Fire at Paris's Notre Dame Cathedral

[WhatWouldJohnCrichtonDo?]

1 minute ago, Beermeet said:

It's like a sober Drunk History on FJ right now!  

What makes you so sure I'm sober?  (Just teasing. I never drink on school nights, and I've never really been drunk, just a bit "buzzed".)

[laPapessaGiovanna]

2 hours ago, Beermeet said:

Especially because the Catholic church can totally afford to rebuild using their own money. They really should refuse it or take it and donate to hate crimes against other lesser known places of worship.  

Notre Dame is completely owned by the French State. The Catholic Church just "uses" it for worship and religious ceremonies, but doesn't own nor manage beyond the religious aspects.

[dharmapunk]

I was amazed to see the donations pouring in. Especially sums of a million euros and more. Don't get me wrong - I am all for rebuilding the cathedral. But there are children starving and millions of people without access to clean water and medical care. Would it not be more important to help some of them? Notre Dame is Parises most visited tourist attraction. They could probably afford to rebuild it from the income generated by tourism alone. 

[laPapessaGiovanna]

2 hours ago, Beermeet said:

They could donate though. It would be the right thing to do. For all I know they have.  I assumed they are heavily tied to such places, no?

I don't think they'll offer money, first because 850 million euros have already been pledged (nearly one billion dollars, a mighty sum), second because they have offered (very politely as not to offend the French) technical expertise, let's not forget that the Vatican manages St. Peter, the Vatican Museums and many other ancient buildings and basiliche, they may know a thing or two about antiques restoration. Also I hope that they are throwing whatever budget they have at keeping the treasures they own and manage safe from fire, earthquakes and whatever disaster may happen. Even a minor blaze in a place such as the Sistine Chapel or the Vatican Rooms would make the damage at Notre Dame pale by comparison, no kidding.

[laPapessaGiovanna]

18 minutes ago, dharmapunk said:

I was amazed to see the donations pouring in. Especially sums of a million euros and more. Don't get me wrong - I am all for rebuilding the cathedral. But there are children starving and millions of people without access to clean water and medical care. Would it not be more important to help some of them? Notre Dame is Parises most visited tourist attraction. They could probably afford to rebuild it from the income generated by tourism alone. 

Well I guess that it depends on the value you give to art and history, to many it's priceless.

Starving children exist and that's a shame on humankind, but let's not delude us into thinking that the millions pledged to rebuild Notre Dame would have gone to feeding those children.

Personally I think we can walk and talk at the same time so I don't see how preserving world heritage sites can prevent us from fighting for equal access to resources, against wars, against damaging commercial practices, against corruption, against climate changes, against pollution, ruin of agricultural soils and every sort of social injustices that are the real causes of hunger in the world.

A Cultural Revolution approach to our history and monuments isn't going to gain us a better world or a more equal society. It usually leaves behind a humanity that's poorer in every sense.

I don't remember how much it was the Notre Dame's entry fee, but I don't think it was high enough to pay for such a gigantic restoration effort, it probably just covered day to day maintenance care. France has a policy of making access to museums and monuments as affordable as possible (compared to my country at least) because art and culture belong to everyone.

[dharmapunk]

3 hours ago, laPapessaGiovanna said:

Well I guess that it depends on the value you give to art and history, to many it's priceless.

Starving children exist and that's a shame on humankind, but let's not delude us into thinking that the millions pledged to rebuild Notre Dame would have gone to feeding those children.

Personally I think we can walk and talk at the same time so I don't see how preserving world heritage sites can prevent us from fighting for equal access to resources, against wars, against damaging commercial practices, against corruption, against climate changes, against pollution, ruin of agricultural soils and every sort of social injustices that are the real causes of hunger in the world.

A Cultural Revolution approach to our history and monuments isn't going to gain us a better world or a more equal society. It usually leaves behind a humanity that's poorer in every sense.

I don't remember how much it was the Notre Dame's entry fee, but I don't think it was high enough to pay for such a gigantic restoration effort, it probably just covered day to day maintenance care. France has a policy of making access to museums and monuments as affordable as possible (compared to my country at least) because art and culture belong to everyone.

