ApolloHoax.net

Off Topic => General Discussion => Topic started by: mako88sb on April 15, 2019, 04:08:35 PM

Title: Notre Dame Cathedral fire
Post by: mako88sb on April 15, 2019, 04:08:35 PM
Was busy for most of the morning and didn't find out about this till about an hour ago. My goodness what a terrible day. I've never been there but it's devastating thinking about all the historical, irreplaceable artifacts that have been lost. Hopefully the stone structure doesn't collapse. One person they interviewed said it could take a generation to restore it to i's former self. So far no word of any lives lost so hopefully it stays that way. 
Title: Re: Notre Dame Cathedral fire
Post by: Bryanpoprobson on April 15, 2019, 04:36:04 PM
The building was being renovated but only to the tune of €4M the actual money required for the restoration was €160M the stone structure is actually eroding away. Those costs will pale into insignificance now sadly.

The Paris Firebrigade are saying the fire is impossible to put out and it may just have to burn out. Very sad,
Title: Re: Notre Dame Cathedral fire
Post by: bknight on April 15, 2019, 04:40:55 PM
Sad, indeed.
Title: Re: Notre Dame Cathedral fire
Post by: apollo16uvc on April 15, 2019, 05:14:33 PM
IT does appear the vaults right under the roof are holding up the burning Wood.
(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/D4OJzIjW0AMCid7.jpg)

If they hold, internal damage may be limited.

There is hope.
Title: Re: Notre Dame Cathedral fire
Post by: Glom on April 16, 2019, 04:35:33 AM
I think the fire is out now. At least, that's what my reading of a German headline says.
Title: Re: Notre Dame Cathedral fire
Post by: apollo16uvc on April 16, 2019, 05:45:54 AM
Current status:

Fire extuished
Roof completely gone.
Two large bell towers largely undamaged.


One vault collapsed, rest of the inside mostly intact.

Inside photos:
(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/D4On5lRWsAQJXbL.jpg:large)

(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/D4OiwvFWsAUzpwE.jpg)

(https://i.imgur.com/ecUGbdL.jpg)
Title: Re: Notre Dame Cathedral fire
Post by: gwiz on April 16, 2019, 06:09:54 AM
The photos show the damage to the interior much less than feared, but ancient buildings catching fire while renovation in progress are all too common.  Also recall the Cutty Sark fire in London in 2007, again during renovation.
Title: Re: Notre Dame Cathedral fire
Post by: apollo16uvc on April 16, 2019, 07:32:51 AM
Northen glass window appears intact. de

(https://i.imgur.com/loDGXj1.jpg)
Title: Re: Notre Dame Cathedral fire
Post by: twik on April 16, 2019, 10:02:57 AM
So tragic, but from the initial pictures of the fire I feared everything would be lost.
Title: Re: Notre Dame Cathedral fire
Post by: mako88sb on April 16, 2019, 10:08:49 AM
Yes, I felt much the same. Apparently there was enough time that most of the historical artifacts were saved.
Title: Re: Notre Dame Cathedral fire
Post by: gillianren on April 16, 2019, 11:04:01 AM
An idiot friend-of-a-friend was arguing that it wasn't really a tragedy, because something something French imperialism.  The Algerian in the group disagreed and was consistently treated as just another white guy.  After he claimed that opposing Communism was racist because most Communist countries were African, Asian, or South American--and then insisting that the USSR had been culturally Asian--he got unfriended by the guy whose friend I am.
Title: Re: Notre Dame Cathedral fire
Post by: apollo16uvc on April 16, 2019, 11:21:21 AM
Ignore those people.

The Notre Dame is human engineering ingenuity and will at its best.
It is a work of gothic and architectural art.

It has nothing to do with french imperialism, it IS world heritage.
Title: Re: Notre Dame Cathedral fire
Post by: apollo16uvc on April 16, 2019, 01:38:00 PM
The following livestream shows the work still being done by firefighters and other personell around the cathedral.



Recently it shows a statue being cut off from the building and lowered down by crane.

