Gothic Architecture

Status
Not open for further replies.
P

Prince_James

Plutarch (Mickey's Dog)
Registered Senior Member
I am extremely fond of this style and always have been. The incredible artistry of the buildings wedded to the extreme amounts of time (sometimes hundreds of years!) to build these majestic buildings has impressed me ever since I was a child.

What about the rest of you? Any other fans of this style?
 
Yup, Gothic is nice. I prefer the later stuff, when it is well advanced. Mind you, Durham cathedral is pretty, although still somewhat Norman.
 
I always look at such architecture and wonder how many starving people could have been fed using that same amount of money ....instead of spending it on a big building.

Or didn't people care about all the starving people back then? ...just like we don't care about them now? ..even tho' we make that claim all the time?

Baron Max
 
Early?
Middle?
Perpendicular?
Which style of Gothic?
 
Middle is a bit better, perpendicular has its own merits, but somehow isnt as interesting to me.
 
Baron Max said:
I always look at such architecture and wonder how many starving people could have been fed using that same amount of money ....instead of spending it on a big building.

Or didn't people care about all the starving people back then? ...just like we don't care about them now? ..even tho' we make that claim all the time?

Baron Max
Click to expand...
You don't feed people with money -- you feed them with food.
What is your doctrine: "Let them eat masonry" ?
Why would the construction of a gothic cathedral starve anyone?
Would it affect the productivity of an ox-team and heavy plough?
 
River Ape said:
You don't feed people with money -- you feed them with food.
What is your doctrine: "Let them eat masonry" ?
Why would the construction of a gothic cathedral starve anyone?
Would it affect the productivity of an ox-team and heavy plough?
Click to expand...

That sure as hell was a silly thing to say!

Baron Max
 
Baron Max said:
That sure as hell was a silly thing to say!
Click to expand...
Is it beyond you, then, to explain why building a church or cathedral (gothic or otherwise I presume) would cause people to starve?

On the whole, I should have said that the presence of a large stone building that might serve to protect harvest and livestock against tempest and flood was likely, to a degree, to prevent starvation.
 
Prince_James said:
I am extremely fond of this style and always have been. The incredible artistry of the buildings wedded to the extreme amounts of time (sometimes hundreds of years!) to build these majestic buildings has impressed me ever since I was a child.

What about the rest of you? Any other fans of this style?
Click to expand...

I absolutely love Gothic buildings...don't understand why people tend to call the Middle Ages 'dark'....Gothic Cathedrals are the most detailed and spiritual churches you can find.
Prince I advice you to read George Dubuy's 'Cathedralbuilders'. Dubuy was a French professor specialised in the Middle Ages!
 
Baron Max said:
I always look at such architecture and wonder how many starving people could have been fed using that same amount of money ....instead of spending it on a big building.
Click to expand...
You need a refresher course in freshman Econ 101A. How would having all those unemployed architects, stonemasons, carpenters, painters, glass cutters and other craftsmen in the village create more food, much less get it into the hands of people who couldn't pay the farmers for it? If they weren't buying clothes, shoes, furniture, and other necessities, then the local merchants would have less money. They would have to lay off some of their employees and you'd have even more people who couldn't afford to buy food. Landlords wouldn't get paid... unemployment invariably begets poverty. Building a cathedral was the medieval equivalent of FDR's make-work projects.

It sounds like you're suggesting that the church just give its tithing money to the poor people without them doing anything to earn it. Since the church was the local equivalent of government, what you're advocating is welfare. I thought you were opposed to welfare? Don't you always say that people who don't earn money should be allowed to starve to death? Here you are taking away their jobs and demanding that the church simply donate money to them for doing nothing!
 
Fraggle Rocker said:
You need a refresher course in freshman Econ 101A. How would having all those unemployed architects, stonemasons, carpenters, painters, glass cutters and other craftsmen in the village create more food, much less get it into the hands of people who couldn't pay the farmers for it? If they weren't buying clothes, shoes, furniture, and other necessities, then the local merchants would have less money. ....
Click to expand...

Sure ...for a little while. But what about after the church is completed? What does Econ 101A say about that?

Fraggle Rocker said:
Building a cathedral was the medieval equivalent of FDR's make-work projects.
Click to expand...

Taking, stealing, from the rich to give to the poor ....borrowing from future generations to give to the poor in the present. What does your Econ 101A have to say about that?

Baron Max
 
288608250_df3d92f6f2.jpg


i love this picture!
 
The church never made much money from public tithing. Most of its enormous wealth up until the 20th century came from donations of land and other assets from wealthy patrons who wanted to go to heaven.

They used to own half of Italy...called the Papal States. And yes the church has sucked megabillions out of the european economy for their glittering palazzos and luxurious lifestyles.

If the peasants starved at their expense...so what?

'Blessed are the meek' they would say...who reap their reward in heaven.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top