I can see your point, although I did not intend my post to be interpreted as a "Cultural Revolution approach" - I see it more as a humanistic approach. In my eyes people are more important than buildings. Even old, beautiful buildings. I am not saying that we should not restore Notre Dame or that cultural monuments are not important. In fact I was very upset when I heard about the fire at Notre Dame. But when I think about how far that money could go in relieving i.e. the hunger crisis in Mosambique, I can't help but think that we sometimes don't have our priorities right.

[LilMissMetaphor]

(I'm not Catholic), but like many of us love history and ancient buildings and art, and have been to Notre Dame, and I'm getting ragey over the number of dumbasses on Facebook posting what people should be doing with their money in the aftermath.  You fucktards, do what you want with your own cash and stop trying to decide what others should do with theirs.  I donated $30 to a gofundme last month for a teenager in our small recently diagnosed with cancer.  Was it a lot of money? No.  Could I have given more? Of course.  Should I have saved it for the homeless person over in the next town? That's not your call.

It's not a competition and if your first or strongest reaction to hearing that the Notre fucking Dame burned down was "what about meeeeee, I need money toooo," then you're a whiny little shit with no cultural or historical perspective.

 

 

[ViolaSebastian]

@LilMissMetaphor, that was kind of my reaction as well. I can (and trust me, I do) feel upset and badly about multiple things at once. I don't feel like feeling badly about Notre Dame takes away from feeling badly about terrorism, or children in cages, or the various clusterfucks going on in my home city and state.

I understand that people don't care enough about tragedies that happen to members of the African-American community and other communities. At the same time, I don't think that caring and support has to be a zero-sum game.

[Alisamer]

@ViolaSebastian I agree. It seems no matter what happens somebody has to find something worse to bring up. (Speaking generally of the "but the starving children" type, not of anyone specifically.) There's always someone who has it worse. There's always a worse disaster. That doesn't mean we can't care about the "lesser" ones too.

And honestly I don't get the "leave politics out of it" posts either. Yes, all world leaders are likely to comment. But no, the majority of them don't try to armchair quarterback the response to it. 

I've been to Notre Dame. It's a place I know. It's important, and beautiful, and historic, and over 850 years old. It's instantly recognizable to most people in the Western world, and the images of it on fire look like a disaster movie come to life - where a beloved landmark is destroyed as a metaphor showing the destruction of civilization. I can be sad about that. It doesn't mean I don't feel sad for the hungry homeless guy on the corner, too. It doesn't mean I don't feel even worse for the Black churches that were attacked and burned.

When my church burned down, many people came and gathered around as the firefighters were controlling the fire. Some prayed, some just watched, but all were horrified. And while we've gotten no financial assistance I'm aware of (we're using insurance and our own building fund), we got a ton of other help - while the fire was still burning several other churches (all of other denominations) were offering to let us meet in their facilities. The city let us use their community center without charge for Sunday services until we were allowed back in the undamaged part of our church. Our Vacation Bible School that had been scheduled for the next week was held at the Methodist church down the street (we're Baptist, btw). Community members were coming up to the church leaders on-scene and saying "I know a really good stained glass restorer" and "I have some good pictures of the building if you need them to help rebuild" and things like that. As soon as the fire was out, the firefighters and community members started carrying things that could be salvaged out of the sanctuary. Including the pastor's mother's bible that had been inside the pulpit, which was very important to him. And he wasn't even there, he was traveling in Europe when the fire began.

In disasters, people are inspired to help. The bigger the disaster, the more inspiration. It's just human nature. 

I seem to be only capable of posting either novels or one liners. Sorry.

[Bethella]

I stole this from a friend on Facebook. I believe it was originally written by a rabbi.

[AliceInFundyland]

@Bethella

I was about to go on a rant. But that's about the nuts of it.

 

 

 

[Jinder Roles]

26 minutes ago, Bethella said:

I stole this from a friend on Facebook. I believe it was originally written by a rabbi.

It’s a lovely sentiment. Hopefully one day with will actually be true on a societal level. 

[AliceInFundyland]

@Jinder Roles

I think what is bothering me here is that your comments are somewhat dismissive of the FJ community's right to mourn.

Some of us, who aren't Catholic, and haven't been to Europe spent the day crying about a building.

I mourn many things. This particular community mourns quite a bit whenever we get wind of things that are troubling. We cry a lot in solidarity with our sisters and brothers everywhere.

Dismissing how people grieve is callous. Your comments are starting to come across as flippant.

