At a time when the French government is desperately trying to cut the deficit, MPs have just decided to build a small reception pavilion at the entrance to the historic Palais Bourbon site, which houses the National Assembly, at a staggering cost estimated at €50 million. The structure is ugly, expensive, and poorly designed—wouldn’t scrapping it be an obvious way to save money?
Renderings have been popping up online over the past few days, giving a glimpse of the disaster in the making: the iconic Palais Bourbon site, with its classical Greek temple-style façade, which faces the Madeleine church on the other bank of the Seine from the Quai d’Orsay, offering one of the most famous views in Paris, is about to be ruined by a brilliant new idea cooked up by a handful of MPs and parliamentary staff.
The architectural project involves the construction, to the right of the historic building, of a reception pavilion to enter the National Assembly site, intended to replace the small structure that was built there in 1887 to filter visitors after the assassination attempt on Minister Jules Ferry during the Third Republic.
As the heritage preservation account Sites et Monuments points out on X, several projects were in the running to replace the original building. One, sober and discreet, in the same spirit, but adapted to contemporary standards, was—unsurprisingly—not selected.
The project preferred by the nation’s representatives takes the form of a monstrous building made of glass and metal, with two rows of colossal cylinders topped by a rectangular platform. With a total surface area of 4,000 square metres, it will house a shop and a cafeteria. At a time when questions are being raised about the unsuitability of contemporary buildings for high temperatures, this is a prime example, as it has all the makings of an oven during a heatwave.
The aesthetics of the glass wall have already caused damage in Paris. The historic Samaritaine department store, a stone’s throw from the Louvre, has just been given a facade of the same type, in total disregard of heritage rules that normally require architectural consistency around a prominent site such as the Louvre. With the National Assembly pavilion, the same mistakes are about to be repeated—with the blessing of the nation’s elected representatives, who are happily circumventing the laws passed by their predecessors.
The president of the National Assembly, Yäel Braun-Pivet, and her colleagues made their choice in the utmost secrecy—no doubt aware of the outcry that would inevitably greet their decision, which was only made public at the very end of the process. Following an investigation by the heritage preservation magazine La Tribune de l’Art, it appears that the National Assembly never communicated the plans to the Ministry of Culture, as it was required to do.
The National Assembly—the building and the institution—is not a plaything for those who work there. The site is part of the “remarkable heritage site” (SPR) of the 7th arrondissement of Paris, itself located on the banks of the Seine, which are listed as a UNESCO World Heritage Site. A building permit was filed on June 16th. A petition has been circulating for several days calling for its outright withdrawal.
This case is just one scandal among hundreds in contemporary architecture in France and elsewhere in Europe. This time, the scandal is not just about heritage and aesthetics, which would be enough to raise our voices. This disgraceful construction comes at a cost, at a time when France is succumbing to debt and clumsily seeking to make savings by cutting budgets here and there in an attempt to balance the books. It would be good for elected officials to remember that the beauty of the city of Paris brings money into the country, as well as giving it an image of excellence and attractiveness throughout the world. Destroying it with constructions of this kind is therefore very poor financial reasoning, both in the medium and long term.
Ultimately, the most serious thing is perhaps not that sick minds have designed this abomination, but that representatives of the nation have supported it and given it the green light to become a reality. The Ministry of Culture, which has just discovered the affair, says it is very embarrassed. And for good reason.
Here is how the architectural firm designed the presentation of its pavilion: “Faced with the monumentality [of the colonnade], our project is first and foremost a gesture of welcome. The entrance via the Cour du Pont is a promise of this. It offers visitors the power of an invitation. The undulating façade of the pavilion echoes the classical rhythm of the colonnades [and] promises an experience and an initiation.” As for the “four glass pillars”, they “display for all to see the four principles of the Republic: “Indivisible, Secular, Democratic and Social”. To these four principles, we prefer the four classic virtues: prudence, justice, temperance, and strength, all of which our representatives are sadly lacking today.
Putting an End to Modern Architectural Disaster: A Great Source of Savings
Colonnade of the National Assembly, Palais Bourbon
BirchLog, CC BY-SA 4.0, via Wikimedia Commons
You may also like
Germany’s HateAid: Portrait of a ‘Trusted Flagger’
The arbiters of acceptable online speech are not nearly as 'independent' as the EU would have people believe.
