Notre Dame is burning.

[Crumpets]

https://twitter.com/pegobry/status/1117930698567032832

^^^Hero

[I spent the winter writing songs about getting better]

https://twitter.com/BarackObama/status/1117886698568830976?s=19

[Illiniwek]

https://twitter.com/pegobry/status/1117930698567032832

^^^Hero

thank you so much to this Father.

[muon2]

What a tragic scene. I regret that during the hubbub of Holy Week in 2013 I did not take the extra time to go inside. I will have to rely on my memories of the interior from my visit in Jan 1992, one of the most compelling spaces I've been in.

For now I will salute those memories by opening and enjoying a snifter or two of Hine rare VSOP Cognac.

[afleitch]

Told you the stone vaulted ceiling would offer protection The fire was clearly ripping through the ceiling void and the wood. The fire service doused it with the right intensity to not bring it down further but no doubt the whole stone vault will need to be secured internally if it's been warped by the heat.

It's still a five year plus restoration at least but much less damage than was feared.

[afleitch]

And, outing myself further as an architectural geek, while the stained glass has been saved it may have internally shattered as happened with York Minster, so they'll need to check that out first and secure it with adhesive plastic before removal.

[MASHED POTATOES. VOTE!]

This is absolutely terrible, but it looks like it won't be as catastrophic as originally predicted. They seemed to be indicating they thought the whole structure would be lost just two hours ago. Losing the spires and the stain-glassed windows is a huge blow, though. Very sad, but thankfully the structure as a whole has survived.

I wonder if wouldn't it be better, due to impossibility of reconstructing the interior without it reeking artificiality, to turn the renovated cathedral into some sort of museum. Just a thought.

Why would it seem artificial? So many churches have burned down over the centuries and have been rebuilt perfectly and beautifully. Turning it into a museum means accepting to close the chapter on this church and, by extension, on Paris' and France's Christian identity. Which would seem completely unacceptable to me. In that case, it would not just be a metaphor for European civilization burning (fully expecting this to be deleted again) - it would literally be that.

You're right. It's important for such symbols to endure. While writting this post I've been under the impression the interior is completely lost and forgot about long history of rebuilding ruined landmarks.

If the Warsaw Cathedral of St. John was destroyed (it already was destroyed once, in 1944), I most likely wouldn't entertain any other thought than rebuilding.

Did the communist government of Poland drag their feet over rebuilding the Warsaw Cathedral of St. John?

Interestingly the St. John's Archcathedral (forgot to mention it's an archcathedral) was reconstructed rather quickly, between 1948 and 1956.

It was the Warsaw Royal Castle that was only rebuilt in the 70s.


By the way, speaking of remaining structures here's the Old Town Market after liberation:



And currently:




Sorry for an ocassional polishposting. Not trying to hijack the thread.

[DavidB.]

Did the communist government of Poland drag their feet over rebuilding the Warsaw Cathedral of St. John?

Communist governments have often done a better job at rebuilding cities in their old state following WW2 than Western governments. Think about the implications of that.

[MASHED POTATOES. VOTE!]

Did the communist government of Poland drag their feet over rebuilding the Warsaw Cathedral of St. John?

Communist governments have often done a better job at rebuilding cities in their old state following WW2 than Western governments. Think about the implications of that.

Well, after the war most of Soviet-backed governments in Eastern Europe were trying very hard to pretend they're not "really that communist" (hell, Bierut's membership in the PPR was kept "secret" for some time). There still was the illusion of honest elections to follow and maintaining full sovereignty, which was especially evident in Poland. Dragging one's feet over rebuilding Warsaw would be too risky, even though many commies really preferred to just start over in Łódź, as much easier to control among other things. The idea of rebuilding the capital was just too important to the millions.

[Filuwaúrdjan]

And, outing myself further as an architectural geek, while the stained glass has been saved it may have internally shattered as happened with York Minster, so they'll need to check that out first and secure it with adhesive plastic before removal.

Yes, it shouldn't be assumed that the glass that has survived will be in a good way, or that any restoration required on the glass will be quick (it certainly wasn't at York Minister). But I'm - is it possible to have bittersweet delight? - that any survived at all, let alone a decent proportion (it seems). The extent to which the building protected itself (as you say, vaulting in a cathedral isn't just there because it is extremely pretty) is remarkable.

[Chunk Yogurt for President!]

I'm glad I got to see it when I did.

[Crumpets]

Told you the stone vaulted ceiling would offer protection The fire was clearly ripping through the ceiling void and the wood. The fire service doused it with the right intensity to not bring it down further but no doubt the whole stone vault will need to be secured internally if it's been warped by the heat.

It's still a five year plus restoration at least but much less damage than was feared.

Those 13th century stonemasons who designed and built that vault deserve a sainthood, and I'm only barely joking. Their work has saved so much for their church, country, and God.

[ilikeverin]

Thanks to all the architecture nerds here providing some much-needed perspective *hughughug*

[Sestak]

So actually all three of the main rose windows appear to have survived.

[Meclazine for Israel]

Remarkable:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TfNHaBeirYc

If the spire fell on the walls, it may have been a different story.

The way the fire looked on the news, that is a great result.

$1 Billion dollars in donations should get some nice new bench seats.

[PSOL]

So actually all three of the main rose windows appear to have survived.

