Discussion: View Thread

A VERY SAD DAY FOR ARCHITECTURE

  • 1.  A VERY SAD DAY FOR ARCHITECTURE

    Posted 04-15-2019 18:04
    I have been devastated watching television coverage of the burning of Notre Dame Cathedral in Paris today.  We, as Architects, need to take time out from our everyday practices and from our political and ethical crises and give thanks and remembrance to those believers, those artisans, those constructors, and, yes, the Master Builders we now refer to as Architects, that caused this wonderful architectural icon to be constructed over a period of 200 years and to continue to exist for the next 700 years.  It was an architectural masterpiece that had so much influence on so many lives, whether religious or secular, whether architects or non-architects... now gone gone up in smoke and ashes...  I pray it can and will be resurrected some day.  It's difficult to imagine how many more generations will pass before it's once again standing proudly in the center of Paris but I'm confident it will be.  Sadly, though, I know it will not be in my lifetime...

    ------------------------------
    Jess Holmes, FAIA
    Artesia, NM
    ------------------------------


  • 2.  RE: A VERY SAD DAY FOR ARCHITECTURE

    Posted 04-16-2019 07:24
    The fire is tragic beyond words, as is the significance of the building. Nevertheless, here's a try, published not long ago.

    It's a Book. It's a Building. It's a Behavioral Intervention!
    Common Edge remove preview
    It's a Book. It's a Building. It's a Behavioral Intervention!
    A few years ago, while visiting, or rather exploring, Notre-Dame, the author of this book found, in an obscure corner of one of the towers, this word carved upon the wall: These Greek characters, black with age, and cut deep into the stone with the peculiarities of form and arrangement common to Gothic calligraphy that marked them the work of some hand in the Middle Ages, and above all the sad and mournful meaning which they expressed, forcibly impressed the author .
    View this on Common Edge >


    ------------------------------
    Richard Buday FAIA
    Archimage, Inc.
    Houston TX
    ------------------------------



  • 3.  RE: A VERY SAD DAY FOR ARCHITECTURE

    Posted 04-17-2019 17:24

    Does anyone think that the AIA and/or the College of Fellows should collect a contribution to the reconstruction of Notre Dame. On one level, this is clearly getting extraordinary support from multi-billionaires and agencies across the globe (that would suggest we could focus on less popular fundraising) on the other hand, this is an architectural treasure.

     

    Kate Diamond FAIA, LEED AP

    Design Director

    HDR

    350 S. Grand Avenue
    Suite 2900
    D (213) 395-7274 M (213) 359-7777

    kate.diamond@hdrinc.com

     

     






  • 4.  RE: A VERY SAD DAY FOR ARCHITECTURE

    Posted 04-18-2019 07:18
    Thank you, Katherine, for your suggestion, one which which I've spent much time contemplating, as well.  I would think it unconscionable if the AIA and the College of Fellows did not contribute in some way, whether in talent and expertise or in financial contribution, or a combination of all three.  I've heard the estimates of the cost of reconstruction and it is completely overwhelming; the last I've heard was upward of $8 Billion... staggering.  Unless I miss my guess, there's no way the Institute or the College can make a dent in that number.  But if every member of the AIA would donate at least $10, that would amount to over a half million dollars, or $5.5 Million if we each contributed $100; a drop in the bucket for what they will need but significant amounts none-the-less.  That would be a very small price to pay to help the citizens of France restore and re-build one of the world's treasures and give back to the world.  I think we, as Architects and members of the Institute and the College, owe at least that much or more to architectural and cultural heritage, to say nothing of the good will we, as American Architects, can and should offer to the world.  So... count me in... 


    --
    In GOD We Trust
    and GOD Bless America...

