This topic has been archived, and won't accept reply postings.
Antony Gormley on R4 today says that the UK doesn’t have an equivalent of Notre Dame - a building for which the nation would ‘weep’ if it burned. I’m trying to think of one - and struggling.
1
In reply to Greenbanks:
Stonehenge is above it my opinion. Not a building though but it's a structure.
No churches are equal to Notre dame here
2
2
In reply to Greenbanks:
I don't suppose all of France is weeping quite as much as the news would have us believe.
Do you get much more iconic than Tintern Abbey, Salisbury Cathedral, York Minster, or St Pauls? Or on a secular note, how about Chatsworth, Blenheim Palace, Windsor Castle, or the Tower of London?
28
In reply to Rob Exile Ward:
York Minster, Durham Cathedral.
2
In reply to Greenbanks:
If you'd asked people last week what France's most iconic building was, I suspect most would have opted for the Eiffel Tower. Tragedy often adds a fair dollop of glamour. Diana wasn't 'the people's princess' when she was alive and before the fire, Notre Dame was pretty much just another spectacular Medieval cathedral, much like many we have over here, but with rather nicer windows.
30
In reply to Greenbanks:
> Antony Gormley on R4 today says that the UK doesn’t have an equivalent of Notre Dame - a building for which the nation would ‘weep’ if it burned. I’m trying to think of one - and struggling.
Antony Gormley seems to me to be particularly untalented artist, whose one speciality is stylized depictions of himself. I have never understood why he gets such an uncritical reception.
But surprise me: why is any of his work any good?
9
9
In reply to Greenbanks:
Big Ben.
People might not agree with some of the politicians beneath it. But that's a different argument.
There are probably dozens of smaller ones. But you never get excited about history on your doorstep. It's almost taken for granted.
13
1
In reply to Greenbanks:
I don't much care for Gormley as an artist, but that's quite irrelevant. I think he's largely correct. Maybe Westminster Abbey or St Paul's – that there are two dilutes their individual cases – but certainly none of our provincial cathedrals. I've no idea how the French feel about Chartres, Amiens, Rheims, Rouen, Bourges or any other of their equally spectacular provincial cathedrals, but there's something about a building that's in a capital city and which has been used for countless national events for centuries that lends it an unarguable gravitas and fixes it within people's hearts. Durham, for instance, however stunning, simply has no place within the national consciousness comparable with the two London cathedrals.
8
5
In reply to Rob Exile Ward:
A reasonable list for England (although Tintern is just in Wales) but not for Britain or the United Kingdom. I don't think any of your suggestions have quite the same importance for the UK as Notre Dame does for France (although some in Corsica may disagree)
edit to add - the Eiffel tower is more iconic as a symbol of Paris than Notre Dame but its not really a building
Post edited at 10:32
1
In reply to Greenbanks:
Parliament.
5
In reply to thomasadixon:
That's a fair call, although it's hard to imagine a worse time to make it. And the building suffers from being so new.
In addition, I imagine French atheists/agnostics/those from other faiths might be more moved by the fire at Notre Dame than the countless despisers of politics in this country would be by a similar one at the Hs of P.
[ed. for sp.]
Post edited at 11:07
2
In reply to Stichtplate:
> If you'd asked people last week what France's most iconic building was, I suspect most would have opted for the Eiffel Tower. Tragedy often adds a fair dollop of glamour. Diana wasn't 'the people's princess' when she was alive and before the fire, Notre Dame was pretty much just another spectacular Medieval cathedral, much like many we have over here, but with rather nicer windows.
From my experience in France, if you asked most tourists, you might be right about the Eiffel Tower, but if you ask french people, especially Parisians, then Notre Dame would be overwhelmingly top of the list. Its been the centre of the catholic church in a strongly catholic country for many centuries. The tower is (and indeed was built as) a tourist attraction, although admittedly a bloody spectacular one!
6
1
In reply to Greenbanks:
Wells Cathedral (But then, I live in Wells).
2
In reply to Greenbanks:
I think Gormley is talking bollock, frankly.
Another one to throw in, Lincoln Cathedral, the home of one Magna Carta. I would be more disappointed if this burned than Notra Dame.
7
3
In reply to TheDrunkenBakers:
> Another one to throw in, Lincoln Cathedral, the home of one Magna Carta. I would be more disappointed if this burned than Notra Dame.
I think I would be more disappointed if my house burned down than Notre Dame. It's not very iconic though.
41
In reply to Rob Exile Ward:
Certainly agree with St Pauls, although that may be more for a certain generation, now passing from us. The famous 'St Pauls Survives' photograph is pretty iconic.
