On April 15, 2019, one of the most horrific fires of the year broke out when the roof of the Notre-Dame Cathedral in Paris went up in flames. The inferno lasted for around 15 hours as the world watched in terror. The fire completely destroyed the famous landmarks' iconic spire that collapsed hours after the fire was initially noticed. Most of the wood/metal roof of the gothic architecture cathedral was also destroyed, with only about one-third of the roof remaining. The interior of the cathedral didn't suffer extensive damage thanks to the stone-vaulted ceiling that largely contained the burning roof as it collapsed.
In the following days, French President Emmanuel Macron reassured the public that the historic building could be restored and a fundraising campaign was quickly initiated to help fund the restoration (that could take up to 20 years or more). As of April 22, 2019, over €1 billion was collected.
On April 17, France announced their plans to host a competition to design a replacement spire for the Notre-Dame Cathedral in Paris. French prime minister Edouard Philippe was reported saying that the government was looking for a unique design "adapted to the techniques and the challenges of our era." This prompted many architects and designers to power up their creative minds and conjure new images of the roof and the spire. From contemporary glass towers to Gothic stained glass windows, the entries so far offer a fresh reimagination of the classic tourist attraction. Scroll down below to see the cool designs and don't forget to comment and vote for your favorites!
This post may include affiliate links.
Well, this is the only one on this list that does't look absolutely horrible. But still...
Best one so far. It's neat,clean and not trying to take any glory away from the rest of the structure.
Agreed. It's nice enough to be lovely, but low key enough to not take away from the original. Another poster suggested antique roses in a greenhouse under the glass. That would be both beautiful and smart. Add some other flowers, and the cathedral bees will have some sweet nectar to drink!
Load More Replies...
It doesn't match any of them with the classic and traditional architecture. The model presented by me is the best to preserve the old features. novo-model...d2-png.jpg 
I can go along with this one. Simple. For the rest I don't even want to spend words.
To all of the 'modern' ideas NONONONONONONO This a cathedral that was to honor GOD not be an ugly art show
I agree. I love the Notre Dame, but it was always very dark inside.
Load More Replies...
Surely the parts that burned could be reproduced from photos. I feel that most of these 'designs' were submitted by naughty children just seeing how far they could push.
It should be rebuilt to look as close to the original as possible.
This would be interesting but it looks too much like a train station
i agree, no need to altar historical creations to fit our sense of modern architectural acceptance
Replacing a tremendous rof with a really boring glass and steel construction is not altering it? Right....
Load More Replies...
What???... Transform Notre Dame Cathedral into Disneyland???... Money-money-money???... And how heavy it's gonna be that glass/steel construction + massive crowds of tourists???... And how often that glass roof needs cleaning???...
This one reconstructs the spire as mandated by the French Senate and also keeps the original attic roof line. Glass is not a good medium for the roof, just replace what was there before the fire. The French government has asked that modern materials and technologies be used in the reconstruction. No light will filter into the church nave because there are stone vaults over the naves.
I agree, best choice out of what's available; unless you can re- build like original roof & spire.
Happily this will not be the case as the French Senate requires that Notre-Dame’s spire be rebuilt ‘exactly as it was’ which has already relegated all these abominable concepts in the garbage where they belong.
Load More Replies...
IMO somewhat better than the original one but still doesn't go with the church.
Almost all of these designs are way too small for the building, this is a massive stately building, a skinning spire just looks odd
No one seems to know that the spire was from Victorian times and has nothing to do with the original cathedral. I think it shouldn't be rebuilt. Victorians loved to add frills to classical medieval buildings that don't match the architecture.
To be precise it started under Louis Philippe, king of the French, this is not England, and architect Viollet-le Duc's spire and roof addition respected the architectural style of the church, it did not detract from it.
Load More Replies...
Definitely the only one that would reach a serious selection panel. The rest are just exercises in professional egotism!