    Jess Holmes, FAIA, LLC
    consulting architect/planner
    524 W. Main. Street
    Artesia, NM  88210
    575.736.8620
    575.736.8621 (fax)
    575.748.5207 (Cell)





  • 5.  RE: A VERY SAD DAY FOR ARCHITECTURE

    Posted 04-19-2019 18:11
    Donations from AIA and the College of Fellows is a great idea and absolutely appropriate. Count me in as a donor.

    Lionel Morrison FAIA
    MORRISON DILWORTH + WALLS
    972 688 3351 office
    214 356 0049 mobile




  • 6.  RE: A VERY SAD DAY FOR ARCHITECTURE

    Posted 04-18-2019 17:25
    All

    Architects helping sounds logical and wise. Our counterpart in France is Societe Francaise des Architectes. It seems best if the contact comes from AIA National.

    Nick Peckham, FAIA
    Peckham Architecture, LLC
    2009 North Country Club Drive
    Columbia, MO 65201

    573-777-4444 (o)
    573-489-0901 (m)
    nick@peckhamarchitecture.com




  • 7.  RE: A VERY SAD DAY FOR ARCHITECTURE

    Posted 04-19-2019 07:13
    If nothing else, there should be an offer of assistance in some fashion from the AIA.  Hopefully that's in process as we speak of it here on the COF Digest.  

    --







  • 8.  RE: A VERY SAD DAY FOR ARCHITECTURE

    Posted 04-18-2019 17:34
    I know, I'm conflicted as well.  However, I think of other worthy buildings like MacIntosh's Glasgow School of Art or two Louis Sullivan buildings in Chicago falling to the flames in recent years.  Rather than (only) money, the AIA should foster dialogue on how these disastrous events shape our relationship with our cultural heritage through architectural icons. 
    ________________
    ROBERT P. THEEL | FAIA
    CHIEF ARCHITECT | 
    GREAT LAKES
     REGION
    DIRECTOR |
     PROJECT PROGRAMS DIVISION
        
    U.S. GENERAL SERVICES ADMINISTRATION
    PUBLIC BUILDINGS SERVICE | CHICAGO, IL
    312.353.1445 (O)   |  312.339.0573 (M)






  • 9.  RE: A VERY SAD DAY FOR ARCHITECTURE

    Posted 04-18-2019 17:47
    Dear Katherine
    I think it would be a wonderful gesture  if AIA/FAIA could make a contribution to the building fund for the reasons you stated.
    Count me in.
    Best
    Jan
    Jan Wampler, FAIA
    Distinguished Professor, ACSA
    Markborough Endowed Professor, USF
    Professor of Architecture, Emeritus, MIT
    Jan Wampler Studio  Architecture/Urban Design
    Office 617 253 7904
    Cell     617 763 4908
    wampler@mit.edu

     

     






  • 10.  RE: A VERY SAD DAY FOR ARCHITECTURE

    Posted 04-18-2019 22:43
    yes





  • 11.  RE: A VERY SAD DAY FOR ARCHITECTURE

    Posted 04-18-2019 23:05
    Yes.

    Sent from my iPhone




  • 12.  RE: A VERY SAD DAY FOR ARCHITECTURE

    Posted 04-19-2019 09:32

    Katherine.  I agree that the College should do something.  What I am trying to set up is to give half of the donations to purchase a brick at the Institute to the Rebuild Notre Dame Fund.   This is a much needed fund for the College, but I think it is important for the College to give money to the rebuilding efforts, for we are the leader of the profession.   This would be $500 given to the rebuild effort for every brick sold.   The College will take a hit on its' fund raising efforts for other programs, but this is one way to give back to the profession.

     

    John

     

     

     

     

    JRS-email-sig NEW

     






  • 13.  RE: A VERY SAD DAY FOR ARCHITECTURE

    Posted 04-19-2019 13:35

    I wonder if there is a need to take a hit on the College's Fundraising efforts? Notre Dame has a special place in every architect's heart whatever our other religion. I like the strategy of asking for $10 from all of our members and more if you can afford it. I also really like the suggestion that we coordinate with UIA and Tom V. to make this an international effort from the profession to recognize our critical heritage.

