This one hits the mark:
Visit this page to see them all
Visit this page to see them all
Tuesday, December 27, 2016
I JUST DON'T KNOW ABOUT SOME OF THESE BEFORE AND AFTERS, THE AFTERS JUST LOOK A BIT TOO CONTRIVED
Visit this page to see them all.
This one hits the mark:
This one, not so much, elegance contrived on austere shell, the two styles clash:
Again it is a nice after but it doesn't go with the interior as a whole:
Don't get me wrong, the afters look better than the befores, but I still think they are trying to make something out of these simple buildings that was not intended and it wouldn't have happened in these 1950's pre-Vatican II styles of building churches at that time.
This one hits the mark:
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
4 comments:
100% in agreement with you Father. The "after" pictures are better but they all look like they were picked out of a catalogue.
It doesn't look right to have a modern structure outfitted with a 1950's vibe. It wouldn't like right to have items from a closed Baroque church put into a 1960's "ski lodge" church. It doesn't work unless someone knows what they are doing and is creative. Those renovations are not creative. They look out of place.
Modern architecture is fine as long as it is tastefully done and original. The same goes for the liturgy. I personally like Roman Vestments and lace surplices etc. But the problem is when they are used for the OF of the Mass they DO look out of place. They look as much out of place as would a woman going to the store in a dress, high heels, a hat and white gloves. It looks good but that isn't 2016. People in the 1950's dressed like everyone dressed in the 1950's they didn't dress up like people did in the 1920's. The same goes for churches. I think we have to accept what "is" and go from there. Have a free standing altar but not one bought from a book. Employ a craftsman and have something tasteful and original created. The same goes for statues, vestments and music etc.
The reason the first set looks great is because the Church likely looked like that before some phillistine pastor who likely never read Sacrosanctum Concilium spent a fortune so the Church would appear "simple."
I agree with the TJM hypothesis. And that curing apostasy does not imbue good taste.
The first does not look overly contrived, but a lot of these type renovations do seem to be exercises in interior design and begin to look more like theatre sets instead of sacred spaces. For some( the second two)I can imagine they were parishes that started with limited funds, and that might account for the stark appearances. Couldn't they make changes gradually over time, rather than call in the designers for a make over? I wonder if this goes on in Italy?
Post a Comment