8
In reply to Greenbanks:
Slightly askew from the theme - I am puzzled by the antipathy shown to Antony Gormley's work in this thread so far. I have found his work quite uplifting in connecting art to nature...
Cheers
9
1
In reply to Greenbanks:
> Antony Gormley on R4 today says that the UK doesn’t have an equivalent of Notre Dame - a building for which the nation would ‘weep’ if it burned. I’m trying to think of one - and struggling.
The Clachaig?
18
In reply to Greenbanks:
> Antony Gormley on R4 today says that the UK doesn’t have an equivalent of Notre Dame - a building for which the nation would ‘weep’ if it burned. I’m trying to think of one - and struggling.
We had an almost identical disaster with York Minster years ago, but in 2019 we are a lot less religious than in the 1980s.
The Houses of Parliament? Though there would be a silver lining in the cloud of a chance to start again with more modern features like a circular chamber.
Post edited at 11:30
2
1
In reply to Neil Williams:
> We had an almost identical disaster with York Minster years ago, but in 2019 we are a lot less religious than in the 1980s.
Although that one started because a certain bishop was insufficiently religious.
3
In reply to Andy Hardy:
I was there when it burnt down! 1971 I think. Had to drink in Glencoe instead - catastrophe.
In reply to Greenbanks:
> Slightly askew from the theme - I am puzzled by the antipathy shown to Antony Gormley's work in this thread so far. I have found his work quite uplifting in connecting art to nature...
What, for example, is your opinion on 'Edge III', a recent effort of his: http://www.antonygormley.com/uploads/images/56fa453c5a039.jpg
To me, this appears to be an gimmick rather than any interesting artistic statement.
2
1
In reply to Rob Parsons:
Like all artists I suppose Gormley has his quirks and idiosyncracies. Some tend to become rather self-indulgent, and his bronzes are a bit (now) both over-used and their place in gallery/exhibition settings is I agree a bit suspect. But, in general, I think he's helped to forge a new way for environmentally-located scultpture and for this I reckon he's worth an accolade.
1
In reply to TheDrunkenBakers:
I agree with you that Lincoln Cathedral is amazing.
However it also had a big fire and rebuild in its history. The "new" bits are part of it.
1
In reply to Bob Kemp:
Temple Church in London is quite iconic IMO. Probably not as well known by the public, but a very beautiful and interesting building. Built a decade(?) after Norte Dame, but entwined with the crusades, knights Templar and Magna carter. Also burial spot of William Marshal whose effigy remains.
Well worth a visit, only 10 mins walk from St Pauls and far less busy.
3
In reply to Doug:
> edit to add - the Eiffel tower is more iconic as a symbol of Paris than Notre Dame but its not really a building
I would argue that the Eiffel Tower is more of a building than the spire on Notre Dame was.
Until a few days ago I didn’t know that Notre Dame had a spire or that it was made of wood. With the exception of the incorporation of Arabic geometry and art into hidden areas I’ve never been that bothered by cathedral architecture.
In reply to Greenbanks:
Natural History Museum
6
In reply to wintertree:
but the spire was only an ornamental feature added relatively recently
In reply to Greenbanks:
Like most fashionable artists when talking about the UK, what Gormley means is London doesn't have an equivalent of Notre Dame. Transport York, Durham or Salisbury cathedrals to a prominent position on the Thames, add centuries of history and I simply don't believe he'd say that. However if Westminster abbey disappeared tomorrow, all England would weep. Ditto Edinburgh Castle in Scotland, and a few tears were shed over the Glasgow School of Art. Remember that the Normans brought Gothic architecture to the UK and the style rapidly evolved to a less flamboyant English style before ending in the stunning but understated Perpendicular Gothic of King's College Chapel. We skipped Baroque as being too flashy (Blenheim palace is rather fine though), proceeded through the repetitive tedium of Georgian architecture to the marmite of the Victorian style: it's fair to say we don't 'love' buildings.
3
1
In reply to Doug:
The original was early C13th.
In reply to Stichtplate:
> If you'd asked people last week what France's most iconic building was, I suspect most would have opted for the Eiffel Tower. Tragedy often adds a fair dollop of glamour.
And they'd probably have been right but I'd wager its loss wouldn't be felt as acutely.
There's just something about cathedrals that imbues them with a power other buildings simply cannot match. For me it's the vision, the commitment, the devotion of a community needed to raise something so much greater than its surroundings something requiring investment, expertise and effort measured not in years but generations. I'm an atheist to my core but I can't help but be moved and inspired by them as living monuments to the people that conceived, constructed and cared for them, they're a fabulous reminder of what a society can achieve when we dedicate our minds to and resources to it.
