Huge fire at Notre Dame cathedral, Paris

[littlebabyjesus]

My favourite tourist attraction in Paris is the catacombs.

 

[teuchter]

I don’t see a problem with people feeling that. Personally, I’ve never been to Paris, but I’m sure that having seen it in person, and being able to associate it with particular memories, would give the fire a personal significance. Of course it would; that’s just human.

Not saying it's a problem as such. Just commenting on the misattribution of the root of the building's value for many.

It's like when Princess Diana died. Was she actually some kind of saint? No, she was probably a nice enough person but people's grief wasn't really for her the actual human being, it was to do with what she symbolised for them.

 

[Sprocket.]

Diana is dead? Can this week get any worse?

 

[Spymaster]

My favourite tourist attraction in Paris is the catacombs.

I've never understood how they got the bones there. Did they bury people somewhere else then dig up the bones when the flesh and everything else had rotted away, or did they remove the bones from recent killed people?

 

[inva]

I've never understood how they got the bones there. Did they bury people somewhere else then dig up the bones when the flesh and everything else had rotted away, or did they remove the bones from recent killed people?

They'd be put there once they're already skeletons iirc

 

[DotCommunist]

the graveyards of paris were overflowing. The ground was giving the dead back. They got remains from pits, tombs and other places of burial and did it at night.

 

[danny la rouge]

Not saying it's a problem as such. Just commenting on the misattribution of the root of the building's value for many.

It's like when Princess Diana died. Was she actually some kind of saint? No, she was probably a nice enough person but people's grief wasn't really for her the actual human being, it was to do with what she symbolised for them.

Do you think a wave of Notre Dame grief hysteria is sweeping the world? It may be, I don’t know. It would be interesting to analyse if so.

Maybe it forces people to confront impermanence in a way that symbolises their own mortality. I’d read that research paper.

 

[gentlegreen]

Nous sommes tous Parisiens.

Since I'm (still) hoping to become naturalised French one day, I find myself deeply affected by all the recent horrors that have happened there.

I'm rather surprised they don't install dry-risers and sprinklers when doing this sort of work - plus extensive monitoring kit.

I don't recall if I went inside when I visited in 1975, but doubtless I will visit Paris again once I'm settled on the continent.

 

[danny la rouge]

the graveyards of paris were overflowing. The ground was giving the dead back. They got remains from pits, tombs and other places of burial and did it at night.

I’ve read that novel. “Pure”, was it?

 

[Pickman's model]

I've never understood how they got the bones there. Did they bury people somewhere else then dig up the bones when the flesh and everything else had rotted away, or did they remove the bones from recent killed people?

they took people to the catacombs to die, so they wouldn't have to cart the bones about.

 

[Sprocket.]

They'd be put there once they're already skeletons iirc

The French are macabre, let’s not make no bones about it.

 

[Yossarian]

Cemeteries began to be emptied in 1786, beginning with Les Innocents. It took the city 12 years to move all the bones—from bodies numbering between 6 and 7 million—into the catacombs. Some of the oldest date back as far as the Merovingian era, more than 1,200 years ago.

Beneath Paris' City Streets, There's an Empire of Death Waiting for Tourists | Travel | Smithsonian

 

[danny la rouge]

They'd be put there once they're already skeletons iirc

I’d say that was the key.

 

[teuchter]

Do you think a wave of Notre Dame grief hysteria is sweeping the world?

A wee bit I think, yes.

 

[DotCommunist]

I’ve read that novel. “Pure”, was it?

Documentary for me I think. Possibly nina ramirez? beeb in any case

 

[danny la rouge]

A wee bit I think, yes.

OK, maybe so. I see my BBC News app is taken up by several articles about it. But then that’s the nature of rolling news. I expect it to die down in the next day or so.

 

[Spymaster]

I’d say that was the key.

I think you're right, tibia honest.

 

[ElizabethofYork]

I think you're right, tibia honest.

Don't try to be humerus

 

[Spymaster]

Don't try to be humerus

I'm not, I'm just ribbing you.

 

[Sprocket.]

I'm not, I'm just ribbing you.

I thought you were trying to be hip.

 

[JuanTwoThree]

Can anybody think of a single great building whose construction was not in part for some dubious purpose, ranging from state religion (cathedrals) to state power (castles and famous walls) or to big up some nobleman, billionaire, dictator, philanthropist or whatever? Look how often these places end up with a person's name: Cheops, Hadrian, Offa, Buckingham, Guggenheim.

BTW I was thinking of how many words try to convey much the same feeling: marvellous, wonderful, awesome. 'Fabulous' meaning 'fable-ous'. 'Magnificent' means 'making great' I suppose, or 'doing great'. 'Astonishing' originally meaning 'thunder-striking'.

We may use them now to talk about a quite nice meal but they had the sense of jaw-dropping amazement.

So I don't too much mind the dodginess of the first if it gives me the second.

 

[littlebabyjesus]

Can anybody think of a single great building whose construction was not in part for some dubious purpose, r

Already mentioned. St Pancras Station.

 

[Pickman's model]

Can anybody think of a single great building whose construction was not in part for some dubious purpose, ranging from state religion (cathedrals) to state power (castles and famous walls) or to big up some nobleman, billionaire, dictator, philanthropist or whatever? Look how often these places end up with a person's name: Cheops, Hadrian, Offa, Buckingham, Guggenheim.

BTW I was thinking of how many words try to convey much the same feeling: marvellous, wonderful, awesome. 'Fabulous' meaning 'fable-ous'. 'Magnificent' means 'making great' I suppose, or 'doing great'. 'Astonishing' originally meaning 'thunder-striking'.

We may use them now to talk about a quite nice meal but they had the sense of jaw-dropping amazement.

So I don't too much mind the dodginess of the first if it gives me the second.

offa left no buildings

 

[teuchter]

Already mentioned. St Pancras Station.

Built by Victorian capitalists with dodgy workers' rights attitudes

 

[Pickman's model]

Already mentioned. St Pancras Station.

constructed for the midland railway to make money, most people would consider that to be a dubious purpose when it's for commercial gain: unless you're saying capitalism is laudable.

if it had been built by a nationalised railway you'd have a point

 

[JuanTwoThree]

Already mentioned. St Pancras Station.

It wasn't built to underline power and century-long heritage? Just to be pretty?

 

[littlebabyjesus]

It wasn't built to underline power and century-long heritage? Just to be pretty?

Well yes. Potlatch. Pretty much any grand project has an element of that, whatever its functional purpose.

 

[Pickman's model]

Can anybody think of a single great building whose construction was not in part for some dubious purpose, ranging from state religion (cathedrals) to state power (castles and famous walls) or to big up some nobleman, billionaire, dictator, philanthropist or whatever? Look how often these places end up with a person's name: Cheops, Hadrian, Offa, Buckingham, Guggenheim.

BTW I was thinking of how many words try to convey much the same feeling: marvellous, wonderful, awesome. 'Fabulous' meaning 'fable-ous'. 'Magnificent' means 'making great' I suppose, or 'doing great'. 'Astonishing' originally meaning 'thunder-striking'.

We may use them now to talk about a quite nice meal but they had the sense of jaw-dropping amazement.

So I don't too much mind the dodginess of the first if it gives me the second.

british library

 

[DotCommunist]

Taj Mahal was built to be a tomb

 

[JuanTwoThree]

offa left no buildings

Offa had it built though, so I'm stretching the definition of 'building' to suit my purposes.