     

    Kate Diamond FAIA, LEED AP

    Design Director

    HDR

    350 S. Grand Avenue
    Suite 2900
    D (213) 395-7274 M (213) 359-7777

    kate.diamond@hdrinc.com

     

     






  • 14.  RE: A VERY SAD DAY FOR ARCHITECTURE

    Posted 04-19-2019 15:50
    Dear Katherine
    Your idea is a good one.   But surely we could afford a little more than $10.   Maybe $25?  ND is a symbol for all of us and we should do what we can to help.  It would show  unity of our profession.
    Jan

    ------------------------------
    Jan Wampler FAIA
    Jamaica Plain MA
    ------------------------------



  • 15.  RE: A VERY SAD DAY FOR ARCHITECTURE

    Posted 04-18-2019 19:16

    I understand from another colleague that the current President of the UIA, Tom Vonier, is based in both DC and Paris, and is a recent AIA President. Tom has begun the process for how to best contribute. Tom is a recent AIA President, and touching base with the AIA.

     

    UIA International Union of Architecture President Speech

    https://www.uia-architectes.org/webApi/en/news/notre-dame-de-paris.html

     

    AIA Statement

    https://www.aia.org/press-releases/6136805-aia-issues-statement-on-notre-dame-de-pari?tools=true

     



    ------------------------------
    Diane Georgopulos FAIA
    Cambridge MA
    ------------------------------



  • 16.  RE: A VERY SAD DAY FOR ARCHITECTURE

    Posted 04-25-2019 11:58
    I've become as disturbed about proposed restoration ideas as the image of Notre-Dame aflame made me. The international competition for a new spire is particularly worrisome, and it begs the question, why? Here's the clearest thinking I've yet read on the debate:

    https://commonedge.org/the-restoration-argument-respecting-viollet-le-duc-at-notre-dame/

    ------------------------------
    Richard Buday FAIA
    Archimage, Inc.
    Houston TX
    ------------------------------



  • 17.  RE: A VERY SAD DAY FOR ARCHITECTURE

    Posted 04-25-2019 12:50
    A very good and informative article, Richard.  I, too, was dismayed to hear talk of a "design competition" to replace the tower.  As much of a contemporary architect as I desire to be, I nevertheless believe that preserving cultural heritage is equally important as creating a "new" signature piece.  There are times when architectural arrogance and the desire to "make one's mark on the world" gets in the way of preserving history.  This may be one of those times.  I pray not...

    --


    Virus-free. www.avg.com





  • 18.  RE: A VERY SAD DAY FOR ARCHITECTURE

    Posted 04-25-2019 13:22

    I agree with you both.  There is no reason to redesign perfection.   The tower should be replaced in kind to reflect the period in which it was conceived and built.  There is no reason to take a ICON building and modify it with a modern twist.  Nonsense!!!  I do hope egos do not jeopardize this great building.

     

    John R. Sorrenti, FAIA

     

     

     

     

     

     

    JRS-email-sig NEW

     






  • 19.  RE: A VERY SAD DAY FOR ARCHITECTURE

    Posted 04-26-2019 17:19
    It was premature to even announce a competition.

    Jeff Oberdorfer FAIA




  • 20.  RE: A VERY SAD DAY FOR ARCHITECTURE

    Posted 04-27-2019 08:37
    I have to admit I never paid much attention to preservation until taking on a role as restoration architect for Affleck House - a deteriorating FLW Usonian in Bloomfield Hills Michigan.  I was always a Wright fan and I viewed it more as a hobby but it soon became a labor of love.  I learned a lot about Wright in that process but much more about preservation.

    Notre Dame has evolved over its life as any building approaching 900 years of age must. Most of the evolution occurred in the course of periodic restoration efforts.