It is odd that Britain despite our cultural wealth doesn't have anything quite so iconic.
jk
6
In reply to Greenbanks:
You might have thought he might have mentioned Winchester cathedral. It even houses some of his pieces... The thought of the choir in Winchester going up in flames would be awful.
I would have the same feeling of loss for any of the ancient cathedrals, mourning the destruction of the sublime craft they are built with. The Dissolution was a tragedy.
And I'm an atheist...
In reply to Toccata:
> However if Westminster abbey disappeared tomorrow, all England would weep. Ditto Edinburgh Castle in Scotland, and a few tears were shed over the Glasgow School of Art.
The people shedding tears for the Glasgow School of Art were only really its ex students, not many other people in Glasgow, never mind Scotland, really even know if its existance in the first place.
5
8
In reply to Rob Exile Ward:
> Do you get much more iconic than Tintern Abbey, Salisbury Cathedral, York Minster, or St Pauls? Or on a secular note, how about Chatsworth, Blenheim Palace, Windsor Castle, or the Tower of London?
It's as if you took a truck and drove it blindfold round the two most iconic ones of all - Buckingham Palace and Parliament/Big Ben
That being said i couldn't draw you a picture of what any of your selections looked like. Notre Dame was iconic for the double block tower front, non of your choices come even remotely close to the same degree of visual recognition.
3
In reply to jkarran:
> And they'd probably have been right but I'd wager its loss wouldn't be felt as acutely.
> There's just something about cathedrals that imbues them with a power other buildings simply cannot match. For me it's the vision, the commitment, the devotion of a community needed to raise something so much greater than its surroundings something requiring investment, expertise and effort measured not in years but generations. I'm an atheist to my core but I can't help but be moved and inspired by them as living monuments to the people that conceived, constructed and cared for them, they're a fabulous reminder of what a society can achieve when we dedicate our minds to and resources to it.
> It is odd that Britain despite our cultural wealth doesn't have anything quite so iconic.
> jk
I'd see it as yet another example of the English liberals favourite indulgence; The all encompassing cultural cringe. Apart from the fine stained glass windows Notre Dame had rather a gloomy interior fully matched by its gloomy exterior. St Pauls exhibits more aesthetic flair, both inside and out. If it's cultural significance you want just look at the list of people buried in Westminster Abbey; 17 British monarchs, 8 prime ministers, scientist of the calibre of Sir Isaac Newton, authors, poets and composers by the score (everyone from Geoffrey Chaucer to Rudyard Kipling to Henry Purcell).
In short, Britain has many buildings of equal historical and architectural significance to Notre Dame. It's just that Britain's intelligentsia will always see them as fatally flawed by geographic location.
9
5
In reply to Greenbanks:
The Houses of Parliament? I'sdsay they are iconic. known throughout the world and a symbol of the UK.
I think they would be missed if they burnt down.
Can't necessarily say the same about many of the people in them.........
1
In reply to Greenbanks:
Gormley needs to get out of London more. The entire world (of harry potter fans) would weep if Alnwick castle was destroyed.
In reply to Stichtplate:
To the dislikers; Westminster Abbey has also hosted every coronation of a British monarch since 1066. Care to expand on Notre Dame’s claim to cultural capital, beyond a starring role in a novel no one’s ever read?
4
1
In reply to Stichtplate:
Umm, not quite
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Winchester_Cathedral#Funerals,_coronations,...
1
In reply to MG:
> Umm, not quite
Henry the young king was crowned at Winchester but died 6 years before his Father. He was never monarch.
1
In reply to Stichtplate:
> Care to expand on Notre Dame’s claim to cultural capital, beyond a starring role in a novel no one’s ever read?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Coronation_of_Napoleon#/media/File:Jacque...
1
In reply to felt:
So one transient Emperor. The lads that kicked his arse, Wellington and Nelson, are buried in St Paul's.
4
1
In reply to felt:
David’s a very lucky man.
Edit: aww...now you’ve gone and deleted your post. (Don’t be ashamed Felt, love’s a beautiful thing).
Post edited at 21:19
In reply to felt:
Yeah, but that was more of an after party. He was crowned in Westminster Abbey first.
1
In reply to Stichtplate:
You'd expect a king of France to be crowned in France.
1
In reply to felt:
Yeah, what's the plaque in Notre Dame say? 'Henry had his second coronation here'...Meh.
