Well it already is un Temple de la Raison.
Quote from: derspiess on April 17, 2019, 02:16:30 PM
According to multiple posts on FB, my sister in law thinks we should feed all the starving kids in the world and clean up plastic garbage on the beaches before anything is done to restore the cathedral.
Is she under the impression we are paying for it?
Quote from: derspiess on April 17, 2019, 02:16:30 PM
According to multiple posts on FB, my sister in law thinks we should feed all the starving kids in the world and clean up plastic garbage on the beaches before anything is done to restore the cathedral.
There's a of retardation going around the last couple of days. Sorry to hear your sister in law caught it.
She's a hippie and loves re-posting things that try to guilt people.
Authorities say Notre-Dame was 15-30 mins from complete destruction.
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2019/apr/16/notre-dame-came-15-to-30-minutes-close-to-complete-destruction?fbclid=IwAR13GY0AxqqbEZruckfm-ccaDfN7YiHVI2KKspIejKpVRcvpSk-0Vl3YOgE
Quote from: derspiess on April 17, 2019, 02:59:27 PM
She's a hippie and loves re-posting things that try to guilt people.
Well tell her we shouldn't spend any money to clean up beach plastic or feed starving human children until we save all the endangered species. And that she is a monster.
Last time she was up here, we got into an interesting conversation about sea turtle eggs, and whether or not people were monsters for eating them. Got really fun when she admitted to eating them on multiple occasions.
For the record, I haven't ever eaten any.
Quote from: derspiess on April 17, 2019, 03:07:50 PM
For the record, I haven't ever eaten any.
You've been too busy tossing plastic bags on beaches.
Probably burned down those black churches, too.
Quote from: Admiral Yi on April 17, 2019, 03:14:30 PM
Quote from: derspiess on April 17, 2019, 03:07:50 PM
For the record, I haven't ever eaten any.
You've been too busy tossing plastic bags on beaches.
Six-pack holders are more of my thing.
Quote from: derspiess on April 17, 2019, 03:17:20 PM
Six-pack holders are more of my thing.
There's gotta be a better name for that thing than six pack holder.
Ring things. Bird chokers.
Can retainers.
What?
Quote from: Habbaku on April 17, 2019, 02:27:55 PM
Quote from: derspiess on April 17, 2019, 02:16:30 PM
According to multiple posts on FB, my sister in law thinks we should feed all the starving kids in the world and clean up plastic garbage on the beaches before anything is done to restore the cathedral.
There's a of retardation going around the last couple of days. Sorry to hear your sister in law caught it.
I find that quite disturbing, because today I was chatting with someone about Brexit and he interjected some unrelated opinions, those very talking points from FB.
Thought it was a bit odd at the time , but I guess he saw them on FB and had a need to 're-broadcast' them. :bleeding:
Just shows you the power of the platform.
Flipper snippers. Six rings of death. This one would probably sound good in German.
Sechs Ringe des Todes, according to Google.
Not really cool.
I guess we'll wait for a real german speaker to come around. :D
Agree. Sex ring of Todds sounds gay.
Quote from: derspiess on April 17, 2019, 02:16:30 PM
According to multiple posts on FB, my sister in law thinks we should feed all the starving kids in the world and clean up plastic garbage on the beaches before anything is done to restore the cathedral.
Not enough Identity politics, (suppressed now) tweets from a state-subsidised student "trade union", yet showing some problems with basic French:
http://www.leparisien.fr/societe/incendie-de-notre-dame-malaise-a-l-unef-apres-les-propos-de-deux-responsables-16-04-2019-8054526.php?fbclid=IwAR2h6a92guISCIqP9Twe2K2uwYZ8kj6gff6WdkP25thaA_LgzXyRh7OJoIs#xtor=AD-1481423552 (http://www.leparisien.fr/societe/incendie-de-notre-dame-malaise-a-l-unef-apres-les-propos-de-deux-responsables-16-04-2019-8054526.php?fbclid=IwAR2h6a92guISCIqP9Twe2K2uwYZ8kj6gff6WdkP25thaA_LgzXyRh7OJoIs#xtor=AD-1481423552)
objectivement c'est votre délire de petits blancs », a ajouté celle qui est aussi membre du bureau national de l'organisation.
Un autre responsable de l'Unef, Édouard Le Bert, qui se présente sur Twitter comme membre du bureau national du syndicat, a publié de son côté un message moqueur et minimaliste : « Ca y est drame national, une charpente de cathédrale brûle ».]« Je m'en fiche de Notre-Dame car je m'en fiche de l'histoire de France ». Ce message publié lundi soir sur Twitter par la vice-présidente de l'Unef Lille, Hafsa Askar, quelques heures après l'incendie de la cathédrale de Paris, a suscité de nombreuses réactions indignées.