As an American who is French by heritage and whose heart will always remain in France. I have visited Notre Dame many times and literally cried when it burned. I am all for some aspect of change but not change which will detract from the original beauty of our Lady. I love the idea of a glass roof, not necessarily all stained glass like St Chapelles, but Notre Dame always felt somewhat gloomy inside and a glass roof would beautifully illustrate all the architectural detail and art. I am 100% against turning it into a tacky tourist attraction with Bible quotes projected on the wall blah blah blah.
My idea - rebuilt the original design, just add skylights studying it well where to locate them to make the interior less dark and locate light rays toward important areas like the altar, lectern and major statues inside. Study them well where to locate the rays stricking at a certain times and abo above all, they shouln’t be too obvious from the outsize.
I would like it if there were slightly less window But the idea would be good to add a SMALL amount
A glass roof? You people know that there are stone vaults below, right? It would be useless, unless they destroy the vaults and the flying buttresses (but it would not be restoration anymore) or use the attic for something (but it would be desecration).
Pitch these designs for a new modern religious structure, these ideas do not integrate at all with the Gothic architecture of the church. Really a glass roof? A swimming pool? A public garden/conservatory? They have no place in any religious building. Stain glass belongs in windows not on a roof attic. The cost of upkeep alone will relegate these atrocities to the garbage heap where they belong. The French government said the modern materials and technologies should be used for reconstruction, it did not say to desecrate the church which is a monument for Humanity and the best example of High Gothic architecture. York Minster in England suffered a similar fate but the English understood well to preserve and maintain the original structure as it had stood for centuries. If any of these atrocious "design and ideas" come to fruition you can bet that a lot of money promised to the rebuilding effort will not be forthcoming.
OK, after looking at all of them, if you must have a glass roof, then this is the only one that at least isn't ridiculous.
Happily this will not be the case as the French Senate requires that Notre-Dame’s spire be rebuilt ‘exactly as it was’ which has already relegated all these abominable concepts in the garbage where they belong.
Load More Replies...
Very elegant, in character with existing architecture and most importantly no wood, so nearly fireproof.
Notre Dame's resurrection should be kept in sync with its past. This is probably the closest design but I would favor design that allows the dark mystery of the cathedral to be recreated. Please remember the atmosphere she had. Please allow that to be recreated with the incense and the thousands of prayers that will be offered, the pain and joy that is brought to her.
I think I really like this one the best! I feel like it matches this cathedral much more than the others.
The spire should be replaced with a giant 200 ft tall fiberglass baguette poking out of giant wheel of cheese with a slice missing from the side.
Happily this will not be the case as the French Senate requires that Notre-Dame’s spire be rebuilt ‘exactly as it was’ which has already relegated all these abominable concepts in the garbage where they belong.
Load More Replies...
I think this one is really pretty. The beam shouldn't be on all the time but maybe it could come on every night at 6:20. Which seems like a weird time but it is the time that the fire alarms first said there was a fire and people looked and didn't find a fire at at 6:45 then they found the fire the second alarm came on and they found it. That could become a tourist thing you know where a point of interest that people wait for that beam to come on and it could just come on for one minute maybe at 6:20 and then again at 6:45 and/or, maybe it could come on the mark the hour, date &time the restoration is complet
Is this the design by the Fukasis'. If it is it is illuminated at night and beautiful. I love it.
Beautiful and not too shockingly different but with a hint on modern. Kinda like the glass pyramids at the Louvre. Kind of ties the two together in style. ❤️
Simple and understated. However, a glass roof might be really hot in summer. It would alter the experience of dim interior lighting.
The only one that even reflects what a Gothic church should be, however the use of glass in unoriginal, uninspired, incompetent, and will destroy the effect of the interior windows. You my friend, are an incompetent loser.
You have to rebuild a gothic style spire, anything else would look ridiculous paired with the rest of the building. The glass roof could work well enough if it's kept simple, and allow in natural light if they choose to open up that space to the public. The idea of placing a garden up there isn't bad at all.
