# Lost Paris



## Fro7en (May 23, 2015)




----------



## Fro7en (May 23, 2015)




----------



## Zaz965 (Jan 24, 2015)

Fro7en, in the begging, the french people found the eiffel tour ugly. How many years did it take to french people start finding beautiful?


----------



## Fro7en (May 23, 2015)

Zaz965 said:


> Fro7en, in the begging, the french people found the eiffel tour ugly. How many years did it take to french people start finding beautiful?


Parisians found it ugly, but I think it got popular very quickly as the world expos held in Paris were the most popular. London started building it's own tower but then destroyed it during construction. I find it amazing. Such a timeless iron work, like the Empire State building.


----------



## Thomas Byrne (Sep 18, 2015)

what do you mean "Lost Paris"?....


----------



## Fro7en (May 23, 2015)

^^ are you blind or something?


----------



## Axel76NG (Oct 14, 2013)

Chateau d'eau - universal exposition 1900










The Old Palais du Trocadero - Worlds Fair 1878










The Gallery of Machines of the 1889 Exposition. It was the largest covered space in the world when it was built.










The Grand Bazar on the Rue de Rennes on its opening day (1906)










Metro at Place de la Bastille, demolished in 1962










Les Halles de Baltard 1852-1970


----------



## Fro7en (May 23, 2015)

amazing


----------



## Fro7en (May 23, 2015)

Cool old photos


----------



## UnHavrais (Sep 19, 2010)

^^But it's not a "Lost Paris" !


----------



## Fro7en (May 23, 2015)

The atmosphere is lost lol


----------



## cameronpaul (Jan 15, 2010)

Fro7en said:


> _Gare Montparnasse before 1960s_
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Of all the great cities of the world, Paris along with Rome and one or two others, probably lost the least number of important buildings during the 20th century's obsession with modernism. Gare Montparnasse is one of the worst losses as it was replaced with absolute shit, now one of the most inhuman and depressing places in central Paris. The other major loss was of course Les Halles which could have been restored in the way London's Covent Garden market was. Many of the other places listed on this site were temporary "exhibition" buildings built with a short life span in mind, fortunately one of the best, the "Grand Palais" still exists.


----------



## Axel76NG (Oct 14, 2013)

^^
Yes the rebuilding of les halles in the 70s was a terrible thing, they destroyed a beautiful and functional space, and replaced it with an awkward and ugly structure that became a hive for crime and pick-pockets. 

Luckily the city realised it was mistake, flattened the thing, and is now replacing it with a beautiful project: la canopée des halles.

Before (Les pavillons Baltard):

























After (Les Halles) Scroll ->









Now (La Canopée des Halles)


----------



## kisssme (Mar 9, 2015)

Theatre de l'Empire
(destroyed by fire)










now


----------



## Fro7en (May 23, 2015)

NOOOOO... That théâtre looks amazing


----------



## cameronpaul (Jan 15, 2010)

kisssme said:


> Theatre de l'Empire
> (destroyed by fire)
> 
> 
> ...


Too bad they didn't have the imagination to at least rebuild the facade of the Empire- the new hotel not only looks totally boring but cheap as well. Not what you expect to find in a major Paris Blvd. but sadly these days it's possible.


----------



## kisssme (Mar 9, 2015)

tribunal de commerce.
before and now


----------



## Axel76NG (Oct 14, 2013)

Before: Gare de Vincennes closed in 1969 and demolished in 1984









Now: Opera Bastille inaugurated in 1989


----------



## Titus-Pullo (Nov 26, 2012)

Unfortunately, in the 21st century, the stupid destructions continues...
La Samaritaine, a large department store in Paris from the 19th-20th centuries owned by LVMH, has been partly destroyed in the name of modernity hno:

Before (facade of 1852 in the Rue de Rivoli) :









http://www.sppef.fr/2013/09/21/la-samaritaine-du-discours-a-la-realite/









http://www.sppef.fr/2013/09/21/la-samaritaine-du-discours-a-la-realite/

Destruction (February 2014) : :bash:









http://www.lemonde.fr/architecture/...rennent-a-la-samaritaine_4507535_1809550.html

After (project) : uke: 









http://www.sppef.fr/2013/09/21/la-samaritaine-du-discours-a-la-realite/









http://www.lemonde.fr/culture/artic...e-gady-la-bonne-samaritaine_4423265_3246.html









http://tempsreel.nouvelobs.com/en-d...ritaine-conseil-valide-projet-renovation.html

Before/after : hno: 









http://www.telerama.fr/scenes/la-samaritaine-aura-son-rideau-de-douche,128254.php

That shit caused the destruction of the footbridge and several houses of the 17th-18th century at the following angle from the department store (Rue Baillet and Rue de la Monnaie) :bash:

Before :









https://www.flickr.com/photos/parisrevu/16873821605










Destruction (December 2013) : icard: 









http://www.latribunedelart.com/la-samaritaine-lvmh-et-la-presse-l-eternel-retour


----------



## kisssme (Mar 9, 2015)

Titus-Pullo said:


> Unfortunately, in the 21st century, the stupid destructions continues...
> La Samaritaine, a large department store in Paris from the 19th-20th centuries owned by LVMH, has been partly destroyed in the name of modernity hno:
> 
> Before (facade of 1852 in the Rue de Rivoli) :


no. the facade was built in the 1930's.
In the same block, the buildings that were built in the 17th century , the ones who have historical value, have not been destroyed.