    As we know, the Viollet-le-Duc spire was a replacement for the original which was removed about 50 years earlier because it had deteriorated to the point where there were fears that it would collapse. The design was not entirely original but it was authentic gothic. Viollet-le-Duc envisioned himself to be a gothic architect (as he saw it there was no other legitimate approach to design) and his spire was - as he saw it - what gothic architects would have originally done but for the fact that the technology at that time didn't allow it. Still - it was authentic to the original profile if not in detail to the original design.  What isn't commonly known is the original plan was for two spires - one each atop the towers on the west work.  Viollet-le-Duc refused, noting that while the plan would be remarkable it "would not be Notre-Dame de Paris".  Instead, he proposed rebuilding the original spire as it was consistent with the original - a restoration - a preservation as opposed to an evolution.

    While the timber necessary to reconstruct the attic likely isn't available in requisite quantities anyway, reconstructing it in that manner would not be wise. Using modern materials and current thinking in the design approach is of course appropriate. There would be no sense whatsoever in reconstructing the attic with heavy timber and wood even if it were possible because that would not limit the fire risk. This is an opportunity to rebuild in a manner that limits the possibility for future such occurrences and it should be taken of course. Therefore, while  it will never be a duplicate, it must be sensitive to and reflective of the original profile and design - not some stylized modern thing some current architect may dream up (I have seen a few sketches that make me shudder).

    I use my Affleck work as an example.  The approach was never to make an exact duplicate as that isn't possible or wise.  Steel reinforcement was added We added reinforcement when rebuilding the concrete and the masonry and also as a safety measure in the deck railings (none of it is visible of course).  All lighting was converted to LED to improve light quality and eliminate the fire risks the high wattage incandescent bulbs create (it is also "green" but I consider that a side benefit).  Extensive skylight banks were carefully disassembled and rebuilt to the original designs, modified (again without changing the appearance) to accommodate high performance insulating glass. There are a number of other examples.  The result is not a 100% duplicate but it is an aesthetic FLW created - as opposed to an aesthetic I think he should have created or an evolution from the aesthetic he created.

    As it should be

    Therein lies the rub

    The Notre Dame aesthetic, understanding that it can't be a 100% duplicate, should be a gothic aesthetic consistent with the original structure.

    With an average building perhaps there is more latitude - possibly even so with a FLW structure.  Notre Dame is different - it is the geographic and spiritual center of Paris, and the aesthetic center of the entirety of gothic architecture. As I see it, it should continue to be exactly that - and not what another Architect thinks it should be instead

    ------------------------------
    Frederick Butters, FAIA, Esq.
    Attorney at Law
    Frederick F. Butters, PLLC
    Southfield Michigan
    ------------------------------



  • 21.  RE: A VERY SAD DAY FOR ARCHITECTURE

    Posted 04-27-2019 14:14
    Well put.

    ------------------------------
    Richard Buday FAIA
    Archimage, Inc.
    Houston TX
    ------------------------------



  • 22.  RE: A VERY SAD DAY FOR ARCHITECTURE

    Posted 04-29-2019 19:24
    Well put #2.
    Doug Kelbaugh FAIA






  • 23.  RE: A VERY SAD DAY FOR ARCHITECTURE

    Posted 04-30-2019 08:35
    My thoughts exactly, Frederick Butters.  Maintain the spirit and aesthetic of the original, but with modern, safer, more durable materials and methods.  Notre Dame is not the place to express a personal style, agenda, or whim.

