The "Renaissance of the Louvre" threatens the Louvre

All the versions of this article: English , français
1. Perrault’s Colonnade: a soon-to-be new entrance to the Louvre?
Photo: Didier Rykner
See the image in its page

Laurence des Cars, inside the Louvre, only talks to her close collaborators. Many people in the museum complain that she does not say hello to anyone, keeping her head stubbornly fixed towards the ground when she passes them.
The president and director of the Louvre has nevertheless made an effort recently, organising a meeting to present her project (see this article) in each department of the museum, one by one. After a lengthy speech lasting about an hour and a half describing how necessary the project is, she opened the floor for a question and answer session... which she hastened not to answer as soon as they became a little tricky.

Many fear her project for the Louvre, which is also that of the President of the Republic. And they are right. Because in reality, in what we know of its beginnings, it is much more worrying than we imagined. And these are not rumours or "people say", but what can be read in black and white in a working document entitled "Louvre - Nouvelle Renaissance" Expression des besoins [1]". But whose needs? Certainly not those of the historic monument or the museum, which will be badly mistreated - we can even talk about vandalism on a classified monument for the former - if, unfortunately, this costly folly were to be implemented.

We will not go back over the restoration and bringing up to standard part of this project. It does seem that the building has suffered from a lack of maintenance in recent years (which says a lot about its management, even if it is wrong to suggest that nothing has been done) and that major work is needed to get it back on track. But there is no need to communicate in this way about these projects, the financing of which from the museum’s own resources (around 400 million, but nothing is precise) should not pose a problem if they are spread out over time thanks to a master plan.

On the other hand, everything else, especially the entrance on the Colonnade side (ill. 1), the creation of new exhibition rooms and a special room for the Mona Lisa, will have terrible consequences for the Louvre, and at an astronomical price (the figure of 500 million, not financed for the moment, is circulating internally). The scandals to come, as can be read in this document (and there will surely be many more when it has been developed) are of two kinds, which we will list here.

Heritage vandalism

The document seriously considers it, in any case it does not rule it out, and it even largely takes it for granted: the moats will be covered with a glass slab in order to recover the surface they occupy for the museum (ill. 2). We will miss the barracks that had been there for years and have just been removed, which at least were not visible when you took a step back. When asked about this, the Louvre replied that "covering the moats will not be a requirement of the programme"", which is completely contradicted by a reading of the statement of requirements. From page 2 onwards, Perrault’s Colonnade is described as an "unthought-of space" (sic). So the Louvre’s management must be thinking for itself. To "magnify the Colonnade" (it says so on p. 5), and for "the acoustic and thermal comfort" of the new access, it is possible that "the architectural proposals result in covering (either partially or totally) the moats with a glass roof" (p. 6). And this is so obvious to them that this use of the moats (and the esplanade) "is the other most innovative aspect of the project"! Finally, of course, "a bold architectural gesture" (sic) will also be required "to enhance the Colonnade [2]".

The inclusion of the moats in the route, and therefore their covering, although described as a "hypothesis", is so obvious that the document includes their surface area in those considered available. Above all, we can read (p. 5) that: "the esplanade and the moats in front of the Colonnade will be used to gradually connect the level of the road system and that of the spaces created under the Cour Carrée by passing under the wing of the Colonnade" (p. 5). How can you go under the wing of the Colonnade if not by occupying the moats, especially since there are plans to connect the Louvre underground directly to the Louvre-Rivoli metro station (which will also be renamed at the same time)?
And even better: on p. 15, there is a reflection on the levels of the new layout in relation to those already existing in the medieval Louvre: there would in fact be only a "50 cm gap with the level of the moats. This small difference will facilitate the junctions with the museum, and particularly the medieval Louvre". "It would therefore be pointless to dig out the current moats any more, thus avoiding complex and costly underpinning work to pass under the great Colonnade". QED: the moats will indeed be included in the new entrance [3].

3. One of the Louvre’s medieval ramparts, which will be pierced to allow cross traffic.
Photo: Didier Rykner
See the image in its page

Another attack on the heritage concerns the walls of other moats, those of the medieval Louvre. In order to create a cross-shaped circulation under the Cour Carrée, it will be necessary to "create two additional openings" (p. 15). Of course, "the heritage issue is sensitive", but "these creations would be in line with the logic of the work already carried out at the time of the Grand Louvre".
It shows a complete lack of understanding of the Louvre to even dare to write this. The Grand Louvre uncovered the medieval palace that had been buried for centuries. To allow it to be visited and included in the museum tour, the breaking through of walls was inevitable. Breaking through medieval remains again (ill. 3) for a useless and costly project has nothing to do with the construction site of the 1980s. This is pure and simple vandalism [4].