Yay 💥 🎈 🧁

[Blue3]

What was lost and what survived
https://www.nbcnews.com/news/europe/what-was-lost-what-survived-devastating-notre-dame-fire-n995026


Saved
The Crown of Thorns was recovered when Paris fire chaplain Jean-Marc Fournier accompanied firefighters into the burning cathedral to recover the ancient relic, said Philippe Goujon, mayor of Paris' 15th District.

The artifact, which was brought to Paris by King Louis IX in the 13th century, is purported to have been pressed on to Jesus' head during the crucifixion.


A priest wipes the Crown of Thorns, a relic housed at Notre Dame Cathedral in Paris, in April 2017.Philippe Lopez / AFP/Getty Images file
Le Grand Orgue, or "the great organ," and its 8,000 pipes also survived, authorities said. The instrument, which dates to the 1730s, was constructed by Francois Thierry.

The organ is "a very fragile instrument, especially its pipes," according to Bertrand de Feydeau, vice president of the preservation group Fondation du Patrimoine.

"It has not burnt, but no one can tell whether it has been damaged by water. Nobody knows if it is (in) a functioning state or will need to be restored," de Feydeau said.


Philippe Lefebvre plays the organ at Notre Dame Cathedral in Paris in May 2013.Christophe Ena / AP file
A famed piece of stained glass known as the South Rose window also survived, as did the Tunic of Saint Louis, a long, shirt-like garment from the 13th century, officials said.

"The crown of thorns, the tunic of St. Louis and many other major artifacts are now in a safe place," Paris Mayor Anne Hidalgo tweeted, thanking first responders for their work in saving the treasures.

Sixteen copper statues of saints that could have been in harm's way Monday had been removed just days earlier as part of the restoration efforts.

[...]


Sorry, but had to modify this due to the "copyright violation" rule - K.

[AndyHogan14]

Couldn't some other countries donate the wood necessary to rebuild the roof if France does not have the requisite number of trees?

[Meclazine for Israel]

Great post Blue.

[True Federalist (진정한 연방 주의자)]

Couldn't some other countries donate the wood necessary to rebuild the roof if France does not have the requisite number of trees?

Given modern forestry practices, the only oaks likely to be of the requisite size to rebuild the roof exactly as it was will be in protected areas. There also isn't any other tree suited to the task than an oak. Those that produce wood of sufficient strength don't produce beams the size of those that were in Notre Dame.

It would be possible to plant oaks and let them grow to the requisite size and age, but I think we don't want to wait until the 23rd or 24th century to rebuild the roof.

[Blue3]

Couldn't some other countries donate the wood necessary to rebuild the roof if France does not have the requisite number of trees?

Given modern forestry practices, the only oaks likely to be of the requisite size to rebuild the roof exactly as it was will be in protected areas. There also isn't any other tree suited to the task than an oak. Those that produce wood of sufficient strength don't produce beams the size of those that were in Notre Dame.

It would be possible to plant oaks and let them grow to the requisite size and age, but I think we don't want to wait until the 23rd or 24th century to rebuild the roof.

Maybe I'm weird, but hearing about this problem over the last couple days just has me daydreaming just how different Europe was back then. Even our movies and TV shows, which have tried to be historically accurate, have probably overlooked things like this. Just imagine a Europe that was covered in these giant trees less than a millennium ago.

[True Federalist (진정한 연방 주의자)]

Couldn't some other countries donate the wood necessary to rebuild the roof if France does not have the requisite number of trees?

Given modern forestry practices, the only oaks likely to be of the requisite size to rebuild the roof exactly as it was will be in protected areas. There also isn't any other tree suited to the task than an oak. Those that produce wood of sufficient strength don't produce beams the size of those that were in Notre Dame.

It would be possible to plant oaks and let them grow to the requisite size and age, but I think we don't want to wait until the 23rd or 24th century to rebuild the roof.

Maybe I'm weird, but hearing about this problem over the last couple days just has me daydreaming just how different Europe was back then. Even our movies and TV shows, which have tried to be historically accurate, have probably overlooked things like this. Just imagine a Europe that was covered in these giant trees less than a millennium ago.

Yup. A major reason why Britain turned to coal in the 17th century was that the island was suffering a shortage of charcoal due to overuse of the forests. For most purposes, charcoal is superior to the coal found in Britain.

[Atlas Has Shrugged]

In other (kinda) unrelated news, a man with two gas canisters was arrested in NYC trying to enter Saint Patrick’s Cathedral.

[Filuwaúrdjan]

Just imagine a Europe that was covered in these giant trees less than a millennium ago.

It wasn't though. The approximate balance between farmland and woodland has been roughly the same in most of Western Europe since the Bronze Age (with a degree of fluctuation over time) and woods have been managed environments throughout the period. 'Wildwood' disappeared a long, long time ago: we don't even really know what it would have looked like. What is true is that the spread of modern Prussian forestry methods (as opposed to the traditional irregular systems of timber trees here, and coppices for wood there etc.) from the late 18th century has resulted in more uniformity within woodlands and in considerably less very old trees than would otherwise be the case* - but very old European broadleaf trees of any species are generally not suitable for use as timber trees!

_{*I think a majority of trees over a certain age in all of Western Europe are in just one country; i.e. Britain.}

[Filuwaúrdjan]

Yup. A major reason why Britain turned to coal in the 17th century was that the island was suffering a shortage of charcoal due to overuse of the forests. For most purposes, charcoal is superior to the coal found in Britain.

No, completely untrue. Old (and self-evidently ridiculous if you know anything about charcoal production) myth.