As we like to give newcomers a chance, we’ll give Rachida Dati credit this time. She must sincerely believe that she has found the right solution to save Marie Curie’s Pavillon des Sources: move it a few metres to keep it next to the huge five-storey building that was planned.
Let’s suppose for a second that this plan was actually implemented: what sense would it make? As we have already written, this pavilion is of historical interest, much more than architectural, in relation to the other two that originally formed the Radium Institute. What makes it so charming is the whole complex, including the garden and the trees planted by Marie Curie.
All that will disappear in this operation, and saving the Pavillon des Sources will be nothing more than a Pyrrhic victory.
But what will actually happen, with a probability of almost 100%? What has happened with all the monument ’rescues’ that have supposedly been carried out since people started worrying about heritage conservation: the building will NEVER be rebuilt.
The latest example is the Halle Eiffel that Françoise Nyssen claimed to have saved, but which we had already announced would never be reassembled (see article). Since then it has been rusting away in pieces on a rubbish tip (see article).
We refer those who doubt this to this article where we listed all the buildings or parts of buildings that had to be rebuilt, sometimes on their original site. All of them, without exception, have been lost forever. Even the Orléans Chancellery: the entire monument had to be moved. Only the decorations could be reassembled a century later, like period rooms.
The worst thing is undoubtedly that after a few years, even a few months, all the promises are forgotten, not just by those who made them, but also by those who believed them. And even more so by the journalists who move on. The perfect crime, like the one we are currently witnessing at the Institut Curie.
And no matter how sincere Rachida Dati is in her decision, as we say, when it comes to rebuilding the pavilion, she will no longer be a minister, and everyone will have forgotten the contractor’s commitment. Worse still: the same thing will happen again and again, to other monuments that can be demolished with the promise of reassembling them later, when Hell friezes over...
The only advantage we can see, despite its derisory nature, is the obvious goodwill of the new minister, on whom we are counting to re-establish the authority of the Ministry of Culture. Let’s hope, however, that she will be able to surround herself with a solid heritage and museums adviser who is well versed in these issues and who can help her make the right decisions in the future.
One final point: we would like her to look into two more or less recent cases of promised reconstruction, so that, if it is still possible, she can implement them. After all, the continuity of the Ministry of Culture has something to do with the continuity of the State... We are therefore calling for the reassembly of the Eiffel Hall in Arles and the Hôtel Texier in Paris (see again this article).