Title: Re: Notre Dame Cathedral fire
Post by: JayUtah on April 16, 2019, 03:43:45 PM
I'm very encouraged by reports of how much has survived.  I had the privilege of singing Mass in Notre-Dame in 1996.  Our conductor was very savvy.  We were given half an hour for private rehearsal, all the tourists having been shooed out.  He rehearsed for all of sixty seconds and then told us to go experience the cathedral without the press of the crowd.  It was sublime.  Notre-Dame de Paris is an icon of Western architecture.  It transcends all boundaries of history, politics, and religion.
Title: Re: Notre Dame Cathedral fire
Post by: JayUtah on April 16, 2019, 03:48:28 PM
Our choir in the cloister of Notre-Dame, preparing to go in for rehearsal.  And the flying buttresses.
Title: Re: Notre Dame Cathedral fire
Post by: apollo16uvc on April 16, 2019, 03:49:49 PM
Fire department of Paris has released video footage of its epic man on duty at the Notre Dame fire.

https://www.rd.nl/vandaag/buitenland/brandweer-parijs-geeft-beelden-vrij-van-blussen-notre-dame-1.1561713


Some status updates:


According to reports, firemen and people from the church have had enough time to remove many art treasures. Such as the crown of thorns and the tunic of Saint Louis

1 of the three rose windows has fallen down. The two remaining rose windows appear unharmed. Some of the minor glass windows have been destroyed, but the oldest and largest ones appear intact.

The organ appears intact.

The amount of water damage to the many paintings within the church is still unknown. The paintings are being moved to climate-controlled vaults to overview the damage.

It is uncertain how far the fire and water has damaged the structural integrity.
Title: Re: Notre Dame Cathedral fire
Post by: ka9q on April 16, 2019, 08:11:51 PM
I'm an atheist, but for me Notre Dame completely transcends religion. It's a hugely significant cultural and historical artifact that's extremely important to a lot of people, and it really hurt to see it burn. I've seen it from the outside several times but never went inside. It's an active church, and when I was there services were underway so I didn't want to just walk around snapping pictures. Now I'm sorry I never went in.

I had no idea there was so much wood in that roof structure. Hopefully it won't be rebuilt that way, or some future generation will have to watch it burn all over again. I'm not a structural or civil engineer, but it seems to me that steel could be used to support the roof, and it would be just as hidden as the wood that burned.

I was also surprised to learn that the roof was lead. I knew from our trips to Istanbul that lead is used to roof minarets in mosques, at least in that part of the world. I remember seeing large rolls of lead sheeting being used in a renovation and was surprised that would still be allowed today. I guess the same practice was followed for large Christian churches in Europe. I can only wonder where all that lead is right now. Quite a lot of it is probably in the river, with much more deposited as dust all over Paris downwind of the site.  I'm sure a suitable replacement material can be found that has the same appearance.

But rebuilding the structure is probably the easy part. It's all the stuff inside. At least much of it seems to have survived, especially the small artifacts that could be quickly removed. By all accounts that was a heroic effort. But there was probably a lot of smoke and water damage throughout the interior. Sigh. Terrible.
Title: Re: Notre Dame Cathedral fire
Post by: Peter B on April 17, 2019, 07:31:45 AM
I'm an atheist, but for me Notre Dame completely transcends religion. It's a hugely significant cultural and historical artifact that's extremely important to a lot of people, and it really hurt to see it burn.

Exactly. It's the same whether it's Notre Dame, Hagia Sophia or the Pantheon. Regardless of the reason for their beauty, we can all appreciate that beauty and regret its loss.

Quote
I had no idea there was so much wood in that roof structure. Hopefully it won't be rebuilt that way, or some future generation will have to watch it burn all over again. I'm not a structural or civil engineer, but it seems to me that steel could be used to support the roof, and it would be just as hidden as the wood that burned.

Agreed. I'd like to see it restored to how it was before the fire, even though I understand its current form has only existed since a "restoration" in the middle of the 19th century. To that extent what matters most is what people can see. (Which is what makes me roll my eyes about the Sydney Opera House, beautiful as it is: its construction was made more complex and expensive by the architect's insistence that the building's iconic sails had to be structural rather than cosmetic, a difference which is entirely invisible). If there comes a time in humanity's future when people don't care about the survival of the building, then by all means let it fall into ruin; but I think that's not likely to happen for a long time.

Quote
I was also surprised to learn that the roof was lead. I knew from our trips to Istanbul that lead is used to roof minarets in mosques, at least in that part of the world. I remember seeing large rolls of lead sheeting being used in a renovation and was surprised that would still be allowed today. I guess the same practice was followed for large Christian churches in Europe.