« On s'en balek [on s'en fout, NDLR] objectivement c'est votre délire de petits blancs », a ajouté celle qui est aussi membre du bureau national de l'organisation.
Un autre responsable de l'Unef, Édouard Le Bert, qui se présente sur Twitter comme membre du bureau national du syndicat, a publié de son côté un message moqueur et minimaliste : « Ca y est drame national, une charpente de cathédrale brûle ». (http://xn--jem'enfichedenotre-damecarjem'enfichedel'histoiredefrance-jbc51h.xn--cemessagepublilundisoirsurtwitterparlavice-prsidentedel'uneflille,hafsaaskar,quelquesheuresaprsl'incendiedelacathdraledeparis,asuscitdenombreusesractionsindignes-c3n4e5a3euann.
Nice to see commies (Edouard Bert) hand in hand with islamists (Hafsa)! :lol:
Executive summary:
"I don't care about Notre Dame because I don't care about French history." (Honesty at last!)
" How people are going to cry about wooden pieces. I swear by Allah you love too much French identidy (...)We don't give a F@ck about it, that's your whitey trip."
"National drama, a cathedral framework burns."
(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/D4ONutRXkAATKbC?format=jpg&name=360x360)
They have a point.
French society forgave teaching them to care & fails at including their immigrants in the broader French identity.
NYC police stop 'copy-cat' attack 0n St Patrick's Cathedral?
Quote
New York police arrest man with petrol in St Patrick's Cathedral
18 April 2019
St Patrick's is a Catholic cathedral in Manhattan built in the 19th Century
A man has been arrested after walking into New York's St Patrick's Cathedral carrying two full petrol cans, lighter fluid and lighters, police say.
They say guards confronted the 37-year-old as he entered the Manhattan church on Wednesday evening.
He spilt gasoline on the ground and officers took him into custody.
.....
Full item here:
https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-47973354 (https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-47973354)
Quote from: Grey Fox on April 18, 2019, 07:15:37 AM
They have a point.
French society forgave teaching them to care & fails at including their immigrants in the broader French identity.
:secret:
The one who fails at basic French is a leader in one of the main student "trade unions". She fails because of her anti-French bigotry not the other way around. After all, as a student, she should be able to write a tweet. :D
And most immigrants feel included in the French identy or at don't have a problem with it, except those into Identity politics and/or hating France and French culture, namely islamists but not just them, for instance black racialists too claiming "black face" , a US concept, for an Eschylus play.
https://www.liberation.fr/politiques/2019/04/15/eschyle-le-blackface-et-la-censure_1721447 (https://www.liberation.fr/politiques/2019/04/15/eschyle-le-blackface-et-la-censure_1721447)
Identity all of the way for them but for whiteys, no. Another broad and meaningless concept in a French setting, imported from the US identity politics. :rolleyes:
I like how racist actions are only US concepts. :lol:
Quote from: garbon on April 18, 2019, 09:15:58 AM
I like how racist actions are only US concepts. :lol:
Or ethnic or religious based nationalism. I certainly wish those were only US concepts.
Quote from: Valmy on April 18, 2019, 09:18:54 AM
Quote from: garbon on April 18, 2019, 09:15:58 AM
I like how racist actions are only US concepts. :lol:
Or ethnic or religious based nationalism. I certainly wish those were only US concepts.
My point was that Blackface, specifically the current obsession about it and Identity politics were US concepts, from the US PC left.
Nice strawmen by the both of you though! :)
Quote from: Valmy on April 18, 2019, 09:18:54 AM
Quote from: garbon on April 18, 2019, 09:15:58 AM
I like how racist actions are only US concepts. :lol:
Or ethnic or religious based nationalism. I certainly wish those were only US concepts.
Wilson's obsession with ethnic purity didn't exactly help Europe.
Quote from: Duque de Bragança on April 18, 2019, 09:31:21 AM
Quote from: Valmy on April 18, 2019, 09:18:54 AM
Quote from: garbon on April 18, 2019, 09:15:58 AM
I like how racist actions are only US concepts. :lol:
Or ethnic or religious based nationalism. I certainly wish those were only US concepts.
My point was that Blackface, specifically the current obsession about it and Identity politics were US concepts, from the US PC left.
Nice strawmen by the both of you though! :)
Ok that is true. I frequently see terminology used that really doesn't work outside of a US context.
But identity politics is just a form of nationalism and Europe has been all over that for a long time.
Quote from: The Brain on April 18, 2019, 10:00:05 AM
Quote from: Valmy on April 18, 2019, 09:18:54 AM
Quote from: garbon on April 18, 2019, 09:15:58 AM
I like how racist actions are only US concepts. :lol:
Or ethnic or religious based nationalism. I certainly wish those were only US concepts.
Wilson's obsession with ethnic purity didn't exactly help Europe.
No argument from me.