4. North staircase of the Colonnade
Photo: Didier Rykner
See the image in its page
5. South staircase of the Colonnade
Photo: Didier Rykner
See the image in its page

Even more scandalous vandalism is also in the pipeline in Napoleon’s Louvre. Indeed: "we will have to consider the possibilities of extending the monumental staircases of the Assyrian and Egyptian pavilions located on either side of the Colonnade to the new underground reference level to facilitate vertical circulation for the public" (p. 15).

6. Pavement at the foot of the north staircase of the Colonnade, which will have to be pierced to continue the staircase to the basement.
Photo: Didier Rykner
See the image in its page
7. Pavement at the foot of the south staircase of the Colonnade, which will have to be pierced to continue the staircase to the basement.
Photo: Didier Rykner
See the image in its page
8. South staircase of the Colonnade, view from above, with the floor that will have to be pierced
Photo: Didier Rykner
See the image in its page

What is presented here only as a working hypothesis is in fact part of this project because it seems that there is no other solution than to touch these stairs (ill. 4 and 5). However, these are historic monuments in themselves, designed by the architect Fontaine, and their appearance would be profoundly altered by their extension underground. Moreover, the marble floor that would be pierced in this way dates from the time of Louis-Philippe (ill. 6 to 8). So this is another case of vandalism [5].

Finally - but no doubt as other destructive works are revealed - the document questions the "worrying state of the buildings". One might think that this simply means restoring them. But that’s without taking into account climate change, which is now being used as an excuse for everything [6] It would therefore be necessary to "clearly raise the question of reconciling climate imperatives with the conservation of the architectural heritage and the collections kept indoors" (p. 17). They are therefore considering, because "the Louvre must be prepared to make bold proposals" [...] "the partial or complete removal of certain glass roofs". This means reconsidering certain 19th-century museographic arrangements, also classified as historic monuments, which have proven their worth by allowing for zenithal lighting, which everyone agrees is the best for the presentation of paintings.

As if climate change were forcing the end of glass roofs! This is all the more absurd - but they are not afraid of this contradiction - as they are seriously planning to cover the Louvre’s moats with glass roofs, and as in many museums (including the Louvre in the days of the Grand Louvre, in the Puget and Marly courtyards, or more recently for the Department of Islamic Art) courtyards that were once open are being covered with glass roofs to create new exhibition rooms. A trend that sometimes goes too far, but that’s another matter.

The amputated and distorted museum

9. The Sphinx of Tanis in the crypt of the Sphinx, which will have to be moved.
Photo: Didier Rykner
See the image in its page
10. Entrance to the Crypt of Osiris, which will no longer house works of art.
Photo: Didier Rykner
See the image in its page
11. Sarcophagus of Ramses III in
the crypt of Osiris, which will have to vacate the
premises along with all the other works
Photo: Didier Rykner
See the image in its page

This last point affects both the heritage (the palace roofs) and the museum (the lighting of the works). But the latter will in fact be much more affected by this project, starting with the Department of Egyptian Antiquities, which will pay the full price, but also to some extent the Department of Oriental Antiquities.
Because it is not just a question of digging under the Cour Carrée, but also of reclaiming space directly from the museum to be used for the reception and movement of visitors. Thus the three crypts - the Sphinx crypt (ill. 9) and the Osiris crypt (ill. 10 and 11) occupied by Egypt, and the Levant crypt (ill. 12 and 13) assigned to Oriental Antiquities - will be purely and simply emptied of their works without these, which are often monumental, being able to be presented elsewhere.

12. Crypt of the Levant, which will be
completely emptied to make
room for the circulation of visitors
Photo: Didier Rykner
See the image in its page
13. Crypt of the Levant, which will be
completely emptied to make
room for the circulation of visitors
Photo: Didier Rykner
See the image in its page
14. Egypt increased,
waiting for Egypt decreased
Photo: Didier Rykner
See the image in its page

While some major pieces such as the sarcophagus of Ramses III (which weighs around 10 tonnes), the sarcophagus of Djedhor (4.5 tonnes), or the Sphinx of Tanis (12 tonnes) will probably be exhibited elsewhere (but where with a surface area that will be reduced?), it is obvious that all this will result in many works being sent to Liévin to be stored. Thus a large part of the Department of Egyptian Antiquities, which is the pride of the Louvre and one of the sections most favoured by visitors, will be sacrificed to this megalomaniacal project. A poster currently on display in the department promises an increased Egypt at the Louvre Museum (ill 14). In anticipation of a decreased Egypt [7].