ETA: I really don't want to start an argument here. I resolutely understand that you feel this is not of your history. And I understand that you feel like other world events and issues should get equal attention. I believe we have addressed that up thread.

Using one tragic event to make people feel worse about others through guilt is not the way to effectively communicate for change.

We can use it to shine light on other situations, such as the black churches . But making people think that their pain is wrongly felt, or less than..

Just no.

 

[Carm_88]

I hope the world eventually becomes a place where you can have feelings without people telling you that you have no right to them because other people have it worse. That's going to be a good world. 

[Jinder Roles]

 Just to clarify:

I’m not questioning anyone’s right to mourn, or even talking about FJ. That’s not my focus.

As I said several times before, the reaction to Notre Dame is very telling of who and what is really valued in society. All you have to do is look at what gets media coverage, donations, think pieces, tears, research, funding and what doesn’t. 

And yes, you can walk and chew gum at the same time but society doesn’t care to. There’s no incentive. 

2 hours ago, AliceInFundyland said:

@Jinder RolesSome of us, who aren't Catholic, and haven't been to Europe spent the day crying about a building.

 

 

This right here is what I’m talking about! The fact that Notre Dame is seen as “our history” to so many people who have no real connection to it is indicative of which histories we are taught to place value on. It’s all subjective. And it has tangible consequences.

What I’m pointing out isn’t diminishing  your personal mourning. The two aren’t mutually exclusive. It’s an observation, not a judgment. 

I hope it changes...but when the US can pledge millions to Notre Dame but drag their feet on Flint, or when France can respond with the quickness to a church burning but can’t give Haitians their reparations, I have to side eye ??‍♀️

Unfortunately, not all tragedies are created equal. 

[AliceInFundyland]

Your observations are inherently condescending and diminishing. 

It is all our history. It’s yours too. Like it or not. We are all citizens of the world. Mankind. That was my point. I accept Notre Dame’s destruction as painfully as the Christchurch shooting.

Everything has value. And when you laugh your ass off at people crying at burning buildings you are judging.

You are missing my point, to ram home a message of wokeness, and I am done.

[Jinder Roles]

1. Wow, can I put “Citizen of the World” on my passport so I don’t have to deal with all these visitors visas?  

2. Please do not tell me what is and isn’t my history. You know little of it. 

3. In a perfect world, your statements are correct. I was commenting on society now. 

4. A damaged historical artifact and gruesome terrorist attacks aren’t even equivalencies in my brain. 

5. The fact that a historical observation seems a threat to your personal feelings (which I did not comment on),sounds like a you problem. 

6. My point was never to laugh which I’ve explained several times now. 

To sum up: 

[AliceInFundyland]

You did laugh, you did it on your status. None of this would have happened from me if not for that, there is no way you can explain that away.

That is why this incident started, and hopefully has concluded. 

 

[VelociRapture]

19 hours ago, Beermeet said:

It's like a sober Drunk History on FJ right now!  

I LOVE THAT SHOW!!! 

Can we make this a regular thing on FJ? We get our favorite posters their beverage of choice (grape juice and root beer included because fundies) and have them recap stories about their favorite Fundies or FJ moments?! ?

[nausicaa]

46 minutes ago, Jinder Roles said:

6. My point was never to laugh which I’ve explained several times now. 

Except you quite literally wrote "People are really having a vigil for half a burned building lmao. I cannot."

Listen, I do get your point to some extent. Certain subjects receive a lot of attention, while other worthy issues do not. However, I do think your argument in your status update contains some logical fallacies but I'm tired and bitchy right now so I don't trust myself to get into that. 

But I will point out that if your objective is to get people to care more about other topics or think more about how non-white art and architectural achievements have been passed over, this isn't the way to go about it. This flippant, condescending style may get a lot of likes on Twitter, but it doesn't really fly on a discussion forum where people delve a little deeper into the issues. In fact, it's going to turn people off, which seems to undermine your goal.

Unless your goal is just to point out how much smarter and more evolved you are than others. In which case, have at it I guess. 