I understand that lead has been used for roofing since Roman times at least, which means it's likely to be common in old buildings across Europe, except for locations where slate is easily available.
Title: Re: Notre Dame Cathedral fire
Post by: Peter B on April 17, 2019, 07:47:17 AM
An idiot friend-of-a-friend was arguing that it wasn't really a tragedy, because something something French imperialism.  The Algerian in the group disagreed and was consistently treated as just another white guy.  After he claimed that opposing Communism was racist because most Communist countries were African, Asian, or South American--and then insisting that the USSR had been culturally Asian--he got unfriended by the guy whose friend I am.

Ah yes, Notre Dame was built to celebrate Napoleon's victory over the Mexicans, at the Battle of Dien Bien Phu, in the Franco-Prussian War...  ::)

And that's what frustrates me about people who have a simplistic, jingoistic view of history as conflicts between supposedly monolithic cultures/faiths. The Christchurch killer is a gruesome example, with his arsenal covered with names of battles between "Crusaders" and Muslims.

What that view misses is how complex, how messy, history can be. The current Syrian Civil War is a classic example. But one example from history I like to pull out occasionally is the 1453 Ottoman Siege of Greek Constantinople - seemingly a classical example of the clash of faiths: the Ottoman army included thousands of Christians, particularly including Serbian miners who were employed to dig under the city's wall; and the Greek defenders included a refugee Ottoman prince and his retinue who ended up fighting to the death when the city fell.
Title: Re: Notre Dame Cathedral fire
Post by: apollo16uvc on April 17, 2019, 08:25:07 AM
Some more high resolution photos that show the interior and windows before the after the fire:

https://home.bt.com/news/uk-news/british-restoration-experts-eager-to-help-resurrect-notre-dame-after-fire-11364355728890

https://www.theatlantic.com/photo/2019/04/after-fire-photos-inside-notre-dame-cathedral/587299/
Title: Re: Notre Dame Cathedral fire
Post by: gillianren on April 17, 2019, 10:30:14 AM
A former teacher of mine who's also a musician was relieved to discover that the organ was not completely destroyed.

My Catholic friends are relieved to discover the relics have been saved.

My historian friends are relieved to discover that much of the fabric of the original cathedral has been spared.

My art historian friend is relieved to discover that most of the art, and two of the three rose windows, are safe.

Everyone I talk to, it seems, has something else to be happy about!
Title: Re: Notre Dame Cathedral fire
Post by: Northern Lurker on April 17, 2019, 12:57:09 PM
Too soon? (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Adgx9wt63NY)

Lurky  :P
Title: Re: Notre Dame Cathedral fire
Post by: twik on April 17, 2019, 03:06:19 PM
Aaaand, of course, Glenn Beck announces that "if the fire was started by Islamists, you'd never be told." In other words, proof of conspiracy is that there is no evidence for it.
Title: Re: Notre Dame Cathedral fire
Post by: jfb on April 17, 2019, 05:50:33 PM
Aaaand, of course, Glenn Beck announces that "if the fire was started by Islamists, you'd never be told." In other words, proof of conspiracy is that there is no evidence for it.

The better part of that statement is that it's obviously those sneaky Mooslums that are responsible. 
Title: Re: Notre Dame Cathedral fire
Post by: gillianren on April 18, 2019, 11:36:11 AM
There are already doctored photos floating around "proving" that Muslims did it.  In one of them, the "lone man in Muslim garb" turns out to be [checks] a firefighter.
Title: Re: Notre Dame Cathedral fire
Post by: gwiz on April 19, 2019, 06:06:24 AM
I understand that lead has been used for roofing since Roman times at least, which means it's likely to be common in old buildings across Europe, except for locations where slate is easily available.
Even here in Cornwall, not far from an enormous slate pit, there is plenty of lead used.   Both modern and ancient buildings have it to fit the awkward corners that are difficult with slate.  Our local old church has a mainly slate roof, but with lead for the flat roof on the tower and for the valleys between the roof sections.
Title: Re: Notre Dame Cathedral fire
Post by: molesworth on April 19, 2019, 12:36:56 PM
I'm very encouraged by reports of how much has survived.  I had the privilege of singing Mass in Notre-Dame in 1996.  Our conductor was very savvy.  We were given half an hour for private rehearsal, all the tourists having been shooed out.  He rehearsed for all of sixty seconds and then told us to go experience the cathedral without the press of the crowd.  It was sublime.  Notre-Dame de Paris is an icon of Western architecture.  It transcends all boundaries of history, politics, and religion.
Wow!  That must have been a great experience, and a chance to enjoy the majesty of the place without the usual babble.

