Home > General > St Pauls as a Mosque

St Pauls as a Mosque

I put this on MyT earlier but no one has bitten yet.

I came across this picture of St Pauls cathedral today and it occurred to me that it would make quite an acceptable mosque. Maybe a little modification to the dome, and the addition of one of those towers for the guys to do the call to prayer thing.

Advertisements
Categories: General
  1. January 17, 2011 at 11:23 pm

    So you did, Jazz, so you did. I saw it there.

  2. January 17, 2011 at 11:29 pm

    Yep, I saw the post, Jazz.

    I’m not sure what response you were eliciting.

  3. January 17, 2011 at 11:31 pm

    You have to admit, it does look quite mosquelike. The muslims won’t have to make too many alterations to it when they take over.

  4. January 17, 2011 at 11:34 pm

    … or attempting to elicit …

  5. January 17, 2011 at 11:37 pm

    I stand corrected, Bearsy.

    Jazz.

    Um, I don’t usually say this but what exactly is your point? 😦

  6. tocino
    January 17, 2011 at 11:56 pm

    Araminta :

    I stand corrected, Bearsy.

    Jazz.

    Um, I don’t usually say this but what exactly is your point? :(

    I seem to remember you giving me a hard time over another picture of St Pauls and asking much the same question.

  7. January 17, 2011 at 11:59 pm

    Yep, with equally good reason, Toc.

    So what do you think the point is then?

  8. tocino
    January 18, 2011 at 12:00 am

    The Christians have done it as well. Think the Giralda is a former minaret that was converted to a bell tower for the Cathedral of Seville.

  9. January 18, 2011 at 12:03 am

    tocino :

    The Christians have done it as well. Think the Giralda is a former minaret that was converted to a bell tower for the Cathedral of Seville.

    Ah, yes, Toc, I was about to suggest that. 🙂

  10. Boadicea
    January 18, 2011 at 12:03 am

    The design of St Pauls was based on St Peters in Rome – so I guess one could say the same about that building, too!

  11. January 18, 2011 at 12:04 am

    Yes, indeed, Boadicea, and I am sure that is not the only example.

  12. tocino
    January 18, 2011 at 12:07 am

    Obtuse springs to mind Araminta. For myself, I think the dome looks rather like the top of a mosque. Probably a little too much lateral thinking for you?

    Sorry Jazz that pic in comments didn’t work but I’m sure you can work my thinking out.

  13. tocino
    January 18, 2011 at 12:09 am

    Thanks to whoever did the edit for me. Thats my lot for tonight.

  14. January 18, 2011 at 12:09 am

    You can’t cut and paste, Toc. But don’t worry, Daddy’s done it for you. 😆

  15. January 18, 2011 at 12:10 am

    Whatever Toc.

    Good night.

  16. January 18, 2011 at 1:46 am

    tocino :

    Obtuse springs to mind Araminta. For myself, I think the dome looks rather like the top of a mosque.

    Hi toc

    For myself, I think that the tops of many mosques look very like the domes of the Byzantine churches and Roman buildings such as the Pantheon which preceded said mosques by several centuries.

    And I personally believe that it is extremely unlikely and on the cusp of being tendentiously absurd to suggest that St Pauls or St Peters or St Marks will ever be mosques.

    Mind, to be fair, the campanile would make a fine spot for a muezzin if it ever did happen.

  17. January 18, 2011 at 3:11 am

    Jazz – I don’t think they would ever want it – after all Shaikh Zayed’s Mosque in Abu Dhabi, the eighth largest in the world, with room for 40,000 worshippers, has eighty domes, the largest equivalent to St Paul’s, and just one of the many chandeliers is a third of the diameter of that main dome. When you spend over $2 billion, you can wind up with quite an impressive piece of architecture…I have posted a slide show of images taken on a tour of it, and Sultan Qaboos’s, on my own blog.

  18. January 18, 2011 at 4:25 am

    John Mackie :

    tocino :

    Obtuse springs to mind Araminta. For myself, I think the dome looks rather like the top of a mosque.

    Hi toc

    For myself, I think that the tops of many mosques look very like the domes of the Byzantine churches and Roman buildings such as the Pantheon which preceded said mosques by several centuries.

