Yorkie wrote: ↑<span title="Fri Apr 19, 2019 12:25 pm">5 years ago</span>
filiarheni wrote: ↑<span title="Wed Apr 17, 2019 8:13 pm">5 years ago</span>
No rebuilding will ever restore such a cathedral to the same way the destroyed building had been before. It then lacks the very impressive atmosphere of completely having been constructed and equipped by people long, very long ago and the connection to this far-away time that it brings. This is very special, at least for me.
I don't think that is true - if you use the same materials with people trained in traditional techniques it is indistinguishable from the original. Honestly, when they repaired the fire at York Minster they used the exact same materials as the original builders. Yes, they had power tools and cranes but they made it the same - you honestly can't tell. And let's be honest, every cathedral has been repaired and modernised and changed over the years - even Notre Dame. The spire and much of the glass were 19th century additions.
If they do it right (and Padma's post does give cause for concern) then I honestly think it will be as good as new.
What I meant is the magic an original radiates. It's about the feeling, not the look. A cathedral can be rebuilt with the same material, with the traditional techniques and it can turn out like the original. But it's this:
like the original. A copy will always remain a copy. It's like having a handwriting of a composer or a sculpture or a painting: It can be copied, but it lacks the fascination that the artist actually made this. A rebuilt cathedral will be unique again, but the fascinating of the original building was for instance that the former people managed to do so with the techniques and the knowledge available at that time. Last year I visited Florence, where you find Michelangelo's David twice, the original and a copy. The copy was totally uninteresting to me, while I spent infinite time with the original ... and it was not due to the fact that there were both available.
You are correct that cathedrals change in multiple ways, however, that is done carefully and step by step, not as radical as it's needed after a big fire. There is a grown connection over the centuries, it's all joined together. And each piece added for the first time is an original itself and when it gets destroyed and is copied by someone else, well, then it's a copy. It may be less important for others. But for me it does make a difference; it causes the largest part of my awe and inspiration, when I stand before a work of art. As a quotation in the below-mentioned article excellently puts it: "The walls, painting and decoration are bearers of history."
For the above-mentioned reasons I will without any doubt continue to second such rebuilding, and I'll admire those too, just in a different way.
This newspaper article as of last week expresses pretty well how I feel about it:
https://translate.google.de/translate?s ... 23103.html
A sad day today.
, and since november people protest every saturday to tell how poor they are... It is sickening in my opinion.