Like others have mentioned, I'm an atheist, but creations like Notre Dame are beyond religion, philosophy, or even science, and show us what we can achieve, if we try.
Title: Re: Notre Dame Cathedral fire
Post by: Echnaton on April 19, 2019, 04:05:27 PM
It is a great building and I am saddened by the destruction, but the Cathedral in nearby Chartres was built at the same time and is a much more spectacular building. Being outside of Paris, it doesn't have as many cultural references, but it is very much worth a visit if you have an interest in medieval architecture. 
Title: Re: Notre Dame Cathedral fire
Post by: JayUtah on May 10, 2019, 01:56:28 PM
A former teacher of mine who's also a musician was relieved to discover that the organ was not completely destroyed.

It's a very important instrument in the organ world, played by several famous organists-in-residence and important composers of French organ literature.  There are famous pieces in the literature that are essentially made to be played on that instrument specifically.  Having had the pleasure of hearing them so played, I agree with the sentiment.

My sister visited Paris later that week with her husband, but was unable to get onto the island to see the surviving structure.  I sent her to Ste.-Chapelle instead, which is every bit as breathtaking a church.
Title: Re: Notre Dame Cathedral fire
Post by: apollo16uvc on May 10, 2019, 03:31:14 PM
I do so much hope it is going to be restored to the state before the fire.
Dare I say, even with the originally designed spires on the two bell towers.

But I am afraid it is going to be made into a modern-art travesty. Today, nothing is sacred to architects.
I present a case for such fear in the following proposal:

https://edition.cnn.com/style/article/france-notre-dame-green-scli-intl/index.html
https://www.mixdexhq.com/experiential-design/foster-partners-creates-proposal-for-new-notre-dame-spire/

Vandalism of world heritage.
Title: Re: Notre Dame Cathedral fire
Post by: gillianren on May 10, 2019, 03:34:50 PM
Honestly, I think that's a lovely blending of the old and the new, and having a garden there brings it somewhat back to its medieval roots.
Title: Re: Notre Dame Cathedral fire
Post by: apollo16uvc on May 10, 2019, 03:41:22 PM
If you want to forever ruin a triumph of medieval architecture for all future generations, sure.

It is so unfortunate we do not appear capable of protecting grand art from our ancestors. Placing a maelstorm of glass barf at the location where a beautiful icon once stood IS heritage suicide.
Title: Re: Notre Dame Cathedral fire
Post by: JayUtah on May 11, 2019, 11:35:56 AM
But I am afraid it is going to be made into a modern-art travesty. Today, nothing is sacred to architects.

Well, I.M. Pei is dead, so that's a slightly less chance of Louvre 2.0.

Quote
I present a case for such fear in the following proposal:

Saw those.  Nearly threw up.
Title: Re: Notre Dame Cathedral fire
Post by: JayUtah on May 11, 2019, 11:40:01 AM
Honestly, I think that's a lovely blending of the old and the new, and having a garden there brings it somewhat back to its medieval roots.

The island has plenty of gardens surrounding the cathedral.  Or did, until they were presumably trampled by firefighters.  One of my fondest memories of Paris was sitting in the gardens eating baguettes and looking up at the awesome medieval structure.

I'm a huge fan of daring architecture.  Just not at the expense of classic architecture.  Paris has plenty of both, mostly in the right places.
Title: Re: Notre Dame Cathedral fire
Post by: JayUtah on May 11, 2019, 11:54:02 AM
If you want to forever ruin a triumph of medieval architecture for all future generations, sure.

It is so unfortunate we do not appear capable of protecting grand art from our ancestors. Placing a maelstorm of glass barf at the location where a beautiful icon once stood IS heritage suicide.

The rest of the art world emphasizes preservation of the original form and intent, often going to great lengths not only to achieve it but to make sure their efforts are fully reversible so that later curators can apply more advanced methods of preservation.  Many years ago I had the privilege of participating as a volunteer in the restoration of the portals at the Basilica di San Nicola in Bari, Italy.  I trained for two weeks in Rome to do this, under the tutelage of some of the best architectural masonry conservators in the business -- people with whom I still correspond today.  The lengths that were gone to in order to preserve without embellishment or addition were... lengthy.