----------



## Titus-Pullo (Nov 26, 2012)

kisssme said:


> no. the facade was built in the 1930's.
> In the same block, the buildings that were built in the 17th century , the ones who have historical value, have not been destroyed.


Yes for the Rue Baillet (1932) but not for the Rue de Rivoli (1852), the project of the architect Henri Savage (in Art-Deco style) was not carried because of the recession in the 1930s and the architect's dead : http://www.jeanfrancoiscabestan.com/pdf/etudes/samaritaine.pdf

The 19th century facade of the Rue de Rivoli constitutes the most important destroyed parts and several buildings of the 17th-18th centuries have been well destroyed at 2-6 Rue Baillet : http://archieturbanisme.canalblog.com/archives/2015/02/27/31067357.html


----------



## JMGA196 (Jan 1, 2013)

kisssme said:


> Theatre de l'Empire
> (destroyed by fire)


Oh god, 80 years ago everything was so classy. The building looked wonderful, and those cars make the picture great. I wish there was some kind of style revival nowadays.


----------



## Neric007 (Feb 5, 2015)

JMGA196 said:


> Oh god, 80 years ago everything was so classy. The building looked wonderful, and those cars make the picture great. I wish there was some kind of style revival nowadays.


Yeah I also wish architect throughout the world could come up with more distinctive styles inspired by those from the past to see what it'd be like.

Regarding lost architecture in Paris, pretty much everything that was build during the world fairs and got destroyed afterwards should be featured here.

Another example: The Main gate for the 1900 fair. So elegant.









_Source: http://www.ville-breuillet.fr/index.php/Outils/imprimer?idpage=11&idmetacontenu=603_


----------



## Axel76NG (Oct 14, 2013)

Neric007 said:


> Yeah I also wish architect throughout the world could come up with more distinctive styles inspired by those from the past to see what it'd be like.


Well that's a fallacy because when those beautiful styles were first introduced they were daring and new, and did not use any inspiration from the classical styles. Many people hated styles like art nouveau or art deco because they were not considered classy but instead revolting or cheap. 

The only reason that cities/ people were willing to let architects go wild during these expositions is because they knew the buildings wouldn't last anyway. For example, the Eiffel tower was considered by many to be the worst thing to happen to Paris, but it managed to get approved because it was sold to the Parisians as a 20 year deal. Had it been planned as a permanent structure from day 1, it would never have been allowed, again, because it was scrap metal that was not classy or distinctive enough (125 years later we are able to look at it without the nostalgia of that period, and call it what it is, classy and beautiful).


----------



## Neric007 (Feb 5, 2015)

Axel76NG said:


> Well that's a fallacy because when those beautiful styles were first introduced they were daring and new, and did not use any inspiration from the classical styles. Many people hated styles like art nouveau or art deco because they were not considered classy but instead revolting or cheap.
> 
> The only reason that cities/ people were willing to let architects go wild during these expositions is because they knew the buildings wouldn't last anyway. For example, the Eiffel tower was considered by many to be the worst thing to happen to Paris, but it managed to get approved because it was sold to the Parisians as a 20 year deal. Had it been planned as a permanent structure from day 1, it would never have been allowed, again, because it was scrap metal that was not classy or distinctive enough (125 years later we are able to look at it without the nostalgia of that period, and call it what it is, classy and beautiful).


I was not talking about the stuff built during the World fairs. And we saw many revivals of styles from the past (neogothic, neoclassical and so on).

I'm not saying it's the way to go but just that I'd be curious to see what a Neo-haussmannian would be like.


----------



## Axel76NG (Oct 14, 2013)

Neric007 said:


> I was not talking about the stuff built during the World fairs. And we saw many revivals of styles from the past (neogothic, neoclassical and so on).
> 
> I'm not saying it's the way to go but just that I'd be curious to see what a Neo-haussmannian would be like.


ok fair enough i misunderstood your message. The point i was making though is that these architects of the time were trying new things, they were going against all the strict established rules of the past and letting their talents fully express themselves. People (not you) that say that we shouldn't build anything modern and instead stick to the architecture of past visionaries are doing exactly the opposite of what these visionaries would have done; they are behaving like those that once frowned upon their work.

That being said, I am against the destruction of past marvels, but i don't think we should hold architects back.


----------



## JMGA196 (Jan 1, 2013)

I think that not all lost Paris is bad... Here we have a before and after of the place were now stands the Place Louis Lepine, built in 1934:


----------



## Fro7en (May 23, 2015)

yeah


----------



## Fro7en (May 23, 2015)

JMGA196 said:


> Oh god, 80 years ago everything was so classy. The building looked wonderful, and those cars make the picture great. I wish there was some kind of style revival nowadays.


there is some.


----------



## Titus-Pullo (Nov 26, 2012)

JMGA196 said:


> I think that not all lost Paris is bad... Here we have a before and after of the place were now stands the Place Louis Lepine, built in 1934


Sure, but most destructions were regrettable because restorations provide pleasing results.

For example the old houses of the square, Place Plumereau, in Tours have been restored between the 60's and 80's.









http://www.jedefiscalise.com/malraux/histoire-malraux/?print=print









http://www.waymarking.com/gallery/image.aspx?f=1&guid=0924dadf-9a4d-4a25-a66c-a3792a5239b6

Unfortunately, urban heritage regeneration in the 19th century was scarce...


----------