Of all of them this one is the best. So much history with the cathedral and so in my opinion they should try to keep it as close to original as possible.
I like it. However I have a great idea for the spire that might be more unique and lovely. I wonder what architects I could contact. Or how would I enter this contest? Anyone know?
Architect Vincent Callebaut's vision draws the ideas of science, art, and spirituality together. The architect suggests uniting the cathedral’s nave, roof, and new spire in a project he titled ‘Palingenesis’, derived from the greek word for ‘rebirth’. It features a garden underneath a three-dimensional crystal glass canopy."transparency, sharing, and openness to our society’s development: such are the ideas conveyed by this new, diaphanous forest of notre dame, outlining the new face of the church in the 21st century," Callebaut explained his vision.
Studio NAB proposes a project that would turn the top of the cathedral into a greenhouse-like structure. The spire, in their vision could house a tower of beehives.
"Our Proposal for the new roof and spire at Notre Dame Cathedral in Paris: A Phoenix rises from the ashes. The spire, clad in sand cast copper panels, emerges from the blackened stainless steel roof supported by flame charred glulam trusses in remembrance of what was and what can become."
"A proposal by summumarchi gives access to Notre Dame's attic to make it a commemorative park, with purple colors in memory of the fire, while taking advantage of this enormous generosity of donations to make it a sanctuary for animals and insects even more threatened in cities. May this reconstruction serve the environment, and demonstrate to the rest of the world the knowledge of our French companions of how to deal with magnificent, technical, timeless architecture at the highest level possible. A symbol for future generations."
I quite like this one. But not the beam of light out the top. There's too much light pollution as there is and it confuses migratory birds.
Architect Norman Foster proposed turning the cathedral's spire into a “super-slender needle touching heaven’s clouds”. It would give the structure more light, reflecting the contemporary architecture.
"This subject is very sensitive for reasons that are easily understood. The wood that the construction was made out of as well as its assemblages and age make it a remarkable and honorable creation. It is hard to imagine that there would be another option than rebuilding the identical roof structure and the roof by using all the documents we have. Just like the castle of Guédelon, that is being rebuilt using the knowledge of our ancestors, Notre-Dame de Paris could also become a huge open-air educational project. In a few decades, this tragic episode would fade and as a result we would have a brand new roof of the Cathedral. But if we think about it, would we really be satisfied with this result? What other pleasure would we find besides that of comforting us in the certainty that everything is eternal?"
"Our proposal for the restoration of the Notre Dame Cathedral is to use one element that it has the best, the stained glass.
Make all the cover in stained glass, including the tower, with transparency to the inner side, through the opening of the vaults, leaving only the structures flying buttresses.
In Gothic there is the connection of the earth to the sky, and inside the Cathedral, the natural illumination multiplies in colors through the filter of the cover in stained glass.
At night the inner illumination turns into a grandiose retro backlit coverage."
"NOUVELLE DAME - Proposal for a new cover of Notre Dame, París"
Looks like a cross between a Marvel space embassy and American megachurch.
"Today the French architecture board website reads, ’Heritage, ancient or contemporary, is a revealing and structuring element of our culture, and we must inculcate ourselves to keep alive these markers but also built today the markers of our time’.Ultimately, I trust in France’s cultural core and its decision makers to have the audacity to move forward while retaining The Lady’s timeless image. I can only hope the project will be humble but innovative, delicate, beautiful and engaged,created by highly skilled people around a common table."
That weird sheeting looks like it's covering some of the exterior architecture. Why on earth would you do that?
"Some say that we should rebuild the spire as it was originally. Others say that we should design a new one. So, let’s build a new one as it was... 8 days ago"
"A single element used, stained glass. No new architectural features, no intervention elements (redesign), no ego, no artistic aspirations.
The material specified for this, stained glass, is made of a high-tech glass produced by a renowned and traditional French factory. The glasses have sun protection, without changing the desired aesthetic.
The windows offer greater thermal comfort inside the Cathedral, greater natural light, reduces external noise."