Quote from: Valmy on April 18, 2019, 10:15:31 AM
Quote from: Duque de Bragança on April 18, 2019, 09:31:21 AM
Quote from: Valmy on April 18, 2019, 09:18:54 AM
Quote from: garbon on April 18, 2019, 09:15:58 AM
I like how racist actions are only US concepts. :lol:
Or ethnic or religious based nationalism. I certainly wish those were only US concepts.
My point was that Blackface, specifically the current obsession about it and Identity politics were US concepts, from the US PC left.
Nice strawmen by the both of you though! :)
Ok that is true. I frequently see terminology used that really doesn't work outside of a US context.
But identity politics is just a form of nationalism and Europe has been all over that for a long time.
In Central and Eastern Europe maybe. In post-national Western Europe not so, with self-hatred or ethno-masochism still permeating politics.
Quote from: Duque de Bragança on April 18, 2019, 10:26:55 AM
Quote from: Valmy on April 18, 2019, 10:15:31 AM
Quote from: Duque de Bragança on April 18, 2019, 09:31:21 AM
Quote from: Valmy on April 18, 2019, 09:18:54 AM
Quote from: garbon on April 18, 2019, 09:15:58 AM
I like how racist actions are only US concepts. :lol:
Or ethnic or religious based nationalism. I certainly wish those were only US concepts.
My point was that Blackface, specifically the current obsession about it and Identity politics were US concepts, from the US PC left.
Nice strawmen by the both of you though! :)
Ok that is true. I frequently see terminology used that really doesn't work outside of a US context.
But identity politics is just a form of nationalism and Europe has been all over that for a long time.
In Central and Eastern Europe maybe. In post-national Western Europe not so, with self-hatred or ethno-masochism still permeating politics.
So we are talking some time period between what the 60s-90s (at push 00s) as the period where Europe wasn't 'all over' nationalism?
Your knowledge of Nationalism in Europe is second only to your knowledge of wines. :)
:hmm:
^_^ A la fin de l'envoi, il touche
Quote from: Duque de Bragança on April 18, 2019, 09:31:21 AM
Quote from: Valmy on April 18, 2019, 09:18:54 AM
Quote from: garbon on April 18, 2019, 09:15:58 AM
I like how racist actions are only US concepts. :lol:
Or ethnic or religious based nationalism. I certainly wish those were only US concepts.
My point was that Blackface, specifically the current obsession about it and Identity politics were US concepts, from the US PC left.
Nice strawmen by the both of you though! :)
I'm neither PC nor on the left, and even I see a problem with blackface. If I were a black man, I don't think I'd be less bothered by a white guy in blackface if the white guy happened to be a Frenchman in France, even if I were myself French.
Except that the PC left sees blackface everywhere, there was not even blackface in the Aeschylus play (The Suppliants) the activists prevented from being played, just some colour masks. However, a rehearsal photo showed an actor with some brown make-up hence triggering the outrage professionals.
https://www.franceculture.fr/emissions/Eschyle-et-le-Blackface (https://www.franceculture.fr/emissions/Eschyle-et-le-Blackface)
QuoteEn l'occurrence c'est l'image d'une répétition affichée sur le site de la Sorbonne qui a déclenché la tempête. Pour cette pièce qui avait été jouée l'année dernière, provoquant déjà quelques remous, le metteur en scène Philippe Brunet a voulu marquer l'opposition entre les grecs d'Argos supposés plus ou moins blancs et les Danaïdes d'Égypte à la peau plus noire. Dans la tradition du théâtre antique, il a symbolisé cette distinction d'ethnies géographiques et non pas raciales avec des masques. Mais lors de la répétition, et sur la photo diffusée par la Sorbonne, c'est une comédienne blanche recouverte d'une peinture cuivrée qui apparaît. À partir de là, la discussion s'arrête.
This is what they censored in the name of anti-racism:
(https://cdn.radiofrance.fr/s3/cruiser-production/2019/03/2ac7db98-98f7-4e0c-b47b-19f198194d03/838_xvmd8517ee8-4ff2-11e9-9ce1-ffe89d242802.webp)
Post-modern treatment of a classic? Maybe, but that's not reason to censor it by bullying the actors.
So not D.W Griffith's Birth of a Nation.
Lastly, those French-speaking activists use actually the English word which shows how much their outrage is fake since imported from the US. Le
grimage (French word) has no such history in France. It's simply old-fashioned and has fallen in disuse.
Quote from: Zoupa on April 18, 2019, 11:44:18 AM
^_^ A la fin de l'envoi, il touche
I always loved Cyrano :)
Quote from: dps on April 18, 2019, 12:46:29 PM
Quote from: Duque de Bragança on April 18, 2019, 09:31:21 AM
Quote from: Valmy on April 18, 2019, 09:18:54 AM
Quote from: garbon on April 18, 2019, 09:15:58 AM
I like how racist actions are only US concepts. :lol:
Or ethnic or religious based nationalism. I certainly wish those were only US concepts.