    ------------------------------
    Verity Frizzell, FAIA
    Principal
    Feltz & Frizzell Architects, LLC
    Point Pleasant Boro NJ
    ------------------------------



  • 24.  RE: A VERY SAD DAY FOR ARCHITECTURE

    Posted 04-29-2019 11:22
    Restore the building, to the extent possible, to its original design and materials!!!!!
    jrw




  • 25.  RE: A VERY SAD DAY FOR ARCHITECTURE

    Posted 04-29-2019 12:26

    I can't help but think about Raphael Moneo's beautiful presentation about his design for the Cathedral in Los Angeles. I am paraphrasing from memory – the essence was that "when designing a 500 year Cathedral, he wanted to embrace the idea that future generations would add their art, their marks, their changes and that the accretion of the history of use would make the cathedral more beautiful." Clearly  the Cathedral of Notre Dame deserves and requires  thoughtful restoration, but is the replication of the spire (that was itself a late addition) the only right and best answer? Responding to the tragedy of the fire with a competition to creatively explore of today's interpretation of Notre Dame's next centuries of beauty shouldn't preclude serious consideration of the straightforward replication of the lost historic structure; in my opinion it also shouldn't presume that a new solution cannot celebrate both the past and the future.  

     

    Kate Diamond FAIA, LEED AP

    Design Director

    HDR

    350 S. Grand Avenue
    Suite 2900
    D (213) 395-7274 M (213) 359-7777

    kate.diamond@hdrinc.com

     

     






  • 26.  RE: A VERY SAD DAY FOR ARCHITECTURE

    Posted 04-29-2019 17:45
    ​Nothing succeeds like excess

    Oscar Wilde

    ------------------------------
    Charles Higueras FAIA
    Project Manager
    Public Works
    City of San Francisco, CA
    ------------------------------



  • 27.  RE: A VERY SAD DAY FOR ARCHITECTURE

    Posted 04-30-2019 18:04
    I think a good design jury can decide - based on the actual entries - how retro or contemporary the winning design can be,
    Doug Kelbaugh FAIA FCNU 2016 Topaz Laureate






  • 28.  RE: A VERY SAD DAY FOR ARCHITECTURE

    Posted 04-30-2019 18:06
    This is essentially the position of the French. They are not precluding any solution and encouraging a broad discussion. Viollet-le-Duc's spire would not have necessarily passed our Secretary's of the Interior's Standards since it was an embellishment of the simpler original spire that was removed fifty years earlier. It did contribute to a revival of Gothic architecture whose emphasis on structural expression was a precursor to modernism. Is his spire giving a false sense of history or has it now been included into the period of historic significance? If the latter, will not some contemporary spire gain the same stature 150 years into the future. This assumes that this architect will be excoriated in a similar way to Viollet-le-Duc who was called "one of the biggest criminals in history" for his restoration work. 

    Jay Raskin, FAIA

    Jay Raskin Architect
    2418 SW Troy Street
    Portland, Oregon  97219
    503.440.0436









  • 29.  RE: A VERY SAD DAY FOR ARCHITECTURE

    Posted 05-02-2019 12:18
    As I outlined in an essay on Common Edge (referenced above), no one who really understands the history of Notre Dame, or restoration theory, would presume to change the work of Viollet-le-Duc at the cathedral. His work is as significant as any of the previous fabric, and he did not simply throw up a "new" flèche to replace the one destroyed during the 18c. He did research to understand what was there and restored it. All buildings must change, but UNESCO heritage sites cannot be "updated" with high tech spires and glass roofs. These are preposterous proposals, and the French have protested against them, along with virtually every conservation architect throughout the world. The competition should be stopped before things get out of hand; no jury will be qualified to judge the appropriateness of "new" proposals.

    I signed a letter printed in Le Figaro on April 29 that is as eloquent an argument for this position as any I have read. It is in French, and I wish I had the capacity to translate it accurately. The AIA and the Historic Resources Committee should endorse that position. The structure of the roof is another matter, and engineers will solve that once an analysis is complete.


    ------------------------------
    Mark Hewitt FAIA
    Principal
    Mark Alan Hewitt Architects
    Bernardsville NJ
    ------------------------------



  • 30.  RE: A VERY SAD DAY FOR ARCHITECTURE

    Posted 05-02-2019 12:23

    Very well sad Mark, I agree

     

     

     

     

    John R. Sorrenti. FAIA, FRAIC

    President

    JRS Architect, P.C.