"It’s a tragedy. Nothing would ever return over 850 years of beauty, but it's time to [rebirth] Notre-Dame. In Gothic times builders [tried] to reach the sky, Le Duc [tried] it also in 19th century and have come closer. Now it's possible to make it happen. Lightweight crown that connects heaven with earth."
NONONONONONONONONONONONONONONONO!!!!!!!!! Oh, hang on... this is a joke, right. In that case... bwahahahahaha!
Why all these glass roofs? Old paintings and textiles bleach from being exposed to UV-lights (that is why most museums tend to be quite dark). I hope they build the roof like it was, but with more fire detectors.
Never before did I downvote every single entry of a list, but this time I did. All 13 concepts are ugly.
They added 4 concepts but I still don't like any of them.
Load More Replies...
Notre-Dame is not a museum. It's a worship place that deserves all our respect. Shouldn't be treated as a game for architects. As a Parisian, I can feel the incredible bond we have with our church. It has to be rebuild as it was. We surely have all the talented people for that. That's the only way to comfort people that really love her.
I think it’s important to be respectful about a place of worship, but we shouldn’t pretend the spire that burned was anything but a game for architects 19th century style.
Load More Replies...
Why do they all have glass roofs? Can't anyone come up with a design that involved..idk..original architecture? It ain't the Crystal Cathedral ya know.
I know that it is not my heritage.. But I like better to restore the old look, please..
These are an abomination. The new spire/roof should be an exact replica of the original.
No on the first 12. A big hell no one #13! Excuse me, I meant heavens no obviously.
What's wrong with restoring the roof to it's original shape, with similar materials. There might be a problem with finding the wooden beams, but it can be done and it would look so much better than those hideous "artist impressions".
No one is forgetting that, Caridina. But there's no reason why the roof can't do more than just sit there. Three quarters of the stone vault perished in the fire so it will need to be replaced. I agree that there doesn't need to be any illuminating the night sky. There's way too much of that happening around the world anyway.
Load More Replies...
Why all the downvotes? people are just trying to get creative and add a contemporary touch to the building. I get that it's a historical building and agree that the design should try to fit that, but some these are pretty good, if you ask me (downvotes expected)
It's okay to be contemporary and creative. Gothic Architecture was the most stylish and contemporary in its time and it originated in France. But I think to plonk a different style of architecture (no matter how nice it looks) over an old design would be a huge cop out and would disrespect the architect and French art in general. By all means, create a beautiful modern building, but maybe just do it somewhere else with someone else budget.
Load More Replies...
It doesn't match any of them with the classic and traditional architecture. The model presented by me is the best to preserve the old features. novo-model...31-png.jpg 
Why can't it just be built as close to the design as the original? Why all these weird beacons and glass roofs? It's meant to be a part of history not a giant crystal museum. All these ideas are realllllly bad...
As my mother use to say when I picked up her porcelain figurines, "Just put it back!"
What's characteristic for a gothic cathedral is how light and spacious it is. With previously used methods cathedrals had very thick wall with rather narrow windows. The invention of the buttress allowed for thin supporting pillars with (for the time) absolutely huge areas of glass in between. I'm afraid a glass roof would compete too much with what originally made the main space of this cathedral so special.
In Gothic times builders tried to reach the sky, Le Duc tried it also in 19th century and have come closer. Now it's possible to make it happen whith a rocket lauch site on the roof. notre-dame...3534c2.jpg 
They are all hideous except the first one. They are turning a beautiful building into a mockery of everything it stands for!!
Why no "before" pic? I'm not religious and I'm from Canada and have never had an urge to visit France. I have no idea what it looked like before.
Search the Internet for Notre Dame and you'll find plenty of pictures from before the fire.
Load More Replies... 
Every renovation ever done to Notre Dame has been a redesign, right up to and including that abomination of a fake “gothic” spire that finally had the good taste to burn down.
Load More Replies...
