ake

Church of the good sheperd, Churchtown, Dublin, built in the 1950s and Rathmines.
[ATTACH]4115[/ATTACH]
[ATTACH]4116[/ATTACH]
[ATTACH]4117[/ATTACH]

St.Mary’s cloister- obscene

Is the cloister in St.Francis, Cork a proper cloister with four walks?is it public?

By the way on the topic of cistercians, does anyone have the book “Cistercian abbeys of Europe”, with photographs by Henri Gaud?

I really think cloisters are a sad absence in modern churches, notwithstanding their monastic function. For example in the medieval cathedrals of England, it is truly sublime to wander around a quiet cloiser garth when visiting the church… I believe there is a similar survival in Adare but I’ve never been

St.Audeon’s: Damn Christmas tree was blocking the altar. I really don’t agree with trees in churches, call me scrooge
[ATTACH]4016[/ATTACH]
[ATTACH]4017[/ATTACH]

@Praxiteles wrote:

Here is an example of what you might expect to find in this church had its original paint work been preserved. The example is taken from St. Peter’s Cathedral in London, Ontario, Canada.

Is it the case do you know, that whenever you see a church with large monochrome areas like that, it was always originally painted, like the above mentioned, meaning like the chancel of Kilkenny Cathedral, or St.Finbars COI, you know with patterns and illustrations etc- at least if the church is 19th century?

I seem to talk about paint alot, but I have another question on it-
Do you believe modern methods of painting are inferior to original methods? Are they even different? The reason I ask is because in alot of churches the paint job seems somewhat crude to me, I don’t know exactly in what way, but for example in St.Teresa’s in Dublin (the one off grafton street), where I was recently, the colours seemed very harsh, almost cartoonish, and even seemed to obscure the plasterwork occasionally. In contrast is St.Audeon’s RC which I understand has not been repainted in the last 35 years:

[ATTACH]4008[/ATTACH]
[ATTACH]4009[/ATTACH]

Am I imagining things?

This is the parish church in Clonskeagh, Dublin. I was amazed that such quality, traditional building was still being done in the 1950’s.

[ATTACH]3999[/ATTACH] [ATTACH]4000[/ATTACH]
[ATTACH]4001[/ATTACH] [ATTACH]4002[/ATTACH]

Is it ok to post pictures of irish churches with nothing to do with cobh or pugin?

@Fearg wrote:

Couple of shots of the interior available at the following link:

St. Augustine and St John’s, Thomas Street, Dublin
http://travel.webshots.com/photo/2146879290082721655LGvize

Would I be correct in thinking that the church is almost as lofty as Cobh, but that the triforium has been sacraficed for a larger scaled nave arcade?

Another nave spoiled by idiotic colors

@Praxiteles wrote:

re 376:

The 1974 restoration was carried out by Percy leClerc. The roof of Irish oak is certainly praiseworthy and authentic. I am not sure that lifting the plaster from the walls can be described as a “restoration”. It is much more likely that they had plastering which was either white washed or frescoed. The removal of the plaster in 1974 smacks of the horrible fashion set by the sack and pillage of Killarney Cathedral. I think that we can take it that if A.W. N. Pugin believed that the Salisbury interior should inspire Killarney, then it should have been white washed and stencilled.

Sorry for going so far back.. I was wondering myself about the way all restored medieval interiors are whitewashed right onto the rubblework-is there even a scrap of historical evidence to suggest that this was ever the practice? On many ruins, for example the cathedral on the Rock of Cashel I’ve noticed what appears to me like fragments of plaster, often quite extensive. Now I’m not an expert, and maybe such plaster, if that’s even what it is, dates back only a couple of centuries, but you say ‘removal of plaster in 1974’ – was this plaster first used in the restoration or original plaster? For example, I notice the practice in all of the restored French Cistercian houses is smooth white plaster, with the decorative stone-work or the fine ashlar masonry left bare, untouched, which works to great effect. The visibility of the rubble texture in Irish buildings gives a look of primitivism and roughness, which although it has a certain charm of it’s own, may not do justice to the original buildings, or the intentions of a restoration. And yet in every book, or guide book (even the Duchas books) I’ve seen that touches the subject, whitewashing is unhesitantly declared as matter of fact. Surely they must know something..I’d love to know the truth of the matter.

P.S. It has just occured to me that whether or not there is evidence for medieval whitewashing, there is positive evidence for plastering, in Cormac’s chapel, in St.Audeons, and on Clare island, I think.

Here is that waterford bow front, now a fancy restaurant-december 2006

[ATTACH]3903[/ATTACH]

Oh my God tell me they are not going to put that illuminous green cheap plastic shite all the way up the tower! Why is that horrible crap popping up all over the place?! It’s the single ugliest building material I have ever seen anywhere in my life. It should be banned. Can we actually not afford a nice polished granite or sandstone in this country overflowing with money