1
In reply to Stichtplate:
I'm not sure what your point is or, indeed, why I'm discussing this with you, pleasant though it is. But here's a quote from some dodgy website, a digestif before bedtime:
"King Charles VI of France died a couple of months after Henry V, making the young Henry VI King of England and King of France. Henry VI was crowned King of England at Westminster Abbey on November 6, 1429. Two years later, he was crowned King of France at Notre Dame de Paris in a ritual similar to that established by his great-grandfather King Charles V of France. This was an attempt to counter the coronation of Henry VI’s uncle and rival, Charles VII of France, who had been crowned at Reims Cathedral in 1429."
1
In reply to Greenbanks:
I had a hunch that the French would want Notre Dame back
1
In reply to Stichtplate:
A British monarch in 1066 ? There was no British Monarch before James VIth & Ist & even he was more king of England & king of Scotland rather than king of Britain
6
In reply to Doug:
You’re right and you’d be pushed to describe William as British in any case. Have a biscuit.
3
In reply to Stichtplate:
> To the dislikers; Westminster Abbey has also hosted every coronation of a British monarch since 1066. Care to expand on Notre Dame’s claim to cultural capital, beyond a starring role in a novel no one’s ever read?
I don't think Westminster Abbey has ever featured in the Muppets, so no contest there...
youtube.com/watch?v=myM6NWCYvjg&
(I found that clip in this Guardian article, which is a pretty good summary of Notre Dame's cultural importance:
https://www.theguardian.com/culture/2019/apr/16/the-culture-inspired-by-not... )
In reply to Greenbanks:
Big Ben & Westminster Abbey
St Paul's
Blackpool tower is iconic in its own way
The Natural history museum
The Royal Pavillion Brighton
The Liver building
2
In reply to Greenbanks:
The Foundry?
4
In reply to Greenbanks:
The Windmill chippie, Stafford.
Passed through Stafford today and it's virtually the only one of my old stomping grounds still standing.
In reply to Pete Pozman:
I would definitely weep for Durham Cathedral - grew up hearing its bells and later went to the university. Of course the bells have been recast but still ...
It isn't just iconic but is very welcoming, warm and human unlike some high rise structures
In reply to felt:
> Although that one started because a certain bishop was insufficiently religious.
Durham again!
In reply to wercat:
> It isn't just iconic but is very welcoming, warm and human unlike some high rise structures
You're right. It is welcoming. I spent a fair chunk of my life in the town and while I was there they never charged for entry, merely a "suggested" £3, and that only towards the end.
My memory of Salisbury is very different. I also remember once trying to get into Westminster Abbey and being stopped. I said I was going to pray, which was a total fib. The guy at the door, a cleric of some sort, must have had a divine sense for the truth and said OK, go to the chapel by the entrance, but no more. He made it clear just by his look that he had my number and would ruthlessly hunt me down if I strayed into the main body of the church. Fair play. It was an interesting chapel.
1
In reply to felt:
If Westminster Hall suffers from being "so new" how can any building qualify as old?
1
In reply to Greenbanks:
Salisbury Cathedral? Not sure how many Brits would weep if it burnt down but I know of at least two Russians who would be very upset.
3
In reply to Greenbanks:
Good to see a sensible, sensitive and historically informed debate on the issue. Notably absent are those who debased the Notre Dame posting with the like of what the f... It's only a building. Probably realised their ignorance and prejudices would get short shrift from their compatriots
1
2
In reply to Greenbanks:
As someone from Ireland who has lived in London and Scotland, and has both an insider's and outsider's perspective, I'd say Big Ben / HoP and St Paul's. Then B'Palace, Tower of London.
Westminster just doesn't have the profile: I don't even know what it looks like! (Just Googled it: beautiful)
In reply to Greenbanks: Recently, on my first ever trip outside Europe, I noticed, while passing through Chengdu airport in China, a large banner entitled something like 'Fly Air China, See the World', along which were the sillhouettes of a dozen or so buildings. I recognised the pyramids and the Taj Mahal, but also several from the Uk - St Pauls (or was it some other dome?), the Tower of London, Nelson's Column, Big Ben and Tower Bridge. No (if memory serves) Eiffel Tower, Alhambra, Golden Gate bridge, Empire State, Colloseum, wonky tower...
Weird, I thought.
In reply to mbh:
> Weird, I thought.
Not weird, it's just that no one ever seems to appreciate what's on their doorstep. I was in St David's at the weekend. Beautiful little cathedral, place of Christian worship for 1500 years, picturesque city (reputedly the smallest city in the UK) set in very pretty countryside. In most countries it'd be a major tourist destination, but in the UK it kind of blends into the background.
In reply to Stichtplate:
It is weird that one country accounted for 30-40% of the silhouettes. All places, including home, have their attractions.
In reply to Greenbanks:
Buck House.
Wembley.
Twickenham.
Parliament.
Stonehenge.
My house.
Eden project.