[47of74]

I had to share this one:
Donald Trump branded 'almighty halfwit' by West Yorkshire fire chief over tweet.
Spoiler A West Yorkshire fire chief has called Donald Trump a "half wit" for suggesting the Notre-Dame cathedral fire in Paris could be extinguished with "flying water tankers".
Deputy chief fire officer Dave Walton responded to the US President's tweet which said: "So horrible to watch the massive fire at Notre Dame Cathedral in Paris.
"Perhaps flying water tankers could be used to put it out. Must act quickly!"
Mr Walton responded by saying: "Of all the almighty half wits in the world...Your expertise in firefighting is on a par with your grasp of humility, equality and honesty.
"Arguably the most unwelcome and ill founded firefighting tip ever issued by anyone ever."
Mr Trump didn't respond to Mr Walton's reply on Twitter but others agreed that dropping tonnes of water from a height might not be the best idea.
Ade Lyden, watch commander with West Midlands Fire Service, said: "Let's totally destroy the 800 year old cathedral by dropping tonnes of water onto it when its structure is already weakened.
"And next week we have Trump on how to split the atom using a Swiss Army knife."
Mr Walton said the suggestion was "ludicrous" and pointed out that a Paris fire department spokesman had said as much.
The spokesman said: "All means are being used, except for water-bombing aircrafts which, if used, could lead to the collapse of the entire structure of the cathedral."
It has also been suggested that dropping tonnes of water from a height could have injured people around the cathedral.
The entire cathedral was minutes away from total destruction, officials say.
However, much of the building survived after 400 firefighters tackled the flames.
Seriously here guys... tell us what you really think of Trump's suggestion. (It was the Swiss Army knife comment that cracked me up completely.)

I’m stealing Almighty Halfwit and might use it in my next letter to the editor involving fuck face. And will use Almighty Fuckwit when I’m feeling less than family friendly.

And no Apple I never mean duck when talking about the Almighty Fuckwit.

[Lisafer]

19 minutes ago, VelociRapture said:

I LOVE THAT SHOW!!! 

Can we make this a regular thing on FJ? We get our favorite posters their beverage of choice (grape juice and root beer included because fundies) and have them recap stories about their favorite Fundies or FJ moments?! ?

True story: although I firmly believe in making marijuana widely available and legal, I had a bad experience with edibles and had to call a friend to talk me down. She made me turn on Drunk History and was laughing her ass off as I narrated the show to her over the phone. Apparently I was doing voices for the characters and everything!

[Vivi_music]

I'm the first to be frowning when I see millionaires pull hundreds of millions of dollars out of their pockets overnight, considering the glaring needs there are in other places. I also question the necessity of foreign governments finding funds to donate to France for the reconstruction. Truthfully, I'd prefer my government to give money to the Innu communities who don't have running water. Just to say: I have not heard of the Canadian government pledge any money for Notre-Dame, it is simply an example. I also agree that a tragedy like this is a good way to shine lights on other places where donations are needed. I agree with all those sentiments

10 hours ago, Alisamer said:

@ViolaSebastian I agree. It seems no matter what happens somebody has to find something worse to bring up. (Speaking generally of the "but the starving children" type, not of anyone specifically.) There's always someone who has it worse. There's always a worse disaster. That doesn't mean we can't care about the "lesser" ones too. 

But ultimately, these big inequalities are not Notre-Dame's fault. I think that is what bothered me as well about people's reaction on Facebook. Is it a contest? To me is looked more like what I call ''casual Facebook snobbishness''. Not EVERYONE but a lot of people being so critical of the public's sympathy for Notre-Dame are not very vocal during the rest of the year concerning other social or environmental issues. They come across as people who want to look ''woke'' online by showing us how aware they are. And I repeat my disclaimer: I'm not saying it is the case for everyone. I know that for a lot of people, it's about being concerned for Notre-Dame AND for the rest: as I am. I am speaking to those who say that we must choose between feeling concerned about Notre-Dame OR about the rest. This conscience police on social networks weighs me a lot.

 

[VelociRapture]

I obviously came in with my Drunk History comment at the exact wrong time. Shame on me for not finishing the thread first. I’m going to wade into the discussion a bit - apologies if I step on any toes or accidentally drift from my lane as a white person. 

@AliceInFundyland @Jinder Roles I think you both have valid points here. I think it’s perfectly ok to be sad about Notre Dame and that’s it’s also possible to feel upset about multiple things at once the way Alice has mentioned. Humans are complex and are capable of feeling multiple things and focusing on multiple topics at once.

