Are there really No Smoking signs in the cathedral? How very modern.
Never been there, of course, but about three years ago I met an Aussie who works nearby. I said you never see a picture of the outside, just the double arches inside.
She said it was very quiet, a nice place to have lunch on workdays.
We didn't talk about what happens Sundays.
Curious, if true, that the feelings of immanence that the architecture was intended to create no longer apply.
"Curious, if true, that the feelings of immanence that the architecture was intended to create no longer apply."
Could that be because, in discarding religion, people have discarded spirituality too. Maybe we need to be made aware of immanence in order to recognise it?
I don't think anyone can avoid internal feelings of immanence. Even I can't.
It's a cultural thing. Mosques do not, as a rule, emphasize soaring spaces the way cathedrals do. Instead, they seem to emphasize the closeness of a community.
For the ancients, it was holes in the ground that evoked immanence.
But, setting aside immigrants from Asia, it would seem that the cultural concepts that created a frisson in 1600 ought to still create at least a tingle in 2007.
The former architecture critic of the New York Times, Ada Huxtable, wrote about the contrast between 19th c. courthouses, which imparted gravitas and majesty to the law with soaring interior spaces; and the lino-floored tube stations of the 20th c. courthouse, which, she thought, didn't.
I thought she was right. Ought to work for churches, too.
Or maybe not so much in England, where the migration from cathedral to chapel has been notable.
11 comments:
Excellent. The spirit of Betjeman lives on.
Excellent, indeed.
This is humbling and most excellent.
Or does it signal a more militant intent?
To toll defiance against the well-meant,
Hell-bent dream of science...
Wonderful.
Thanks, all.
Are there really No Smoking signs in the cathedral? How very modern.
Never been there, of course, but about three years ago I met an Aussie who works nearby. I said you never see a picture of the outside, just the double arches inside.
She said it was very quiet, a nice place to have lunch on workdays.
We didn't talk about what happens Sundays.
Curious, if true, that the feelings of immanence that the architecture was intended to create no longer apply.
"Curious, if true, that the feelings of immanence that the architecture was intended to create no longer apply."
Could that be because, in discarding religion, people have discarded spirituality too. Maybe we need to be made aware of immanence in order to recognise it?
I don't think anyone can avoid internal feelings of immanence. Even I can't.
It's a cultural thing. Mosques do not, as a rule, emphasize soaring spaces the way cathedrals do. Instead, they seem to emphasize the closeness of a community.
For the ancients, it was holes in the ground that evoked immanence.
But, setting aside immigrants from Asia, it would seem that the cultural concepts that created a frisson in 1600 ought to still create at least a tingle in 2007.
The former architecture critic of the New York Times, Ada Huxtable, wrote about the contrast between 19th c. courthouses, which imparted gravitas and majesty to the law with soaring interior spaces; and the lino-floored tube stations of the 20th c. courthouse, which, she thought, didn't.
I thought she was right. Ought to work for churches, too.
Or maybe not so much in England, where the migration from cathedral to chapel has been notable.
Nothing short of brilliant.
Harry:
It might just be Aussies who lack feelings of immanence.
Wells Cathedral is awe-inspiring in the literal sense.
Magnificent!
Post a Comment