Anthony Gormley's garage.
Post edited at 19:46
In reply to Greenbanks:
Clifton suspension bridge!
1
In reply to timjones:
We're talking Pugin/Barry's Parliament buildings?
In reply to felt:
> We're talking Pugin/Barry's Parliament buildings?
No. We're talking:
https://www.parliament.uk/about/living-heritage/building/palace/westminster...
Constructed 1097. Nearly 70 years older than Notre Dame.
1
In reply to captain paranoia:
OK, so we're not talking about the same thing.
In reply to Greenbanks:
I'm surprised no one has mentioned the Forth rail bridge. Maybe not a British icon but it's Scotland's Eifel Tower.
3
In reply to Removed User:
Apparently one of the most over-engineered structures ever...so I've been told. But I'm not an engineer. And yes, it is iconic and very grand in an industrial sense.
In reply to Greenbanks:
> Apparently one of the most over-engineered structures ever...
Understandably, as work started on it 3 years after the Tay bridge disaster.
1
In reply to streapadair:
I thought it much longer than that. I remember that no large structures were built in Scotland for 50 years after the Tay bridge disaster. One if the things that came out of the enquiry was a realisation of the lack of knowledge, techniques and understanding required to safely design large structures. Prior to commencement of the design, for example, large plates mounted on pressure transducers were installed on one of the islands in the Forth in order to estimate the forces due to wind that the bridge would have to withstand. It was the start of the discipline of wind engineering. It's startling to think that up until then no one had even tried to estimate the very considerable loading placed on structures by the wind.
With the realisation of the uncertainties involved in such a design it's quite understandable that the bridge was very solidly built.
In reply to Removed User:
> I thought it much longer than that. I remember that no large structures were built in Scotland for 50 years after the Tay bridge disaster.
The Tay Bridge disaster was in 1879. Construction on the Forth Rail Bridge was authorised by statute in 1882 and started the following year.
1
In reply to thomasadixon:
The difference being that we purposely tried to burn that one down!
In reply to TheDrunkenBakers:
I think the Magna Carta is actually kept at the Castle just across the road (or at least is was when I last day it). As for the Cathedral no one had seen it for years! It's had large sections covered up by scaffolding for some time now.
In reply to Stichtplate:
> I'd see it as yet another example of the English liberals favourite indulgence; The all encompassing cultural cringe. Apart from the fine stained glass windows Notre Dame had rather a gloomy interior fully matched by its gloomy exterior. St Pauls exhibits more aesthetic flair, both inside and out. If it's cultural significance you want just look at the list of people buried in Westminster Abbey; 17 British monarchs, 8 prime ministers, scientist of the calibre of Sir Isaac Newton, authors, poets and composers by the score (everyone from Geoffrey Chaucer to Rudyard Kipling to Henry Purcell).
> In short, Britain has many buildings of equal historical and architectural significance to Notre Dame. It's just that Britain's intelligentsia will always see them as fatally flawed by geographic location.
I agree... and throw in a particular habit of Londoners to be dismissive, or 'cool' about their own tourist attractions. London is iconic world city with the architecture and history to go with it, and the rest of the world knows it. I could spend days just wandering round... and I say that as a republican who gets grumpy about modern Londencentric policies.
Edit: And as someone else said Gormley really meant London.
Post edited at 11:12
1
In reply to Tigger:
We did?
In reply to felt:
Weatminster Hall lies at the very heart of the HoP.
Have you ever visited and had a look around?
1
In reply to timjones:
Possibly years ago as a schoolboy.
In reply to felt:
In that case the huge hall that you most likely entered through is Westminster Hall. A massively impressive piece of architecture which has stood for at least as long as Notre Dame.
In reply to Greenbanks:
> Antony Gormley on R4 today says that the UK doesn’t have an equivalent of Notre Dame - a building for which the nation would ‘weep’ if it burned. I’m trying to think of one - and struggling.
Outside in Hathersage.
1
In reply to jkarran:
> It is odd that Britain despite our cultural wealth doesn't have anything quite so iconic.
Britain seems highly opposed to architecture that is modern, high-tec and perhaps slightly controversial. It seems as a nation that we normally prefer safe, twee, traditional and 'with period features' over progressive modern architecture. People seem to forget that most of the UK's iconic historical buildings we seem to love so much today were often at the very cutting edge of modern architecture at the time they were built.
1
In reply to thomasadixon:
Well, an attempt to blow-up the house of lords in 1605...
In reply to Rob Parsons:
I'm not a fan of all his work but the Angel of the North, Exposure and Another Place all appeal to me.
This topic has been archived, and won't accept reply postings.
Loading Notifications...