My point was that Blackface, specifically the current obsession about it and Identity politics were US concepts, from the US PC left.
Nice strawmen by the both of you though! :)
I'm neither PC nor on the left, and even I see a problem with blackface. If I were a black man, I don't think I'd be less bothered by a white guy in blackface if the white guy happened to be a Frenchman in France, even if I were myself French.
Well, what I find silly is the insistance on reinventing every historical or existing fictional character as black or gay. That gets really annoying. Just because the opposite has been done in the past, does not mean it's "super great" now to blacken characters. But, frankly, if you want to make a movie about a black transexual Alexander the Great, I'd likely not watch it, as opposed to send death threats to the producers.
We know that all historical characters were lily white. And even fictional ones!
https://www.theguardian.com/film/2010/dec/17/white-supremacists-boycott-thor
Quote from: viper37 on April 18, 2019, 02:19:48 PM
Quote from: dps on April 18, 2019, 12:46:29 PM
Quote from: Duque de Bragança on April 18, 2019, 09:31:21 AM
But, frankly, if you want to make a movie about a black transexual Alexander the Great, I'd likely not watch it, as opposed to send death threats to the producers.
So there's a chance you'd send death threats? :hmm:
Quote from: garbon on April 18, 2019, 03:04:49 PM
We know that all historical characters were lily white. And even fictional ones!
https://www.theguardian.com/film/2010/dec/17/white-supremacists-boycott-thor
No but there do exist other people besides Nordic people and subsaharan Africans to. Of course Thor is literally a part of Nordic culture so that is a historical context.
Quote from: Valmy on April 18, 2019, 04:41:46 PM
Quote from: garbon on April 18, 2019, 03:04:49 PM
We know that all historical characters were lily white. And even fictional ones!
https://www.theguardian.com/film/2010/dec/17/white-supremacists-boycott-thor
No but there do exist other people besides Nordic people and subsaharan Africansto
Name one.
Xerxes. He was also a giant BDSM enthusiast.
Quote from: Valmy on April 18, 2019, 04:46:41 PM
Xerxes. He was also a giant BDSM enthusiast.
A good point well made.
I will observe that Thor the comic book hero is about as Nordic as Black Panther the comic book hero is African.
Quote from: The Brain on April 18, 2019, 04:49:19 PM
I will observe that Thor the comic book hero is about as Nordic as Black Panther the comic book hero is African.
So extremely authentic?
Quote from: Valmy on April 18, 2019, 04:51:30 PM
Quote from: The Brain on April 18, 2019, 04:49:19 PM
I will observe that Thor the comic book hero is about as Nordic as Black Panther the comic book hero is African.
So extremely authentic?
:yes:
Quote from: Valmy on April 18, 2019, 04:41:46 PM
Quote from: garbon on April 18, 2019, 03:04:49 PM
We know that all historical characters were lily white. And even fictional ones!
https://www.theguardian.com/film/2010/dec/17/white-supremacists-boycott-thor
No but there do exist other people besides Nordic people and subsaharan Africans to. Of course Thor is literally a part of Nordic culture so that is a historical context.
Idris did a terrible job.
Quote from: garbon on April 18, 2019, 05:04:18 PM
Quote from: Valmy on April 18, 2019, 04:41:46 PM
Quote from: garbon on April 18, 2019, 03:04:49 PM
We know that all historical characters were lily white. And even fictional ones!
https://www.theguardian.com/film/2010/dec/17/white-supremacists-boycott-thor
No but there do exist other people besides Nordic people and subsaharan Africans to. Of course Thor is literally a part of Nordic culture so that is a historical context.
Idris did a terrible job.
Fuck you. Your family came on the Gayflower and you don't appreciate The Hunk?
Idris had nothing to work with. Nothing! You try playing a glorified receptionist in a silly costume.
Is there room in your heart for two man-crushes?
Quote from: Admiral Yi on April 18, 2019, 05:13:32 PM
Is there room in your heart for two man-crushes?
I think so.
Besides, Dolph is getting long in the tooth.
Quote from: garbon on April 18, 2019, 05:04:18 PM
Quote from: Valmy on April 18, 2019, 04:41:46 PM
Quote from: garbon on April 18, 2019, 03:04:49 PM
We know that all historical characters were lily white. And even fictional ones!
https://www.theguardian.com/film/2010/dec/17/white-supremacists-boycott-thor
No but there do exist other people besides Nordic people and subsaharan Africans to. Of course Thor is literally a part of Nordic culture so that is a historical context.
Idris did a terrible job.
That's why the Libyans overthrew him.
Read on Twitter:
Re: the cause of the fire, no one knows, but Quasimodo has a hunch.
I prefer the humpback of Notre Dame.