In contrast, architects seem to go off the deep end in the opposite direction.  They look at conservation and restoration as a playground for their own personal artistic, social, or cultural statements.  These structures are a cultural and artistic legacy dating back centuries.  We hope to preserve them for centuries to come.  We are merely the brief custodians of them.  To subject them to our ephemeral architectural fads and fancies seems so very childish and irresponsible.
Title: Re: Notre Dame Cathedral fire
Post by: apollo16uvc on May 11, 2019, 03:27:45 PM
Awesome how you've worked on restoration work.

Exactly my thoughts: To have some contemporary piece, dreamed by the whims of a short-sighted architect, is not getting the point.

This is not something that will last a few years, and eventually be bulldozed for the next "art" piece: Its something that should be able to preserve the cathedral from harm of the elements for centuries, and do this with style.

Really, I think having a global callout to architects to make proposals will just get you people who want to put there name on some list. And be able to say: "I put my art on the Notre Dame!", so they can fit in some elite group of established artists that put their modern art somewhere memorable.

They want to be "Bold" and "Challenging", "Modern" but it shows their shortsightedness.

Would a glass roof as seen in the proposals even be fit to survive centuries of the elements? They simply haven't been around long enough for us to know.
I wonder how they are going to remove the partially melted scaffolding, its collapse could seriously damage the remaining bulkheads.
How can they determine where to start in such an unstable and complex structure?
Title: Re: Notre Dame Cathedral fire
Post by: Peter B on May 12, 2019, 12:23:25 AM
I do so much hope it is going to be restored to the state before the fire.
Dare I say, even with the originally designed spires on the two bell towers.

But I am afraid it is going to be made into a modern-art travesty. Today, nothing is sacred to architects.
I present a case for such fear in the following proposal:

https://edition.cnn.com/style/article/france-notre-dame-green-scli-intl/index.html
https://www.mixdexhq.com/experiential-design/foster-partners-creates-proposal-for-new-notre-dame-spire/

Vandalism of world heritage.

I assume those designs are more about the architects promoting themselves than any expectation of winning the design competition.

But keep in mind any project to restore the building to what it was pre-fire means restoring it to an appearance it's had only since the middle of the 19th century...
Title: Re: Notre Dame Cathedral fire
Post by: JayUtah on May 12, 2019, 01:46:18 PM
I assume those designs are more about the architects promoting themselves than any expectation of winning the design competition.

That's a reasonable assumption.  But it's sad that those are the designs that show up in the media.  I blame news aggregators that err on the side of click-bait.

Quote
But keep in mind any project to restore the building to what it was pre-fire means restoring it to an appearance it's had only since the middle of the 19th century...

A very good point.  The cherished image of the roof and spire was really from the 19th century.  It's therefore legitimate to ask what is so sacred about that particular epoch of the cathedral's appearance, that it should be the restoration target.  And one answer could be that it's the form that has been cherished for 150 years.  If the goal of restoration is to recover and sustain that feeling, then stick with what is known to work.  Gambling that the world will form the same degree of appreciation for a modern statement or a green statement or any sort of "statement" is a terrible waste.  Don't make a statement.  Respect the existing aesthetic, because that's what people came to love.

I'm not a purist when it comes to structure.  Saying it ought to look the same as at some point in the past is not the same as saying it should be built the same way.  I don't endorse cutting down an entire forest to recreate the massive timbers that were lost in the fire.  If we have to hide a high-tech framework of, say, aluminum space frames between the vault and the roof in order to preserve the structure for the next hundred years, and support a new lightweight-but-heavy-looking roof, I would approve of that.  The fact is many of these ancient structures need a little help, and we're getting better and better at hiding necessary structural remedies.

If the fire is to be treated as a lemons-to-lemonade exercise, then I still see little reason why a trendy, ephemeral re-imagining should be indicated.  People point to the Centre Pompidou as a modern design that was originally hated but then came to be loved.  Yes, and now it's considered architecturally passe.  It's a quaint colloquial expression of a certain 1980s aesthetic that impresses no one today.  A better architectural challenge, in my opinion, would be to attempt to recreate the form as originally designed.  It would be an homage to the original artisans and architects.