That said, I do think Jinder has a pretty important point that might have gotten lost as well - society (and I'm speaking of American society here since I’m American) in general does not place as much value on things that are not inherently connected to white people. That doesn’t mean individuals don’t genuinely care on a personal level and I don’t think it’s meant to be a personal attack. It just means that society in general - our media, our laws, etc. - doesn’t place the same value on, say, three black churches being burnt down in an act of racism or Flint still not having clean water years later as it does on Notre Dame burning down. Another good example is to just flip through history textbooks. I’m hoping they’ve gotten better over the years, but I recall the ones I used were pretty heavily focused on white history. A lot of what I’ve learned about minority history - the Tulsa massacre and the existence of Black Wall Street, the horrific story of Solomon Northup, the massacre at Wounded Knee, that black Trans women were the ones who led during the Stonewall Riots, histories and cultures of various indigenous tribes, the fact that Japanese Americans were forced into prison camps during WW2, even the simple fact that Shirley Chisholm ever ran for President - has been learned as an adult and thanks in large part to the internet, which has connected me to people and information I wouldn’t have found otherwise. 

I think it’s fine for individuals to do whatever they want with their personal money. For our part, my husband and I have not donated to the Notre Dame efforts. There’s enough money and attention being thrown at it already - our money is not needed. I absolutely will draw the line at foreign governments offering financial assistance though, especially my government - Trump has no place offering money to France when that money could be much better spent elsewhere. For instance, again, on ensuring the people of Flint finally have access to water that is not going to kill them or making sure Puerto Rico has money to rebuild after Hurricane Maria. Notre Dame is a beautiful and important building, but the US Government has no right to be offering funds to rebuild it when they’ve done next to nothing for citizens of our own country. 

Again, @AliceInFundyland and @Jinder Roles, I think you both have decent points and I apologize if I unintentionally misconstrued what either of you was saying. 

[Vivi_music]

I also want to add my 2 cents about what a World Heritage site for me (as I work in the field of museums and historical monument).

I will always agree that humans must pass before material things. Which is why like a lot of you, I am sceptical about these huge donations, especially from foreign government and millionaires. But it is without forgetting that Notre-Dame is also about humans: its craftmanship, ingenuity, artistry, culture and memory. It is the collective memory of humankind, through its historical evolution.

And believe me, Notre-Dame really escaped the worst in this fire. I can name you a lot of world heritage site that are in real danger, some that have even been destroyed. The Buddhas of Bamyan are one (I'm still mad about it to this day). Two giant Buddah statues dating back to the 6th century, hewn directly from the sandstone cliffs in Afghanistan. Dynamited by the Talibans in 2001 because they were considered idols. It was a crime against culture and the heritage of the Afghan people. The Great Colonnades in Palmyra or the beautiful mosques in Timbuktu have also been damaged in recent years quite severly. Not to mention the Krak des Chevaliers in Syria (Syria is so full of beautiful heritage sites: the old citadel of Aleppo, ancient city of Damascus, it makes my blood boil). These Heritage sites have all been damaged and not by accidents, but by war and terrorism. Let's just say that I have had an obcession with the Krak des Chevaliers since my history major in college. I'm a bit mad sometimes that no heritage experts has been able to visit the site for the past 5 years. I do reserch online quite frequently but no news about the state of the castle as come out. That being said, I shut my mouth (online and in real life) because I know the Syrian people have been affected by this tragic war and have lost so much. They are the priority for now. The monument will wait. I hope one day we will be able to assess the damage and repair the site but it won't be for a very long time and human lifes are more important right now. For me, these monuments deserve as much money as Notre-Dame. It is not a competition.

And if people dig a little bit more into Unesco World Heritage Sites, they will realize it is NOT only buildings (or old stones). One example is the Everglades National Park in Florida, which is a natural reserve of biodiversity. The Unesco considers the Everglades ''in danger'' because of the deterioration of the water quality and flow, mainly caused by agricultural and urban development. This continued degradation has resulted in the loss of marine habitat and decline in marine species. This World Heritage site was selected especially to protect a fragile ecosystem. Do you also know that the Garamba National Park in the Democratic Republic of Congo is considered in danger by the UNESCO? Because of the reduction of Northern White Rhinoceros population and poaching. World Heritage can be any site that as cultural, historical or natural importance to the collective interests of humanity. It is more than old stones, believe me.

(As you can see, this subject is close to my heart. My novel is over.)