    NY : 516-294-1666  x210

    NJ :  609-688-9100  x310

    www.jrsarchitect.com

     






  • 31.  RE: A VERY SAD DAY FOR ARCHITECTURE

    Posted 05-03-2019 22:04
    As Mark has said & John affirmed, this is clearly a time for restoration of the grandeur of this building. Anything else is a travesty.

    ------------------------------
    Burton L. Roslyn, FAIA
    President
    Roslyn Consultants, LLC
    Roslyn Heights, New York
    ------------------------------



  • 32.  RE: A VERY SAD DAY FOR ARCHITECTURE

    Posted 05-03-2019 18:32
    I agree Mark with your well stated position.

    Joe Weilenman, FAIA
    Pago Pago, AS




  • 33.  RE: A VERY SAD DAY FOR ARCHITECTURE

    Posted 05-08-2019 23:28
    I too was saddened by the destruction of Notre Dame.
    I was astonished to learn that a billion dollars was pledged in such a short time to rebuild the cathedral when there are individuals and organizations struggling to raise money to build basic shelter for our less privileged brethren throughout the world.

    ------------------------------
    Kathryn Tyler Prigmore, FAIA
    Associate Director
    Shalom Baranes Associates
    Washington, DC
    ------------------------------



  • 34.  RE: A VERY SAD DAY FOR ARCHITECTURE

    Posted 05-29-2019 16:05
    French Senate declares Notre Dame must be rebuilt as it was before, quashing competition

    ------------------------------
    Richard Buday FAIA
    Archimage, Inc.
    Houston TX
    ------------------------------



  • 35.  RE: A VERY SAD DAY FOR ARCHITECTURE

    Posted 05-29-2019 16:14

    Wonderful news, thank God they have taken a stand

     

     

     

     

    JRS-email-sig NEW

     






  • 36.  RE: A VERY SAD DAY FOR ARCHITECTURE

    Posted 05-29-2019 22:33
    It is as it should be!!!

    ------------------------------
    Burton L. Roslyn, FAIA
    President
    Roslyn Consultants, LLC
    Roslyn Heights, New York
    ------------------------------



  • 37.  RE: A VERY SAD DAY FOR ARCHITECTURE

    Posted 05-30-2019 19:24
    Thank you for sharing this. Richard. I am so glad they have taken this action. A “competition “ would have been a tragic mistake!

    Tom

    Tom E. Lewis, FAIA, Esq.
    Attorney at Law
    Architect

    General Counsel - The Tallahassee Ballet
    Former Chairman, Tallaassee-Leon County Planning Commission
    Former Chairman, Tallaassee-Leon Count Local Planning Agency
    Former Florida Supreme Court Certified Circuit Civil Mediator
    Florida Supreme Court Qualified Arbitrator
    7349 Hilltop Oaks Lane
    Tallahassee, Florida 32311
    850.491.5983
    atty32301@gmail.com

    CONFIDENTIALITY NOTE: The information contained in this transmission may be privileged and confidential, and is intended only for the use of the individual or entity named above. If the reader of this message is not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any dissemination, distribution or copying of this communication is strictly prohibited. If you have received this transmission in error, please immediately reply to the sender that you have received this communication in error and then delete it. Thank you.


    Sent from my iPad




  • 38.  RE: A VERY SAD DAY FOR ARCHITECTURE

    Posted 06-01-2019 14:01
    HI Jess, Don't underestimate the power of the people. For example, Reins cathedral was ruined during WW1 by bombs and a fire equivalent to the recent fire at ND. Nineteen years later in 1938 the cathedral was "reopened' in its restored glory, financed largely by Rockefeller money. Now I don't expect that I'll be around in nineteen years but I bet a lot of our younger FAIAs will be, so a similar modern day miracle may occur in their life times! I am full of hope and know that a few donated funds will  help..