    And I personally believe that it is extremely unlikely and on the cusp of being tendentiously absurd to suggest that St Pauls or St Peters or St Marks will ever be mosques.

    Mind, to be fair, the campanile would make a fine spot for a muezzin if it ever did happen.

    Hello Mr Mackie, I agree with you fully on this. It seems that there is a lot of hysteria and hyperbole. Yes, there are a lot of problems going on right now but there seems to at least be universal acknowledgement that they must be dealt with and slowly they are being dealt with. Problems that take decades to materialise to not solve themselves immediately.

  19. Janus
    January 18, 2011 at 11:01 am

    What constitutes ‘an acceptable mosque’? Discuss. 😉

  20. sheona
    January 18, 2011 at 11:29 am

    Since Islam seems to have borrowed so much from other religions, it’s hardly surprising their mosques look like some cathedrals and the minarets like bell towers.

    Thank you for the photos of the Giralda and the Campanile. Just what I need on a chilly day to bring back memories of sunshine. If a muezzin did ever try to broadcast the call to prayer from the Campanile, I hope it would collapse again.

    I agree with Christopher that there is now some acknowledgement, at least among the people if not the politicians, that we have a problem. If, as the French say, “c’est le premier pas qui compte”, I suppose the ban on face coverings is a good start.

    Janus, some Muslims seem to think that an “acceptable mosque” is a Paris street. Has anyone ever checked to see whether the mosque is full to the brim or whether this is just another attempt to exert pressure?

  21. Boadicea
    January 18, 2011 at 12:18 pm

    Janus :

    What constitutes ‘an acceptable mosque’? Discuss. ;-)

    I don’t know what constitutes an ‘acceptable’ mosque, but I know that this:

    hiding under the name ‘Baital Futuh’, meaning House of Victories, is unacceptable. It is the largest mosque in Western Europe.

    Read its web-site http://www.baitulfutuh.org, and note that it says the ‘The Best Part of a City in the eyes of God are its mosques’.

    I know the area well – it was my ‘stomping ground’ as a teenager and I celebrated my first marriage there. I find it unacceptable that such a building, totally out of keeping with the surrounding architecture, should be allowed to be built in an area steeped in English history. I find it outrageous that it should call itself ‘House of Victories’, and that it should claim that the ‘Best Part’ of London are its mosques.

    I might add that I had a long ‘discussion’ with a Muslim in the other place on this very mosque. He, very kindly, said that ‘when’ Britain became Muslim the little churches with historical connections would be preserved. Gee – thanks!

    You may find this acceptable – I don’t.

  22. January 18, 2011 at 12:25 pm

    It would make a good target!

  23. January 18, 2011 at 12:29 pm

    Janus :

    What constitutes ‘an acceptable mosque’? Discuss. ;-)

    One that is not in England?

  24. tocino
    January 18, 2011 at 12:40 pm

    bravo22c :

    Janus :

    What constitutes ‘an acceptable mosque’? Discuss. ;-)

    One that is not in England?

    Ditto.

  25. tocino
    January 18, 2011 at 1:21 pm

    I note that Jazz hasn’t returned to this post. For my part, levent has expressed his thoughts on the MyT post which would mirror what I was actually thinking when I started my post here and before I got sidetracked engaging with Araminta.

    http://my.telegraph.co.uk/jazz606/jazz/83/st-pauls-as-a-mosque/

  26. January 18, 2011 at 1:30 pm

    Toc, you may wish to adjust the knob of your ironometer.

  27. January 18, 2011 at 1:36 pm

    Hello, Levent.

    Just what I was going to say!

  28. tocino
    January 18, 2011 at 1:40 pm

    Levent :

    Toc, you may wish to adjust the knob of your ironometer.

    Good to see that you keep a watching brief here levent. 🙂

    My original thoughts on the pic were, two minarets and a dome and in my opinion it was similar to many a mosque

  29. tocino
    January 18, 2011 at 1:48 pm

    Araminta :

    Hello, Levent.

    Just what I was going to say!

    Good God, or should I say by Allah. Are you two hanging out in the same internet cafe?

  30. January 18, 2011 at 1:54 pm

    tocino :

    Araminta :

    Hello, Levent.

    Just what I was going to say!

    Good God, or should I say by Allah. Are you two hanging out in the same internet cafe?

