The Washington Post tries to divert our attention from impeachment today with a long piece about the rebuilding of Notre Dame. The big question is whether the ugly-ass spire should be rebuilt:
Philippe Villeneuve, chief architect of the country’s historic monuments service, said in a broadcast interview that he would resign rather than allow a modern spire — as proposed by French President Emmanuel Macron — to be built atop the cathedral’s roof. In response, Georgelin told the architect to “shut his gob.”
….Beginning in the mid-1220s, much of Notre Dame was remade to be more in line with contemporary architectural tastes. The two western towers were finished and a [horrid] spire was added to the crossing of the nave and transept….By the late 18th century, the original [horrid] spire was removed before it could collapse from decay….The cathedral remained without a spire until 1859, when [an even more hideous one] designed by Eugène Emmanuel Viollet-le-Duc was added as part of an extensive 20-year renovation.
Hmmm. Perhaps I have let my opinion seep into this blog post? In any case, put me on Team Nothing. Rebuilding Notre Dame without the spire will improve it considerably and cost less. Now quit arguing and get to work.
BY THE WAY: Jokes aside, the Post article is a good one if you’re interested in this kind of thing.