I poked fun earlier at I.M. Pei.  He's the one who put that gawdawful pyramid in the middle of the Louvre.  We have to keep in mind this was an expansion, not a restoration.  The original construction of the Louvre could not accommodate the press of visitors, so additional space was needed.  The fear was that an annex would never match the style and grandeur of the palace.  So Pei shoved all the service space underground, leaving only a single entrance.  And he deliberately separated that structure both spatially and stylistically from the rest of the building.  And it is still controversial.  The justification given was that Pei could design no structure for access to the subterranean spaces that would duplicate or harmonize with the existing palace.  That's debatable, but it's probable that Pei couldn't -- that wasn't his style.  Notre Dame is not an expansion.  No additional space is needed.  We're recovering from a disaster, not extending the space to accommodate new needs.

I think a better design analogy is Sagrada Familia, in Barcelona.  Gaudi didn't finish the design.  But that doesn't stop modern architects devoted to Gaudi's inimitable style from imitating it and fleshing out the cathedral in a manner that expresses a whole aesthetic.  There is no reason today's architects can't do similar.  They reach for trendy modernism and deliberately controversial clashes because that's what some architects do.
Title: Re: Notre Dame Cathedral fire
Post by: JayUtah on May 16, 2019, 08:40:11 PM
Well, I.M. Pei is dead...

Okay, now I.M. Pei is dead.
Title: Re: Notre Dame Cathedral fire
Post by: ka9q on May 16, 2019, 11:11:58 PM
Wasn't the Eiffel Tower also hated at first by the Parisians?
Title: Re: Notre Dame Cathedral fire
Post by: JayUtah on May 17, 2019, 02:00:04 AM
Wasn't the Eiffel Tower also hated at first by the Parisians?
And by Gustav Eiffel.  The reason he had his office at the top of the tower was, in his words, because it was the only place in Paris from which he couldn't see that damned tower.
Title: Re: Notre Dame Cathedral fire
Post by: bknight on May 17, 2019, 09:24:51 AM
Wasn't the Eiffel Tower also hated at first by the Parisians?
And by Gustav Eiffel.  The reason he had his office at the top of the tower was, in his words, because it was the only place in Paris from which he couldn't see that damned tower.

Now that makes perfect sense to me.
Title: Re: Notre Dame Cathedral fire
Post by: bknight on May 17, 2019, 10:38:27 AM
Well, I.M. Pei is dead...

Okay, now I.M. Pei is dead.

I didn't get that one until this morning when it was announced on my TV program.  :-[
Title: Re: Notre Dame Cathedral fire
Post by: JayUtah on May 17, 2019, 11:39:29 AM
I'm just embarrassed not to have known he was still alive.  It pays to fact-check even in the seemingly unimportant details.
Title: Re: Notre Dame Cathedral fire
Post by: Peter B on May 18, 2019, 03:26:55 AM
The cherished image of the roof and spire was really from the 19th century.  It's therefore legitimate to ask what is so sacred about that particular epoch of the cathedral's appearance, that it should be the restoration target.  And one answer could be that it's the form that has been cherished for 150 years.  If the goal of restoration is to recover and sustain that feeling, then stick with what is known to work.  Gambling that the world will form the same degree of appreciation for a modern statement or a green statement or any sort of "statement" is a terrible waste.  Don't make a statement.  Respect the existing aesthetic, because that's what people came to love.

Yep. The outcry from the public was because something we love has been destroyed. That immediately suggests that what most people wanted is for it to be restored to what it was pre-fire. I don't think I've heard anyone express gratefulness for the fire because now we can turn Notre Dame into something...different...better...
Title: Re: Notre Dame Cathedral fire
Post by: Peter B on May 18, 2019, 03:45:31 AM
And here's an article discussing exactly these issues - architects coming up with (noticeably similar to me) designs for the "restoration" of Notre Dame, the appropriateness of strongly interventionist restoration, how restoration could/should be performed, and who gets to decide: https://www.abc.net.au/news/2019-05-18/notre-dame-spire-design-competition-for-the-ages/11110218
Title: Re: Notre Dame Cathedral fire
Post by: apollo16uvc on May 18, 2019, 04:59:23 PM
The roof is going to be a monstrosity.
Title: Re: Notre Dame Cathedral fire
Post by: ka9q on May 21, 2019, 03:00:02 PM
Speaking of I. M. Pei, I believe MIT people refer to one of their buildings as the "Pei Toilet" because of its appearance and designer.