    ------------------------------
    Jane Stansfeld FAIA
    Austin TX
    ------------------------------



  • 39.  RE: A VERY SAD DAY FOR ARCHITECTURE

    Posted 06-01-2019 14:36
    Reims is perhaps the "highest" Gothic cathedral. It's later and more dematerialized than Norte Dame. 
    Doug 







  • 40.  RE: A VERY SAD DAY FOR ARCHITECTURE

    Posted 06-04-2019 10:34
    Doug,

    According to Sir Banister Fletcher, Beauvais is "..the loftiest in Europe". Sketch made in 1989.
    Hope you are well.

    Abie





  • 41.  RE: A VERY SAD DAY FOR ARCHITECTURE

    Posted 06-04-2019 11:10
    If my memory serves me well, they pushed the nave too high at Beauvais, and vaults collapsed.
    Structural engineering was non-existent. So it was trial and error, and this was the error that ended the attempts to go higher.
    Doug




  • 42.  RE: A VERY SAD DAY FOR ARCHITECTURE

    Posted 06-04-2019 12:27
    Thank you. Respectfully, I question the use of the word dematerialization here. If anything the structural bravado brings more attention to the materials presented in such a carefully crafted way. The materiality, palpabilty, does not go away. A representation of heaven, but one bound by earthly constraints nonetheless. I don’t know, is “characteristic” a different thing from materiality? Or, do you think my experience of it is so entirely different from that of the original congregants. This all goes to the original inspiration for my question: dematerialized gothic seems impossibly oxymoronic. Sorry to be long winded and thanks again.

    Sent from my iPhone




  • 43.  RE: A VERY SAD DAY FOR ARCHITECTURE

    Posted 06-04-2019 13:08

    Mike:
    I heartily agree with your analysis!
    Love the Oxymoronic Reference!
    Regards



    ------------------------------
    Burton L. Roslyn, FAIA
    President
    Roslyn Consultants, LLC
    Roslyn Heights, New York
    ------------------------------



  • 44.  RE: A VERY SAD DAY FOR ARCHITECTURE

    Posted 06-04-2019 13:22
    Dematerialization is a term used by architectural historians.
    It denotes going from heavier to lighter and lighter construction, as the gothic cathedrals became more gossamer and feathery with height.
    Doug Kelbaugh FAIA






  • 45.  RE: A VERY SAD DAY FOR ARCHITECTURE

    Posted 06-03-2019 21:42

    Doug, if I may call you that.  I think you definitely need to tell us more about dematerialized gothic.  I think I have a sense of it but I would like to hear a considered academic commentary.

    Thanks

    Mike Mense FAIA

     

    Sent from Mail for Windows 10

     


    Virus-free. www.avast.com





  • 46.  RE: A VERY SAD DAY FOR ARCHITECTURE

    Posted 06-03-2019 22:31
    The Gothic architecture that climaxed in cathedrals like the ones in Reims and Amiens were trying to metaphorically reach the heavens.
    They emphasized the upward reach with their vertical naves and large (stained glass) windows with delicate tracery. Bundled columns with ornate detailing and sculpture literally dematerialized as the structure rose higher and lighter. Flying buttresses kept the exterior as light and airy as possible. The masons wanted to make the building look as delicate and filigreed as possible, from inside and out.
    Lowly worshippers on the ground were meant to be inspired to connect with their ethereal God above.

    And the acoustics were well tuned to preaching and singing.
    It was a total work of art and, as the urban centerpiece.  

    Doug Kelbaugh FAIA
    Emil Lorch Collegiate Professor
    of Architecture and Urban Planning
    and Dean Emeritus
    Taubman College of Architecture & Urban Planning
    University of Michigan
    2000 Bonisteel Blvd., Ann Arbor, MI 48109-2069
    Mobile: 734 358-9587 Home: 734 827-2259
    kelbaugh@umich.edu