    Tut tut Toc, no need to get nasty.

    As for your thoughts on this post and yours. I think you are referring to this one: https://charioteers.org/2010/12/29/an-iconic-photograph/

    So you were trying to point out the resemblance with a mosque in your post too.

    I’m a bit confused. Perhaps you are too. 😉

  31. January 18, 2011 at 1:54 pm

    Hello Araminta!

  32. January 18, 2011 at 2:01 pm

    I’m now even more confused than I was when I came into this post; I’ve tried lateral thinking but it doesn’t seem to help.

    I’ll just get back to my gardening instead. 🙂

  33. tocino
    January 18, 2011 at 2:02 pm

    Levent :

    tocino :

    Araminta :

    Hello, Levent.

    Just what I was going to say!

    Good God, or should I say by Allah. Are you two hanging out in the same internet cafe?

    Tut tut Toc, no need to get nasty.

    As for your thoughts on this post and yours. I think you are referring to this one: https://charioteers.org/2010/12/29/an-iconic-photograph/

    So you were trying to point out the resemblance with a mosque in your post too.

    I’m a bit confused. Perhaps you are too. ;)

    Nothing nasty in my comment levent, just your interpretation of it. Why am I confused by pointing out the resemblance to a mosque?

  34. January 18, 2011 at 2:09 pm

    No confusion about resemblance, Toc. You said “For my part, levent has expressed his thoughts on the MyT post which would mirror what I was actually thinking when I started my post here ”
    I think you were referring to this post of yours https://charioteers.org/2010/12/29/an-iconic-photograph/ . I don’t see any sign to this resemblance in your post.

  35. tocino
    January 18, 2011 at 2:16 pm

    By Allah, now I see where you are talking about. I should have said ‘my comment & not my post’. Thi is fun. 🙂

  36. tocino
    January 18, 2011 at 2:23 pm

    tocino :

    By Allah, now I see where you are talking about. I should have said ‘my comment & not my post’. Thi is fun. :-)

    Oh dear, the perils of the tiny Ipad!

    By Allah, now I see what you are talking about. I should have said, ‘my comment’ & not ‘my post.’ This is fun. 🙂

  37. January 18, 2011 at 2:25 pm

    tocino

    I’m still here and if I’ve got this right below should be a pic of the Central Mosque off the Cowley Road in Oxford.

  38. January 18, 2011 at 2:25 pm

    Bingo!!

  39. January 18, 2011 at 2:25 pm

    🙂

  40. tocino
    January 18, 2011 at 2:33 pm

    Jazz, was I right in my ‘lateral thinking’ comment?

  41. Janus
    January 18, 2011 at 2:36 pm

    tocino :

    bravo22c :

    Janus :

    What constitutes ‘an acceptable mosque’? Discuss. ;-)

    One that is not in England?

    Ditto.

    “St Pauls cathedral today and it occurred to me that it would make quite an acceptable mosque.” So you both disagree with Jazz.

  42. tocino
    January 18, 2011 at 2:40 pm

    Janus :

    tocino :

    bravo22c :

    Janus :

    What constitutes ‘an acceptable mosque’? Discuss. ;-)

    One that is not in England?

    Ditto.

    “St Pauls cathedral today and it occurred to me that it would make quite an acceptable mosque.” So you both disagree with Jazz.

    But not in this country. I was talking about minarets and domes and how it could look like a mosque.

  43. January 18, 2011 at 2:40 pm

    Janus.

    Or conversely and working on the same curious logic, St Pauls should not have been built; it looks too much like a mosque to be acceptable!

  44. January 18, 2011 at 2:46 pm

    Sir Christopher Wren was a visionary man. He intended to be helpful for the later restorations. (Fluttering eyelashes)

  45. January 18, 2011 at 2:48 pm

    Very amusing, Levent. 🙂

  46. Janus
    January 18, 2011 at 2:49 pm

    HI, Lev! 🙂

  47. January 18, 2011 at 3:03 pm

    Hello Janus!

  48. tocino
    January 18, 2011 at 3:42 pm

    They would have more than a few problems turning this one into a Mosque.