Because the artworks, and this is becoming increasingly common, seem to be a problem for certain curators who consider that there are too many. This is clearly the case for Laurence des Cars, as she is planning to "launch a reflection on the in-depth overhaul of the presentation of her collections". Other sources confirm that she does indeed want to tackle the Louvre and its museography as a whole. This involves "introducing clear narratives about the collections" and "questioning the volume of the works presented". The president of the Louvre explains this last ambiguous sentence orally internally: "quality over quantity" is required. This credo does not appear as such in the document, but it can be deduced from this sentence (p. 16): this "necessarily implies questioning the volume of the works presented, the density and rhythm of the displays and the insertion of mediation elements". All of this obviously means fewer works, above all fewer works [8]. !

The document also envisages (p. 11) the "creation of a dedicated, non-circulating space" for "the restoration of large paintings". We often denounce the use of rooms that are closed for these restorations, so we are not happy about this idea. Yes, but there is no question here of using the spaces that would be created by the project because "the location under the Cour Carrée could be complex" due to the "lack of natural light" . The possibility of a location within the Sully quadrilateral [9] is therefore suggested "as part of the essential operations of rearranging the collections and using the rooms". The proposal is therefore to ensure that large-format works undergoing restoration can continue to occupy the permanent exhibition rooms.

In reality, it must be recognised that the Louvre does not have the necessary rooms for the restoration of large-scale artworks. Rather than carrying out restorations on site, they should simply be sent where possible, to the C2RMF in Versailles in particular. In this regard, the Louvre should instead recover the former rooms of the Pavillon de Flore, which are currently occupied by the C2RMF and which were among the most beautiful permanent exhibition spaces in the museum with their view of the Seine and the Musée d’Orsay.
We could add other incongruities in this working document. For example, the floor of the Courtyard "will have to be restored based on the selected architectural project" (p. 15). While it is true that the intensive use of this space for the installation of structures allowing its privatisation is damaging it (one could be forgiven for thinking one was in a Parisian street, there is even a fountain that does not work - ill. 15 and 16), we don’t see what’s stopping them from maintaining it. As for the ground, there’s nothing disgraceful about it, as a large part of it is paved (ill. 17). The document also promises "free, high-quality Wi-Fi". It should be noted that there is currently free Wi-Fi that practically never works. Tomorrow, it will work, I promise. But why not today?

16. It is not a street in Paris
with a dry fountain,
it is the Cour Carrée of the Louvre.
Photo: Didier Rykner
See the image in its page
17. The pavement of the Cour Carrée, which apparently needs to be completely redone
Photo: Didier Rykner
See the image in its page

The project schedule, which has already been delayed by four months, was clarified this week (it is not in the document):
– March-June 2025: establishment of the competition programme,
– June 2025: publication of the competition with specifications,
– October 2025: selection of five candidates,
– March 2026: handing over of copies by candidates,
– end of April 2026: designation of the winner,
– autumn 2026: start of work.

In less than four months, therefore, by the end of June, the Louvre must have devised a programme for its entire operation with no fewer than nine working groups involving the Louvre’s thirteen departments. The author of these lines, having been an organisational consultant in a previous life, can testify that this is simply unrealistic, especially since this costly and damaging project for the Louvre is completely unfunded. Let us add that at no point are the timeframes necessary to obtain authorisation for work on such a building, including consultation with the Commission nationale des monuments historiques (National Commission for Historic Monuments), taken into account - they intend to ride roughshod over them, as they did for the stained glass windows of Notre-Dame - nor the more than likely appeals that will be lodged by heritage protection associations.
We must act quickly because this is above all a political issue that brings together the hubris of the president of the Louvre and that of the president of the Republic. The end of Emmanuel Macron’s term of office - and the possible calling into question of the project - is scheduled for 2027. There is therefore no time to lose.

A Louvre curator confided the following to us when we asked him if he ultimately regretted Jean-Luc Martinez: "Compared to Laurence des Cars, Jean-Luc Martinez is a small player". A museum manager, who did not have strong enough words for the former president and director, says that now he regrets it!
We could indeed add numerous subjects. We will do so in other articles to come, because since we started to look a little more closely at the management of the Louvre, the file has grown. This gives an idea of the problem once again facing a museum where one wonders when it will finally have a president-director of the level it deserves.

Didier Rykner

Footnotes

[1] Yes, in all simplicity, there is a capital R in Renaissance!

