Rebuilding the Notre Dame Spire: Proposed New Desings

Feb 2019
936
Serbia
Since the spire of the Notre Dame has collapsed in the recent fire the French Prime Minister E. Phillipe has announced that an international competition will be held that would give the cathedral “a spire suited to the techniques and challenges of our time”.
It is said that the building will be rebuilt in the time span of 5-6 years. It is unknown how much money would be required to repair the damage done by the fire but so far investors have raised 880 million euros.

France announces contest to redesign Notre Dame spire

The proposed new designs are interesting, I doubt the necessity of an international competition and so many designs but it still worth looking into.

The magazine Dezeen lists 7 of them: Seven alternative spires for Notre-Dame Cathedral

What are your thoughts on the proposed designs? Should the spire be restored to what it was before, should it be changed or should an entire new building be constructed in its place? In my opinion it should be restored to what it was before, I do not like the idea of changing such an old building in such a way and I do not like modern architecture.

That being said: What are your thoughts?
 
  • Like
Reactions: Futurist

Edratman

Forum Staff
Feb 2009
6,708
Eastern PA
It is a spire on a 800 year old building. Something that appears similar to the collapsed spire is the correct choice, a design that does not scream "Designed by.......".
 
  • Like
Reactions: Futurist
Oct 2017
139
South Australia
In my opinion it should be restored to what it was before, I do not like the idea of changing such an old building in such a way and I do not like modern architecture.
I agree whole-heartedly. That building is a beautiful historical artefact, and it shouldn't be tampered with. It's like someone suggesting we put make-up on Mona Lisa.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Futurist

Linschoten

Ad Honoris
Aug 2010
16,212
Welsh Marches
All architects' vanity projects that call attention to the new addition and away from the old cathedral; Viollet-le-Duc's restorations were not always historically authentic but they alwyas harmonized perfectly with the old structure, and that is what is required here, and I'm sure wikk be provided in the end. Although some pretty awful buildings have been put up in Paris since the war.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Futurist

tomar

Ad Honoris
Jan 2011
13,909
Just like with the Louvre pyramid , its a good bet it'll end up being something modern, probably with a significant amount of glass

 
  • Like
Reactions: Futurist
Feb 2019
936
Serbia
Just like with the Louvre pyramid , its a good bet it'll end up being something modern, probably with a significant amount of glass

Speaking of glass I think the proposal with a stained glass roof and spire might look pretty good and complement the building. However some others like the one with ''electrified balls'' extending from the cathedral are just unnecessary and out of place. The glass reconstruction might actually be good.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Futurist

botully

Ad Honorem
Feb 2011
3,546
Amelia, Virginia, USA
I agree whole-heartedly. That building is a beautiful historical artefact, and it shouldn't be tampered with. It's like someone suggesting we put make-up on Mona Lisa.
That’s one way of looking at it. Some would restore the damaged portions as close to original as possible, even using original methods where practical.
Or we could restore the original appearance as closely as possible, using modern materials and methods. I favor this view. I think a “living” building can be updated and improved, these changes then becoming part of the building’s history. In 800 years, steel trusses will be seen as quaint as oak beams do to us. The building will and has been updated in many respects regardless; wiring, plumbing, handicap access and such, fire suppression systems etc.
 
Oct 2017
139
South Australia
That’s one way of looking at it. Some would restore the damaged portions as close to original as possible, even using original methods where practical.
Or we could restore the original appearance as closely as possible, using modern materials and methods. I favor this view. I think a “living” building can be updated and improved, these changes then becoming part of the building’s history. In 800 years, steel trusses will be seen as quaint as oak beams do to us. The building will and has been updated in many respects regardless; wiring, plumbing, handicap access and such, fire suppression systems etc.
Oh I agree with upgrading the structural elements, I only want to preserve the outward appearance. Guess those fire suppression systems didn't work hey!
 

Linschoten

Ad Honoris
Aug 2010
16,212
Welsh Marches
A glass roof would utterly wreck the lighting of the building (a crucial factor in medieval church architecture, as contributing to the numinous effect); it would also clash with the rest of the building. I don't much care for Wei's pyramiid in its context, but the Louvre is nothing particularly wonderful as architecture, but the best Gothic cathedrals are the real gold standard, and modern architects will merely make a fool of themselves if they try to compete with a building like Notre Dame so as to call attention to themselves, rather than restoring it in a way that will blend in with the old building (as was achieved in the 19th Century, and with the completion of Cologne Cathedral at the same period).
 
  • Like
Reactions: Futurist