  49. January 18, 2011 at 4:00 pm

    Canterbury, a mosque? No. It looks like, that it would make a nice madrasah, Toc. 🙂

  50. O Zangado
    January 18, 2011 at 5:21 pm

    Afternoon all. Personally I would never discriminate against any individual on the grounds of their race, sexual orientation or religion as long as they do not push it into my face.. When that happens I get all defensive and you really don’t want to meet a wolf on the defensive – lots of teeth, snarling, blood and suchlike. Just leave me alone. let it be. Live and let live and all that.

    As things stand, therefore, I think there should be as many mosques in Blighty as there are churches in Saudi Arabia. By the same token, my instinctive sympathies are with the Cornwall hotel owners http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/law-and-order/8266097/Gay-couple-awarded-damages-after-Christian-hotel-owners-refused-to-let-them-share-double-room.html

    OZ

  51. tocino
    January 18, 2011 at 5:24 pm

    Levent :

    Canterbury, a mosque? No. It looks like, that it would make a nice madrasah, Toc. :)

    A bit on the large size for an Indian Restaurant Levent? 🙂

  52. tocino
    January 18, 2011 at 5:29 pm

    O Zangado :

    By the same token, my instinctive sympathies are with the Cornwall hotel owners http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/law-and-order/8266097/Gay-couple-awarded-damages-after-Christian-hotel-owners-refused-to-let-them-share-double-room.html

    OZ

    Have to say, that judgment was a bit of a bummer.

  53. January 18, 2011 at 5:36 pm

    O Zangado :

    <…I think there should be as many mosques in Blighty as there are churches in Saudi Arabia.

    I’ll drink to that.

  54. O Zangado
    January 18, 2011 at 5:47 pm

    Toc – 🙂

    Bravo – Clink (of glasses). Was originally going to write ‘chink’, but fell fear of the UK Thought Police. What have we come to?

    OZ

  55. christinaosborne
    January 18, 2011 at 6:14 pm

    ‘What constitutes an acceptable mosque?’

    A RAZED one!

  56. January 18, 2011 at 6:22 pm

    Ahem
    Christina
    I meant ‘acceptable’ in the errr….. architectural sense.

  57. tocino
    January 18, 2011 at 6:32 pm

    jazz606 :

    Ahem
    Christina
    I meant ‘acceptable’ in the errr….. architectural sense.

    There you hsve it Araminta.

  58. Boadicea
    January 18, 2011 at 7:26 pm

    jazz606 :

    Ahem
    Christina
    I meant ‘acceptable’ in the errr….. architectural sense.

    And that, Jazz, was my point. When the Normans conquered England they built huge castles to dominate the countryside – the White Tower in the Tower of London was one such. The building in Morden (#21) with its name and web-site seems to me to have the same intent. At least the mosque in Oxford is built red brick.

  59. christinaosborne
    January 18, 2011 at 8:03 pm

    Oh all right then.
    One that comes conforming to the cubist movement, all nicely jumbled blocks artistically lying around after demolishment.
    If Picasso can get away with it………

  60. sheona
    January 18, 2011 at 9:23 pm

    CO, you could be heading for the next Turner prize.

    I agree with bravo. An acceptable mosque is in a Muslim country. I couldn’t comment on architectural merit.

  61. January 18, 2011 at 9:35 pm

    So, architecturally does this offend? It is a Hindu temple in London.

  62. Boadicea
    January 18, 2011 at 9:58 pm

    It’s a beautiful building – rather like an over-decorated country mansion. Not terribly sure it fits in with the local area… 🙂

    The picture I posted looks like a military post in contrast. I’ll own that knowing what the name ‘Baital Futuh’ means and having read its web-site in some detail confirms my opinion that that particular mosque is intended to be an outpost for Islam.

    I checked out, briefly it’s true, the web-site for the place you have posted – it’s not confrontational in the same way as the ‘ ‘Baital Futuh’’s site is.

  63. January 18, 2011 at 10:07 pm

    No, I’m not sure it fits in either but it is a traditional Hindu temple, whereas “Baital Futu “, to me seems to be a rather modern interpretation which I don’t find particularly pleasing.

    In truth I’d prefer a traditional mosque.

    In the end, be it modern office blocks, Hindu temples or mosques, any of these buildings in an area one knows and loves can be exceedingly offensive.