In a lot of these Reconstruction Designs the Liberal heathens have removed the symbol of the Christen Cross …. ................................BRAVO...…………………….
While I like the idea of people visiting the spire etc.. most of this are horrible! I never cared for the spire because if just didn't fit the architecture ...ugh these are horrible.
A new design would be disrespectful to Viollet-le-Duc and to the Gothic Art movement. Notre Dame is a world icon that was crafted with patience, finesse and a great attention to detail. Adding a basic modern designed spire and roof would also send a message that people don't know how to design or construct Gothic architecture anymore. I'm all for modern architecture but if you want that, build it somewhere else. There are too many design studios with big egos that feel the need to put their stamp on everything to promote themselves. These concepts are missing the point, it's not a greenhouse or an office building, or a bakery, or a museum. It's a Church.
so others think i watched in horror as that old church burnt down,to be quite frank i couldn't careless what happened.i was to busy watching lesbian porn in HD
Am I the only person who thought the 19th century spire was ugly, disproportionate in size and out of place? Here's a chance to rebuild without the spire....
They could rebuild the original roof much easier than when it was originally built. A few skylights- maybe. But stop trying to futurize a medieval structure. It was beautiful the way it was. The glass rooves are a poor concept- too fragile and it would heat up the interior. They could rebuild the spire the way it was! It's not as if the entire building was gutted!
Replace the damage with an exact copy of what it originally was but use flame retardant on everything to prevent it happing again. Its a shame the original wood is no longer available. If you re-design the cathedral then its no longer the historical building it used to be with a beauty that drew in admirers of its architecture. Doing this sort of thing would be discrediting Notre Dame and reduce its value as a historical land mark completely.
There is a reason that architects don't just rebuild it the way it used to be: They are not allowed to. If you are an artist, you can't create something in an old style, because you always need to create something new and contemporary. Otherwise we would still be stuck in antiquity. I'm not aure if there's a written rule for that, but you are not allowed to make something in a style that is obsolete. I don't like that rule very much, mind you. I'm a sculptor and have a master's in fine arts. My friends who are architects told me this. This is also the reason why a building - even if it's abandoned and ugly as sin - is still standing, because of its "historical importance" (I'm from Europe, Croatia, so maybe approaches differ from country-to country).
That sounds like a load of baloney, sorry. Architects design what their clients want.
Load More Replies...
I'm sure I'm going to get a lot of down-votes for this, but who the bloody hell are some of these "artists?" Some of these look like a small child threw-up over Microsoft Paint. I do quite like the first design though.
Looking at these, I feel like Madeline Kahn's Roman empress character in History of the World, Part 1: "No, no, no, no, no, no, no, no...", except there's isn't anything here to say "yes" to.
I guess I understand the desire to take the opportunity to update the structure, but... I don't know. It's a historical building and probably should reflect the era in which it was built. My 2¢
Please just rebuild it like it was. And glass roofs? Seriously? In the summer it would feel very nice to be inside the building...
This is the First Panda Post that I looked to see which one got most down votes
This cathedral has been rebuilt many times, and I presume staying true to the original design. Or close to it. Why not try that! It's a church, a house of worship for thousands, maybe millions, of people. Honor that faith, even if you don't share it.
It should just be replaced to act somewhat like before the fire using minimal wood, future generations should be able to learn that there was a fire once.
#3 is the best one. (With antique roses growing inside for the bees, perfume floating down into the cathedral, and what better gift to give a lady than roses?)
Charge people to go in with sledge hammers and knock it down. Then give the money to the starving poor people.
Tyler Duffy, you are arguably the most underrated BP troll.
Load More Replies... Because this cathedral is like Christmas, people think more of the building itself than what it is supposed to represent. I agree the church overlords are all evil for what they cover up to this day, but that's sorta besides the point here. Here it's about the building itself.
