France is hotly debating the interior design of Notre-Dame. Some want to try something new – others don’t want a multi-purpose hall.
Paris – It sounds theatrical, almost sensational: “What the fire spared, the diocese now wants to destroy”: under this title hundreds of intellectuals address the public in order to “save” the Notre-Dame cathedral, which burned down two and a half years ago. Some passages read quite dramatically: the interior design project transforms “silliness into kitsch”, write the cultural heritage specialist Stéphane Bern or the philosopher Alain Finkielkraut. Their reaction to the plans for Notre-Dame reached as far as London, where the conservative Daily Telegraph was furious that the building in the heart of Paris would become a “Disneyland of political correctness”.
It is obvious: after the decision to restore the roof structure true to the original in spring, the interior reconstruction of the nave also caused heated discussions. Father Gilles Drouin just wanted to keep up with the times. The Commissioner of the Diocese of Paris saw the reconstruction of the 800-year-old cathedral as a good opportunity for some adjustments. A week ago he submitted his proposals to the commission of the responsible Ministry of Culture.
Notre-Dame: Contemporary art is designed to attract visitors
Before the big fire, around twelve million people visited Notre-Dame every year. After the reopening in 2024, they should no longer be able to flow from the side, but through the main portal into the church – and thus immediately get a feeling for the passage “from shadow to light” of the altar.
That could still be done. But Drouin also wants to integrate the dozen side confessional chapels into a “liturgical path”. Among other things, it should also include nature-related – today one would say: ecological – topics; It would be flanked by contemporary art, for example by Anselm Kiefer or Louise Bourgeois. In addition, Drouin imagined that projectors for travelers from all over the world should project Bible quotes in many languages onto the wall.
The cleric of the Catholic Institute also came up with the idea of radically changing the interior lighting: It should no longer illuminate the magnificent vaults, i.e. strive to God, but rather bathe half of the nave in darkness. Drouin only wants to illuminate those who are praying – and not with candlelight, as in the Middle Ages, but with small lamps embedded in the backrests of the pews.
Notre-Dame: “A strictly identical renovation would be a surrender”
In the Internet forums, not a few sneer that the illumination does not allow for inner contemplation, but rather resembles the “runway of an airport”. Drouin made it even worse with the idea of providing the pews with wheels so that they could be pushed aside on special occasions. “Notre-Dame – a multi-purpose hall!” Indignantly all those who had already pushed through the identical reconstruction of the roof turret by Eugène Viollet-le-Duc. Now they claim that “a centuries-old harmony will be destroyed” in the nave.
Gilles Drouin defends himself, by no means having a concert hall or a theater stage in mind, but rather a “liturgical space”. Religious historians support him by pointing out that cathedrals had already been changed again and again in the Middle Ages; in Strasbourg, for example, it recently became apparent that the stone walls were painted earlier. And the former Louvre director Henri Loyrette recently stated: “Whether with contemporary art or not: a strictly identical renovation would be a surrender.”
But all the voices critical of modernization, which form a sacred alliance of secular purists and church traditionalists, make themselves heard significantly more. One tweeted that one had to be glad that the church windows weren’t also removed right away. Right-wing presidential candidate Eric Zemmour stated categorically: “Notre-Dame must remain Notre-Dame.”
The decision lies with the Minister of Culture Roselyne Bachelot
The prior advisory National Commission for Cultural Heritage and Architecture has, to a certain extent, torn Drouin’s concept in the air. She rejects lamps and rollable benches, and the old statues of saints in the side chapels are to remain, which would make it impossible to place or hang modern art.
The final decision rests with Culture Minister Roselyne Bachelot. It follows a more conservative taste and probably also the recommendations of the commission. Recently, President Emmanuel Macron has been leaning in the same direction. Two years ago he suggested a “contemporary architectural gesture”; But the environment has changed: in the current presidential election campaign, openly reactionary candidates like Zemmour are setting the tone.
Stéphane Bern, currently omnipresent on television, says conciliatory that he is “not against improvements, only against distortions”. And with the statement, “I think people want to meet Notre-Dame again as they had known”, the spokesman for the silent majority. (Stefan Brändle)
List of rubric lists: © Imago