    I have no idea if the Hindu temple caused an outcry with local residents when it was built, but I suspect it may well have been considered not in keeping.

  64. sheona
    January 18, 2011 at 10:16 pm

    A very striking building, and not surrounded by many others with which it might clash, by the look of it. Remember the outcry about the new Hillingdon council offices in Uxbridge? What has this got to do with mosques btw?

  65. Boadicea
    January 18, 2011 at 10:18 pm

    In the end, be it modern office blocks, Hindu temples or mosques, any of these buildings in an area one knows and loves can be exceedingly offensive.

    I can think of quite a few ‘modern buildings’ that do offend horribly!

  66. January 18, 2011 at 10:21 pm

    What has St Pauls got to do with mosques, Sheona?

    We are talking architecture now according to comment #56 by the author of the post. 🙂

    I must admit this whole post seems to be going round in circles, though.

  67. January 18, 2011 at 10:24 pm

    Sheona.

    I may be wrong but I think this temple is in Wembley.

    Not an area I know well so I don’t know how it fits in to the surroundings.

  68. Boadicea
    January 18, 2011 at 10:27 pm

    The difficulty with looking at a mosque objectively as simply another piece of architecture is that they have come to symbolise the dislike, distrust and fear that many people have about Islam.

  69. January 18, 2011 at 10:28 pm

    Boadicea :

    The difficulty with looking at a mosque objectively as simply another piece of architecture is that they have come to symbolise the dislike, distrust and fear that many people have about Islam.

    I think you have hit the nail on the head there, Boadicea!

  70. sheona
    January 18, 2011 at 10:36 pm

    To quote Jeeves (quoting some Roman) “Rem acu tetigisti” Boadicea. That is why I said that an acceptable mosque is one in a Muslim country.

  71. Janus
    January 19, 2011 at 9:13 am

    Some Roman, Sheona? How very dare you? Tully hisself. 🙂

  72. Janus
    January 19, 2011 at 9:15 am

    PS the Romans started the dome thing – or was it the Persias? Depends who you ask. Guess which the muslims plump for.

  73. January 19, 2011 at 10:50 am

    Domes have a tendency to spread out like a blancmange unless restrained in some way. Which is why the large mosques in Istanbul (one of which I believe was once a church?) have their domes surrounded by other smaller domes, it is to stop the main dome pancaking.

    Wren solved this problem by restraining the dome at it’s base with a circumferential chain, an elegant and simple solution which appears to have eluded previous dome architects.

  74. January 19, 2011 at 11:57 am

    Toc, (@51),

    How do you say it, the more the merrier? 😛

  75. January 19, 2011 at 12:05 pm

    Araminta @#69,
    Ditto.

  76. January 19, 2011 at 12:07 pm

    Boadicea’s remark made me think:
    During the cold war, how did you see USSR and did your view change after it ended. Have you noticed the manipulation of the media?

  77. January 19, 2011 at 6:20 pm

    In reference to the Hindu Temple versus the Muslim Mosque: when Hindus, or for that matter Sikhs, build a temple it is at times; especially when the motifs are not in keeping with local aesthetics,
    met more with a shaking of the head but little more. I do not take issue with people because they are Muslims, nor do I take issue with the fact that they want to have houses of worship — very few actually do. When Muslims say “why bother learning German? Austria will turn into a Muslim country anyway, so we can keep on speaking our own languages” or “when Britain turns Muslim, we’ll preserve the little churches with historical value” it does more to inflame the situation than a building. Furthermore, building an unwieldy, aggressive structure with a militant name does not reduce tensions one iota. While I think that the talk of Britain and Europe turning Muslim is greatly overblown, the likelihood that there will be alienated (self-imposed and otherwise)minorities forming micro-nations within the European countries is likely.
    It would be a situation much like blacks in the USA — a cultural half-way between the old world and the new world, often with the worst of both.

  78. January 19, 2011 at 6:26 pm

    Levent :

    Boadicea’s remark made me think:
    During the cold war, how did you see USSR and did your view change after it ended. Have you noticed the manipulation of the media?

    I do agree with you, generally. The problem is that Muslims, like most other groups, are their own worst enemy.

  1. No trackbacks yet.

Add your Comment

Please log in using one of these methods to post your comment:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: