Re: GESO Cathédrale Notre-Dame de Paris.

John jsessoms002 at nc.rr.com
Mon Apr 22 11:31:00 EDT 2019


Oddly enough, North America - at least the part of it covered by the U.S. has 
more forested acreage today than it did when English colonists arrived in the 
17th century.

Only a small fraction of that could be considered "old growth", but some does 
exist. It does seem shameful not to recover the timber from such fallen trees.

On 4/21/2019 15:36:26, P. J. Alling wrote:
>> There's the 64 million dollar question.  Even if such wood exists today, the 
>> owner is unlikely to be willing to allow it to be harvested.
> 
> It's worse than that actually.
> 
> A few years ago, one of the last "untouched" Oak groves in New England had 
> several trees in the 400 to 500 year age group toppled by high winds during a 
> Hurricane.  The trees were, well to put it bluntly, dead.  An historical 
> preservation group wanted to harvest the wood to do some restoration work on a 
> number of historic wooden vessels, the USS Constitution in particular, needed 
> old oak of the proper shape to make new parts.
> 
> The Conservation group that owned the property, would hear nothing of that, and, 
> decided that the wood should be left to decay naturally...
> 
> There are a number of problems with this not the least of which is there hasn't 
> been a truly natural, untouched by the hand of man, forest in New England for at 
> least 5 thousand years.
> 
> The natives practicing slash and burn agriculture after all, and the later 
> settlers managing the forests for their own purposes after that.
> 
> In fact the demise of the Passenger Pigeon alone modified the Northeastern 
> forests so that they can no longer be returned to their original state.
> 
> Yet, the wood rotted in the forest none the less.
> 
> On 4/21/2019 3:46 AM, mike wilson wrote:
>> There's the 64 million dollar question.  Even if such wood exists today, the 
>> owner is unlikely to be willing to allow it to be harvested.
>>
>> ND is in an unusual (but not unique) position - it's a historical artefact 
>> that can still function for its intended purpose.  It therefore behoves us as 
>> its temporary guardians to inflict as little change as possible.  How that's 
>> going to be done is the interesting question.  Windsor castle showed that 
>> restoration is possible on a smaller scale.  Not least because this is 
>> unlikely to be the only instance, larger scale work needs a game plan.  Nelson 
>> planted a tree for every one he harvested - that's the sort of forward 
>> thinking that needs to be done right now.  I'm not confident.
>>
>>> On 21 April 2019 at 00:30 John <jsessoms002 at nc.rr.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>> In that case, where are they going to get the timbers they're going to need?
>>>
>>> Seems to me the "wasn't done that way when ND was constructed" argument is going
>>> to apply to anything they might be able to do today, which means they're left
>>> trying to find the least historically incorrect way of rebuilding.
>>>
>>> On 4/20/2019 02:28:20, mike wilson wrote:
>>>> Glulam falls down (possibly literally) in the jointing.  The whole point of 
>>>> using green oak is that the joints tighten up as the wood seasons in the 
>>>> building, reducing to neglibility the need for joint maintenance.  The 
>>>> system works, as can be seen in the large number of buildings that are 
>>>> approaching a millenium in age.  In contrast, the oldest glulam building is 
>>>> not even 200 years old.  The biggest argument against it, however, is that 
>>>> it wasn't done that way when ND was constructed.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>> On 19 April 2019 at 04:49 John <jsessoms002 at nc.rr.com> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Glued_laminated_timber
>>>>>
>>>>> On 4/18/2019 03:46:33, Bob Pdml wrote:
>>>>>>> I expect the oak will be replaced with some kind of engineered wood beams.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> That would be the architectural equivalent of this:
>>>>>> https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-19349921
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On the other hand it was the French who gave us post-modernism and a love 
>>>>>> of fragmentation and the simulacrum, so perhaps it's not a bad idea.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Apparently a US researcher recently laser-scanned the whole thing, so 
>>>>>> maybe we could just 3D-print a new one, in resin made from harvested ocean 
>>>>>> plastic.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> https://www.architecturaldigest.com/story/future-of-notre-dame
>>>>>>
>>>>>> B
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On 18 Apr 2019, at 01:00, John <jsessoms002 at nc.rr.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> It took 182 years to build it the first time, so if it takes longer than 
>>>>>>> 5 years for the repairs that's not such a big deal.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Carpenters can be trained. If it takes 40 years to rebuild it, that's a 
>>>>>>> career.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> The oak might be another problem, but I expect the oak will be replaced 
>>>>>>> with some kind of engineered wood beams. Nor will it surprise me if 
>>>>>>> there's a lot of international support for the reconstruction.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> On 4/17/2019 13:52:11, Bob Pdml wrote:
>>>>>>>> French people are saying 'typical Macron, promising something when he 
>>>>>>>> has no idea whether it is possible or not'. One article i read suggests 
>>>>>>>> that it will take up to 40 years. The bishop has already said it will be 
>>>>>>>> closed for at least 5 or 6.
>>>>>>>> One of the problems is that there aren't enough oak trees or carpenters 
>>>>>>>> with the right skills
>>>>>>>>> On 17 Apr 2019, at 17:52, Paul Stenquist <pnstenquist at comcast.net> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Thanks to all who commented or had a look. In the hours since this 
>>>>>>>>> tragedy it’s become obvious that the cathedral can be restored. I will 
>>>>>>>>> take year -- Macron says 5 years — but it will be worth the wait.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> On Apr 16, 2019, at 3:12 PM, Paul Stenquist <pnstenquist at comcast.net> 
>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> I’m catholic only by birth not by practice, but watching Notre Dame 
>>>>>>>>>> burn last night was crushing. I immediately recalled how I was 
>>>>>>>>>> overwhelmed by the majesty and history of this ancient cathedral when 
>>>>>>>>>> I visited it on a spring afternoon in 2003. Extending a business trip 
>>>>>>>>>> by a day, I wandered the streets of Paris with my Leica iiif RD and 
>>>>>>>>>> Summicron 50/2 Collapsible, alternately shooting tribute-x and Portra 
>>>>>>>>>> 400. I had the color neg film loaded when I stopped in the cathedral 
>>>>>>>>>> and captured a few images as best I could, given the faded mirror of 
>>>>>>>>>> my Leica and the dim lighting. Yesterday, I wondered what had become 
>>>>>>>>>> of those images. I found an envelope that contained the negatives and 
>>>>>>>>>> camera store prints and scanned a few of the negatives. Today, I 
>>>>>>>>>> assembled a small gallery. 
>>>>>>>>>> https://www.photo.net/gallery/1109648#//Sort-Newest/All-Categories/All-Time/Page-1 
>>>>>>>>>>
> 


-- 
Science - Questions we may never find answers for.
Religion - Answers we must never question.



More information about the PDML mailing list