Load More Replies... Oh, please aunt messy help us poor ignorant 'muricans learn us some culture, you must be a purty smart lady, did you go to school at Oxford like Jethro Bodean, down there where the oxen ford the river? Why nobody else could a figured that maybe a building might get spruced up a bit every couple hundred years, but I knowed that cause even the Walmart gets new did ever so often and shoot I bet that church is most as famous as Walmart.
Load More Replies...
Why all these glass roofs? Old paintings and textiles bleach from being exposed to UV-lights (that is why most museums tend to be quite dark). I hope they build the roof like it was, but with more fire detectors.
Never before did I downvote every single entry of a list, but this time I did. All 13 concepts are ugly.
They added 4 concepts but I still don't like any of them.
Load More Replies... Notre-Dame is not a museum. It's a worship place that deserves all our respect. Shouldn't be treated as a game for architects. As a Parisian, I can feel the incredible bond we have with our church. It has to be rebuild as it was. We surely have all the talented people for that. That's the only way to comfort people that really love her.
I think it’s important to be respectful about a place of worship, but we shouldn’t pretend the spire that burned was anything but a game for architects 19th century style.
Load More Replies... Why do they all have glass roofs? Can't anyone come up with a design that involved..idk..original architecture? It ain't the Crystal Cathedral ya know.
I know that it is not my heritage.. But I like better to restore the old look, please..
These are an abomination. The new spire/roof should be an exact replica of the original.
No on the first 12. A big hell no one #13! Excuse me, I meant heavens no obviously.
What's wrong with restoring the roof to it's original shape, with similar materials. There might be a problem with finding the wooden beams, but it can be done and it would look so much better than those hideous "artist impressions".
No one is forgetting that, Caridina. But there's no reason why the roof can't do more than just sit there. Three quarters of the stone vault perished in the fire so it will need to be replaced. I agree that there doesn't need to be any illuminating the night sky. There's way too much of that happening around the world anyway.
Load More Replies... Why all the downvotes? people are just trying to get creative and add a contemporary touch to the building. I get that it's a historical building and agree that the design should try to fit that, but some these are pretty good, if you ask me (downvotes expected)
It's okay to be contemporary and creative. Gothic Architecture was the most stylish and contemporary in its time and it originated in France. But I think to plonk a different style of architecture (no matter how nice it looks) over an old design would be a huge cop out and would disrespect the architect and French art in general. By all means, create a beautiful modern building, but maybe just do it somewhere else with someone else budget.
Load More Replies... It doesn't match any of them with the classic and traditional architecture. The model presented by me is the best to preserve the old features. novo-model...31-png.jpg
Why can't it just be built as close to the design as the original? Why all these weird beacons and glass roofs? It's meant to be a part of history not a giant crystal museum. All these ideas are realllllly bad...
As my mother use to say when I picked up her porcelain figurines, "Just put it back!"
What's characteristic for a gothic cathedral is how light and spacious it is. With previously used methods cathedrals had very thick wall with rather narrow windows. The invention of the buttress allowed for thin supporting pillars with (for the time) absolutely huge areas of glass in between. I'm afraid a glass roof would compete too much with what originally made the main space of this cathedral so special.
In Gothic times builders tried to reach the sky, Le Duc tried it also in 19th century and have come closer. Now it's possible to make it happen whith a rocket lauch site on the roof. notre-dame...3534c2.jpg
They are all hideous except the first one. They are turning a beautiful building into a mockery of everything it stands for!!
Why no "before" pic? I'm not religious and I'm from Canada and have never had an urge to visit France. I have no idea what it looked like before.
Search the Internet for Notre Dame and you'll find plenty of pictures from before the fire.
Load More Replies... Every renovation ever done to Notre Dame has been a redesign, right up to and including that abomination of a fake “gothic” spire that finally had the good taste to burn down.
Load More Replies... In a lot of these Reconstruction Designs the Liberal heathens have removed the symbol of the Christen Cross …. ................................BRAVO...…………………….
While I like the idea of people visiting the spire etc.. most of this are horrible! I never cared for the spire because if just didn't fit the architecture ...ugh these are horrible.