[2] For the sake of transparency, we will provide the Louvre’s answers to our questions in a note; regarding the architectural gesture, this is what we had asked:
Question: Is it still relevant to make an "architectural gesture" for the entrance to the Colonnade, and how is this compatible with the listed status of this façade?
Reply: The aim is to breathe new life into this now neglected space and thus to restore Perrault’s Colonnade and its architectural power to the limelight. There can be no question of distorting it. No architectural gesture that would compete with the Colonnade.
Our comment: As we have just demonstrated, this is incorrect. The document clearly states that the project must include a "bold architectural gesture".

[3] Question: Is it true that there is strong interest in covering the moats with glass roofs, as I feared, or that in any case it has not been ruled out?
Reply: The moats dug by Malraux in the 1960s are part of the project that will be submitted to an international competition. It will then be up to the candidates to propose options for the architectural treatment of this immense space. Covering the moats will not be a requirement of the programme.
Our comment: As we demonstrate, not only is covering not excluded, but it is implicit in the constraints that will be imposed on the architect.

[4] Question: Is it true that there are plans to make two openings in the walls of the Louvre moats as part of the project?
Answer: A study is underway to prioritise the heritage value of the architectural elements. In any case, no visible openings will be made in the base of the Colonnade. All the specialists agree that the counterscarp walls of the 1960s moats, some of which are concrete covered with stone, clearly do not have the same heritage value as the base of the colonnade.
Our comment: We were not specific enough for this question and wanted to talk about the medieval walls. Although the document does not mention any drilling in the base of the Colonnade, it should be noted that, by refuting a hypothesis that we had not made, the Louvre nevertheless gives it a possible character since it is written that there will be no visible drilling in the base of the Colonnade, which does not mean that there will be no drilling...
The Louvre has therefore not answered a question that it is true we had not asked clearly. We have the answer, in any case, because as we read in the statement of requirements document, there are plans to pierce the medieval moats.

[5] 3. Question: Is it true that there are plans to extend the two north and south staircases of the colonnade to the basement, which would have the dual effect of closing off the marble floor on the ground floor (which dates from the time of Louis-Philippe) and profoundly altering the appearance of these staircases which, like the entire Louvre, are listed?
Answer: We are looking into the possibility of connecting the bases to the stairs of the end pavilions. Our chief architect is looking into this matter so as not to distort Fontaine’s work. Everything will of course be submitted to the State’s Scientific and Technical Control for authorisation.
Our comment: The Louvre confirms this; however, it is obviously impossible to extend these staircases without distorting them and breaking the floor; as for the State’s Scientific and Technical Control, for a political project supported by the Presidency of the Republic, it is obviously not to be counted on to prohibit it.

[6] As always, we are perfectly aware of climate change and its dangers, and there is no question of denying or minimising it. On the other hand, using this excuse without hindsight to vandalise heritage - without any effect on climate change or its consequences - is an unacceptable practice.

[7] Question :
Is it true that all the works in the two large Egyptian Antiquities crypts will be removed? And if so, where will some of the monumental sculptures in them go?
Answer: The works will obviously be removed during the works to ensure their conservation. They will be repositioned in the new layout in consultation with the Directors of the departments concerned.
Our comment: We referred to two crypts in our question, whereas the document specifies that there are in fact three crypts (including the Levant crypt). The Louvre does not deny what is written, but indicates that the works will be repositioned in the new layout. However, as this does not include any additional rooms, this will inevitably be to the detriment of the works on display today..

[8] Question: Is it true that there are plans to reduce the number of works on display to the public, prioritising quality over quantity? This would mean putting even more works in storage.
Reply: Nothing new here. Laurence des Cars has already spoken about this on several occasions, both internally and externally: we want to use the museum to offer new displays and new ways of accessing the works, to help people discover new stories. We need to share our knowledge with the public more effectively: changes to the display, which should probably be less dense and better present the masterpieces, with greater clarity of the narratives, and crossovers between collections and techniques. The President has met with all the conservation departments, which have been open and constructive on these issues. This will also make it possible to share our collections more effectively with our colleagues in the Region.
Our comment: The Louvre thus confirms what we are writing: it is indeed the entire Louvre that is concerned and that will have to present fewer works. We will of course return to this question.

[9] The "Sully quadrilateral" is the group of buildings surrounding the Cour Carrée.

Keywords

Paris, Musée du Louvre Heritage: threats, denaturation, vandalism and destruction Laurence des Cars Politique de Laurence des Cars au Louvre

Your comments

In order to be able to discuss articles and read the contributions of other subscribers, you must subscribe to The Art Tribune. The advantages and conditions of this subscription, which will also allow you to support The Art Tribune, are described on the subscription page.

If you are already a subscriber, sign in.