• Introduction to The Notre-Dame Effect
• Jorge Otero-Pailos (bio)

The essays in this special issue of Future Anterior bring the fire that ravaged the Cathedral of Notre-Dame de Paris on April 15, 2019, into a larger intellectual context and challenge us to consider the effects and ramifications of the calamity within the discipline of preservation. They are reflections illuminated by the flame of this calamity, which was, let’s not forget, ignited within the work of preservation, within the scaffolding set up precisely to protect the building.

That scaffolding, like all preservation scaffoldings, was not simply a physical construction. It was also an intellectual structure made of disparate political, economic, social, and cultural elements that were joined together according to various historical processes and habits, which are vulgarly described as the way things are done: preservation practice. When the critical load of Notre-Dame, itself weakened by years of neglect, leaned against this intellectual structure, it catastrophically unraveled the weakened and fatigued joints. Unhinged from each other, political, economic, social, cultural, and preservation elements pushed and pulled at cross-purposes.

Clearly there is a French specificity to the fatigued joinery, but as the essays in this issue make clear, that is no comfort to the rest of the world. As the oldest modern preservation bureaucracy in the world, French intellectual joinery was used as a pattern book in erecting preservation scaffoldings throughout the world. French patterns of intellectual joinery are found deep within the myriad structures of conception, administration, and regulation of heritage globally. They can be found in Brazil, where the National Museum was incinerated in 2018; in Okinawa, where Shuri Castle combusted in 2019; and in England, where Clandon Park ignited in 2015, just to name a few of the tragic losses that cannot be brushed off as aberrations of chance. They illuminate a global process, a gradual loss of cohesion among the financial, political, social, and cultural elements that once shared an interest in joining forces to protect these heritage buildings. If they unraveled in France, the rest of the world should take notice; document and assess the effects of outdated assumptions on the conditions of the intellectual joinery that holds together their own thinking; and identify their intellectual pathologies, uncover their sources, and test experimental treatments or replacements, not necessarily in kind. [End Page iii]

The Cathedral of Notre-Dame de Paris is deeply ingrained in the mind of every preservationist as the textbook example of the theory and practice of restoration. To say that Notre-Dame is part of the canon of preservation is to recognize the deep intellectual engagement of generations of preservationists in it. For nearly two centuries, beginning in 1844 with Lassus and Viollet-le Duc, Notre Dame has stood as the grindstone against which and through which countless preservationists have sharpened their thinking about what preservation is and can be.

To engage in the material fabric of Notre-Dame one has to first climb on the scaffold of thoughts that make up our discipline, the échafaudage, which as Viollet-le-Duc reminds us, was perfected through siege warfare as both an extension of the constructive logic of the walls and as a means to disassemble them, to deconstruct them according to their own logic, precisely in order to preserve them. Scaffolds have been raised, physically and conceptually, against the walls of Notre-Dame many times throughout its history. An old one just burned down, and is currently being replaced. The essays in this issue call for the replacement to incorporate different elements and be joined together in new and more robust ways.

By definition, scaffolds, intellectual or physical, cannot stand on their own. They must be attached to another preexisting structure. Particularly in the case of preservation scaffoldings, those prior structures cannot be taken for granted, as they might be unstable. Every time, the locations of their anchoring points have to be carefully studied. They need to be secured into stable antecedents and firm material fabric. Yet they must be close enough to the weakened areas to allow access to them.

The fatal mistake is to anchor a scaffold only into fabric of unknown firmness, as it will surely...

• 介绍巴黎圣母院的影响
• 豪尔赫·奥特罗-帕洛斯（生物）

本期Future Anerior特刊中的文章将 2019 年 4 月 15 日肆虐巴黎圣母院的大火带入了更大的知识背景，并挑战我们在保护学科内考虑灾难的影响和后果. 它们是被这场灾难的火焰照亮的倒影，我们不要忘记，这是在保护工作中点燃的，在为保护建筑物而设置的脚手架中。

那个脚手架，像所有的保存脚手架一样，不仅仅是一个物理结构。它也是一种由不同的政治、经济、社会和文化元素组成的知识结构，这些元素根据各种历史过程和习惯结合在一起，被粗俗地描述为做事的方式：保存实践。当巴黎圣母院本身因多年忽视而削弱的关键负荷靠在这种智力结构上时，它灾难性地解开了虚弱和疲劳的关节。政治、经济、社会、文化和保护因素相互脱节，相互推动和拉动。

显然，疲倦的细木工具有法国特色，但正如本期文章明确指出的那样，这对世界其他地方来说并不舒服。作为世界上最古老的现代保护官僚机构，法国知识分子细木工被用作世界各地架设保护脚手架的模式书。在全球范围内无数的遗产概念、管理和监管结构中，都可以发现法国的智力细木工模式。它们可以在巴西找到，那里的国家博物馆于 2018 年被焚毁；2019年首里城发生火灾的冲绳；而在英格兰，克兰登公园于 2015 年在那里点燃，仅举几个不能被视为偶然失常的悲惨损失。它们阐明了一个全球进程，金融、政治、社会、和文化元素曾经共同保护这些遗产建筑。如果他们在法国解体，世界其他地方应该注意；记录和评估过时的假设对凝聚他们自己思想的智力细木工条件的影响；并确定他们的智力病理，发现他们的来源，并测试实验性治疗或替代品，不一定是实物。[尾页iii]

巴黎圣母院大教堂作为修复理论和实践的教科书范例，在每个保护主义者的脑海中根深蒂固。说巴黎圣母院是保护经典的一部分，是为了承认几代保护主义者对其中的深刻理解。近两个世纪以来，从 1844 年的 Lassus 和 Viollet-le Duc 开始，巴黎圣母院一直是磨刀石，无数保护主义者通过它磨练了他们对保护是什么和可以是什么的思考。

从事圣母院一个材料织物上的想法，使我们的纪律，脚手架第一爬échafaudage，其作为维奥莱特-乐德提醒我们，通过攻城战作为两个延伸完善墙壁的建设性逻辑，并作为分解它们的手段，根据它们自己的逻辑解构它们，正是为了保护它们。在巴黎圣母院的历史上，脚手架在物理上和概念上都被多次竖立在圣母院的墙壁上。一个旧的刚刚烧毁，目前正在更换。本期文章呼吁替代品结合不同的元素，并以新的、更强大的方式结合在一起。

根据定义，脚手架，无论是智力上的还是身体上的，都不能独立存在。它们必须连接到另一个预先存在的结构上。特别是在保存脚手架的情况下，不能认为那些先前的结构是理所当然的，因为它们可能是不稳定的。每次都必须仔细研究其锚定点的位置。它们需要固定在稳定的前因和坚固的材料结构中。然而，它们必须足够靠近薄弱地区，以允许进入它们。

致命的错误是只将脚手架固定在强度未知的织物上，因为它肯定会……