The European Tribune is a forum for thoughtful dialogue of European and international issues. You are invited to post comments and your own articles.
Please REGISTER to post.
I'm not sure exactly what governs the beauty of a spire - I guess to some extent it's in the eye of the beholder, but no doubt ratios and geometries enter into it.
Here's my favourite...
"The future is already here -- it's just not very evenly distributed" William Gibson
The shift between the roman style to the gothic one, was more on the separation with "nature" and relationship to another plane ! (more of a political statement). "What can I do, What can I write, Against the fall of Night". A.E. Housman
Our project is not nearly so grand. You will notice that the spire of the 1894 building is much taller and more graceful than the 1862 version. But that is part of the charm of the 1862 effort--it was built by amateurs. These folks were barely off the boat, the USA Civil War was raging, the new land had a harsh climate with a short growing season and farming required new methods, few of the settlers spoke English, etc. Ole Rolvaag wrote a book about these settlers called Giants in the Earth. "Remember the I35W bridge--who needs terrorists when there are Republicans"
However, the only one that was taller was Lincoln-and that did fall down. There's something rather heroic about the way these builders pushed their craft to the limits, as evidenced by some of the corrections they had to make later.
Another example, though not of a spire, is the West Front of Peterborough Cathedral.
If you think the porch looks like an afterthought, you'd be right. From the right angle, you can see quite clearly that it's propping the whole thing up.
If I remember right, an extended tower in the middle did collapse, but that's a vague memory from 20 years ago and I could be thinking about another cathedral.
If you ever get the chance get to the top of the center tower there. the view to the east is fairly spectacular out across the fens. Any idiot can face a crisis - it's day to day living that wears you out.
Still, I did give up on the idea of ex cathedra being infallible a long time ago... :)
looking in various places there is the story that the porch was built as support, but I'm sure I was told that it isn't true. Any idiot can face a crisis - it's day to day living that wears you out.
However, I have a feeling I first saw this on the (sufficiently antique to warrant its own restoration) information board on the cathedral greens, and it's entirely possible that a mistake on there could simply have been endlessly repeated.
Interesting...
(my head is between the fourth and fifth heads in the front row on the left hand side) Any idiot can face a crisis - it's day to day living that wears you out.
I've been out this evening, but I've traced the porch-holding-up-the-West-Front argument back as far as 1859:
The porch ...materially injures the uniform effect of the front; but its insertion seems to have been rather a question of necessity than of taste. It was probably erected "as an abutment against the west front, which, by a bulging outward of the pillars or a settlement of the foundations, was falling forward toward the west. It was, in fact, overweighted by the stone spires and pinnacles of the flanking towers, which those structures, having no proper buttresses, were ill adapted to bear. The construction of this elegant little edifice is extremely scientific, especially in the manner in which the thrust is distributed through the medium of the side turrets, so as to fall upon the buttresses in front. These turrets, being erected against one side of the triangular columns, on the right and the left hand, support them in two directions at once, viz. from collapsing towards each other, and from falling forward. The latter pressure is thrown wholly upon the buttresses in front, which project seven feet beyond the base of the great pillars."
Handbook to the Cathedrals of England, 1862, quoting F. A. Paley, "Remarks on the Architecture of Peterborough Cathedral", 2nd Ed, 1859.
On the other hand, the definitive modern book seems to be An Architectural History of Peterborough Cathedral by Lisa Reilly . At a mere £165 on Amazon, I don't suppose I'll be buying it any time soon. However, it could be significant that, although every review and excerpt I've found mentions the porch, none has referred to its supposed structural function.
I wonder if the library has a copy....
And if you are, that would make this an interesting example of how good stories win out over boring facts.
And...cough...I might also...possibly...have emailed the cathedral architect to ask whether he thinks it's structural or not.
I wonder if he'll reply? :)
by Frank Schnittger - Sep 17
by Frank Schnittger - Sep 10 3 comments
by Frank Schnittger - Sep 1 6 comments
by Frank Schnittger - Sep 3 32 comments
by Oui - Sep 6 3 comments
by gmoke - Aug 25 1 comment
by Oui - Sep 18
by Oui - Sep 172 comments
by Oui - Sep 154 comments
by Oui - Sep 151 comment
by Oui - Sep 1315 comments
by Oui - Sep 13
by Oui - Sep 124 comments
by Oui - Sep 1010 comments
by Frank Schnittger - Sep 103 comments
by Oui - Sep 10
by Oui - Sep 92 comments
by Oui - Sep 84 comments
by Oui - Sep 715 comments
by Oui - Sep 72 comments
by Oui - Sep 63 comments
by Oui - Sep 54 comments
by gmoke - Sep 5
by Oui - Sep 47 comments