A new design would be disrespectful to Viollet-le-Duc and to the Gothic Art movement. Notre Dame is a world icon that was crafted with patience, finesse and a great attention to detail. Adding a basic modern designed spire and roof would also send a message that people don't know how to design or construct Gothic architecture anymore. I'm all for modern architecture but if you want that, build it somewhere else. There are too many design studios with big egos that feel the need to put their stamp on everything to promote themselves. These concepts are missing the point, it's not a greenhouse or an office building, or a bakery, or a museum. It's a Church.
so others think i watched in horror as that old church burnt down,to be quite frank i couldn't careless what happened.i was to busy watching lesbian porn in HD
Am I the only person who thought the 19th century spire was ugly, disproportionate in size and out of place? Here's a chance to rebuild without the spire....
They could rebuild the original roof much easier than when it was originally built. A few skylights- maybe. But stop trying to futurize a medieval structure. It was beautiful the way it was. The glass rooves are a poor concept- too fragile and it would heat up the interior. They could rebuild the spire the way it was! It's not as if the entire building was gutted!
Replace the damage with an exact copy of what it originally was but use flame retardant on everything to prevent it happing again. Its a shame the original wood is no longer available. If you re-design the cathedral then its no longer the historical building it used to be with a beauty that drew in admirers of its architecture. Doing this sort of thing would be discrediting Notre Dame and reduce its value as a historical land mark completely.
There is a reason that architects don't just rebuild it the way it used to be: They are not allowed to. If you are an artist, you can't create something in an old style, because you always need to create something new and contemporary. Otherwise we would still be stuck in antiquity. I'm not aure if there's a written rule for that, but you are not allowed to make something in a style that is obsolete. I don't like that rule very much, mind you. I'm a sculptor and have a master's in fine arts. My friends who are architects told me this. This is also the reason why a building - even if it's abandoned and ugly as sin - is still standing, because of its "historical importance" (I'm from Europe, Croatia, so maybe approaches differ from country-to country).
That sounds like a load of baloney, sorry. Architects design what their clients want.
Load More Replies... I'm sure I'm going to get a lot of down-votes for this, but who the bloody hell are some of these "artists?" Some of these look like a small child threw-up over Microsoft Paint. I do quite like the first design though.
Looking at these, I feel like Madeline Kahn's Roman empress character in History of the World, Part 1: "No, no, no, no, no, no, no, no...", except there's isn't anything here to say "yes" to.
I guess I understand the desire to take the opportunity to update the structure, but... I don't know. It's a historical building and probably should reflect the era in which it was built. My 2¢
Please just rebuild it like it was. And glass roofs? Seriously? In the summer it would feel very nice to be inside the building...
This is the First Panda Post that I looked to see which one got most down votes
This cathedral has been rebuilt many times, and I presume staying true to the original design. Or close to it. Why not try that! It's a church, a house of worship for thousands, maybe millions, of people. Honor that faith, even if you don't share it.
It should just be replaced to act somewhat like before the fire using minimal wood, future generations should be able to learn that there was a fire once.
#3 is the best one. (With antique roses growing inside for the bees, perfume floating down into the cathedral, and what better gift to give a lady than roses?)
Charge people to go in with sledge hammers and knock it down. Then give the money to the starving poor people.
Tyler Duffy, you are arguably the most underrated BP troll.
Load More Replies... Because this cathedral is like Christmas, people think more of the building itself than what it is supposed to represent. I agree the church overlords are all evil for what they cover up to this day, but that's sorta besides the point here. Here it's about the building itself.
Load More Replies... Oh, please aunt messy help us poor ignorant 'muricans learn us some culture, you must be a purty smart lady, did you go to school at Oxford like Jethro Bodean, down there where the oxen ford the river? Why nobody else could a figured that maybe a building might get spruced up a bit every couple hundred years, but I knowed that cause even the Walmart gets new did ever so often and shoot I bet that church is most as famous as Walmart.
Load More Replies... 