Walpurgis Night of Madness: Germany in the Grip of Climate Socialism
Historians will struggle to find another nation so thoroughly deceived by a small clique of people cocooned in taxpayer-funded NGOs or state employment.
Merz’s Fantasy of Leading Europe
Eight months into his time in office, Germany’s chancellor has ceded strategy, leverage, and initiative to others.
At a time when the French government is desperately trying to cut the deficit, MPs have just decided to build a small reception pavilion at the entrance to the historic Palais Bourbon site, which houses the National Assembly, at a staggering cost estimated at €50 million. The structure is ugly, expensive, and poorly designed—wouldn’t scrapping it be an obvious way to save money?
Renderings have been popping up online over the past few days, giving a glimpse of the disaster in the making: the iconic Palais Bourbon site, with its classical Greek temple-style façade, which faces the Madeleine church on the other bank of the Seine from the Quai d’Orsay, offering one of the most famous views in Paris, is about to be ruined by a brilliant new idea cooked up by a handful of MPs and parliamentary staff.
The architectural project involves the construction, to the right of the historic building, of a reception pavilion to enter the National Assembly site, intended to replace the small structure that was built there in 1887 to filter visitors after the assassination attempt on Minister Jules Ferry during the Third Republic.
As the heritage preservation account Sites et Monuments points out on X, several projects were in the running to replace the original building. One, sober and discreet, in the same spirit, but adapted to contemporary standards, was—unsurprisingly—not selected.
The project preferred by the nation’s representatives takes the form of a monstrous building made of glass and metal, with two rows of colossal cylinders topped by a rectangular platform. With a total surface area of 4,000 square metres, it will house a shop and a cafeteria. At a time when questions are being raised about the unsuitability of contemporary buildings for high temperatures, this is a prime example, as it has all the makings of an oven during a heatwave.
The aesthetics of the glass wall have already caused damage in Paris. The historic Samaritaine department store, a stone’s throw from the Louvre, has just been given a facade of the same type, in total disregard of heritage rules that normally require architectural consistency around a prominent site such as the Louvre. With the National Assembly pavilion, the same mistakes are about to be repeated—with the blessing of the nation’s elected representatives, who are happily circumventing the laws passed by their predecessors.
The president of the National Assembly, Yäel Braun-Pivet, and her colleagues made their choice in the utmost secrecy—no doubt aware of the outcry that would inevitably greet their decision, which was only made public at the very end of the process. Following an investigation by the heritage preservation magazine La Tribune de l’Art, it appears that the National Assembly never communicated the plans to the Ministry of Culture, as it was required to do.
The National Assembly—the building and the institution—is not a plaything for those who work there. The site is part of the “remarkable heritage site” (SPR) of the 7th arrondissement of Paris, itself located on the banks of the Seine, which are listed as a UNESCO World Heritage Site. A building permit was filed on June 16th. A petition has been circulating for several days calling for its outright withdrawal.
This case is just one scandal among hundreds in contemporary architecture in France and elsewhere in Europe. This time, the scandal is not just about heritage and aesthetics, which would be enough to raise our voices. This disgraceful construction comes at a cost, at a time when France is succumbing to debt and clumsily seeking to make savings by cutting budgets here and there in an attempt to balance the books. It would be good for elected officials to remember that the beauty of the city of Paris brings money into the country, as well as giving it an image of excellence and attractiveness throughout the world. Destroying it with constructions of this kind is therefore very poor financial reasoning, both in the medium and long term.
Ultimately, the most serious thing is perhaps not that sick minds have designed this abomination, but that representatives of the nation have supported it and given it the green light to become a reality. The Ministry of Culture, which has just discovered the affair, says it is very embarrassed. And for good reason.
Here is how the architectural firm designed the presentation of its pavilion: “Faced with the monumentality [of the colonnade], our project is first and foremost a gesture of welcome. The entrance via the Cour du Pont is a promise of this. It offers visitors the power of an invitation. The undulating façade of the pavilion echoes the classical rhythm of the colonnades [and] promises an experience and an initiation.” As for the “four glass pillars”, they “display for all to see the four principles of the Republic: “Indivisible, Secular, Democratic and Social”. To these four principles, we prefer the four classic virtues: prudence, justice, temperance, and strength, all of which our representatives are sadly lacking today.
Our community starts with you
READ NEXT
Venezuela Tests Europe’s Moral Credibility
“Où va ma France?”: The App the Left Wants To Ban
Germany’s HateAid: Portrait of a ‘Trusted Flagger’