To replace or not to replace? That is the question.

By Louise Peloquin

Six photo-illustrated pieces, posted between April 4, 2023 and May 5, 2025, covered the restoration of Notre Dame de Paris. (1) This top tourist attraction still makes the news as thousands continue to visit the “Limestone Ph0enix.” A giant crane towers over the majestic church since outside consolidation is ongoing, funded by single coins as well as by multiple-digit bank transfers.

A three-year-old debate about whether or not to replace grisaille panels is popping up in the media once again. (2) Signed by the Paris regional prefect, an administrative document announcing window replacement work has been posted directly on the cathedral. This is setting off proceedings in matters of administrative law and is marking the start of legal action. The Sites and Monuments Association has announced that opponents to the project can take legal action by filing an appeal at the administrative court. A debate of ideas is becoming a legal battle whose consequences will concretely impact the future of Notre Dame cathedral.

Behind the posted document is a very specific project. It entails removing the 7-meter by 4-meter (22 feet and 11.5 inches high by 13 feet and 1.5 inches wide) 19th-century medieval-style stained glass windows in six chapels south of the nave and replacing them with modern  creations. Contemporary artwork is not in itself problematic. However, its insertion into an already structured and coherent gothic cathedral is widely discussed because the 19th-century windows are deemed to be an integral part of the architectural ensemble.

Side chapel original windows

The new window project was initiated in 2023 by Laurent Ulrich, Archbishop of Paris. That year, on December 8, he invited President Emmanuel Macron to the cathedral renovation site. The President immediately gave his full support to bringing a “contemporary contribution” to Notre Dame. An official call for public procurement contracts was launched. One hundred and ten proposals were examined. French-born artist Claire Tabouret’s dossier was retained. (3) The Regional Directorate of Cultural Affairs endorsed the choice by stating that the new windows would be “a contribution from our era” to a monument built over the course of several centuries.

One of Claire Tabouret’s 6 new windows

One may ask why the project has triggered strong opposition given that history has already shown additions to the cathedral, for example, Viollet-le-Duc’s spire. (4) Opponents point out that this project is fundamentally different. It is not about adding something but rather about replacing elements which still exist. The 19th-century windows were not destroyed in the 2019 fire. They were dismantled, protected, cleaned and restored. In other words, they are perfectly preserved. Consequently, the question is: why dispose of something that works, is protected and is part of the history of the cathedral.

Original blue and grey window

Notre Dame is listed as a historic monument and so are its components. Windows are  not merely elements of decor but are just as protected as the heritage site is. This fact reinforces the legal constraints surrounding their modification or replacement. The opponents’ argument is that replacing these windows is aimed neither at conservation nor at restoration. The official mission of the public institution in charge of Notre Dame is precisely to preserve and restore the cathedral. Therefore, window replacement is considered acting outside of the legal framework. This will be the main argument for legal action. Opponents are also quick to point out that Claire Tabouret is a friend of First Lady Brigitte Macron.

A first legal procedure was initiated concerning the question of the legitimacy of the public institution to carry out this operation. The procedure was lost at first instance but is currently under appeal. Opponents particularly criticized the decision because of its failure to take the heritage aspect into account.

A second, more direct legal front opened, that of the project itself. Heritage experts find this point very interesting because the National Commission for Heritage and Architecture has twice opposed dismantling the 19th-century windows. Therefore, opposition is not just marginal. A real disagreement exists between the political project and part of the historic heritage world. Despite this, the decision to go ahead with the project was upheld. The experts’ opinions were not followed. The polemic is no longer just an artistic or a heritage discussion but seen as a political choice which disregards specialists’ recommendations.

Top section of an original window

Top section of Claire Tabouret’s window

     The project is moving along despite reservations and this is precisely what is feeding the polemic because opponents are not only contesting the final result, they are also contesting the way in which the decision was made. They find it to be a forced choice disregarding technical views. Some associations are even talking about a dangerous precedent for the future protection of historic monuments. If this type of replacement can be approved, the broader question comes up of who decides about the evolution of a monument such as Notre Dame.

In 2023, a petition was launched against the project. On April 28, 2026 it had 302,935 signatures, a considerable number for a question of heritage. It shows that the issue goes far beyond just specialists. It concerns the public which holds dear the integrity of the monument.

The project is also generating interest. Models of the new windows, illustrating the theme of Pentecost, were exhibited at the Grand Palais from December 10, 2025 to March 15, 2026 and attracted approximately 325,000 visitors.

Models of Claire Tabouret’s windows exhibited at the Grand Palais in Paris

Public opinion remains divided. One point comes up frequently in the discussion and that is cost. Some people find it shocking to spend nearly 4,000,000 euros ($4,694,668  – May 1 exchange rate) to replace windows that have already been restored (for a cost of several million euros) and are in perfect condition. Opponents feel that French taxpayers’ and donors’ money is being used to satisfy an aesthetic vision imposed by what some call a “presidential whim.” They maintain that replacing restored, intact windows by contemporary artwork is transforming not preserving. Therefore, beyond budgetary considerations, the issue remains whether or not to impose a new interpretation of the original windows.

What are the precise criticisms of the new windows? They represent Pentecost figures with a figurative, contemporary approach. Opponents insist that it is not just a question of taste. They put forward two main arguments. The first is linked to the idea of architectural coherence since the current windows are part of a progression of color and therefore, replacing risks upsetting visual balance. The second is an argument of principle. When working on historic monuments, adding, not removing, is acceptable.

Finally, some specialists bring up technical characteristics. For example, the new windows do not take into account the tracery (5). There are problems with delineating the characters depicted in the glass.

Detail of a Claire Tabouret window

It is really not a question of rejecting contemporary art at all. Some completely agree that contemporary art can have its place in the cathedral. Take, for example, the tapestries now hung in some of the side chapels. (6) The root cause of the problem is not integrating something new but rather replacing something sound.

Controversy over replacing stained glass windows at Notre Dame has already triggered controversy. An exhibition, held from June 22, 2024 to January 5, 2025, in Troyes, a city in the Champagne region, presented an ensemble of forgotten windows conceived for the 1937 Paris World Fair. Stored in the rear of Notre Dame’s south nave, they were rediscovered in 2019. They were created by twelve master glass-makers to replace Viollet-le-Duc’s grisailles. Louis Barillet, emblematic figure of Art Deco, was project manager. In 1934, he began working with eleven other master glass-makers to create a series of windows for the Pontifical Pavilion at the 1937 Paris World Fair. (7) When the fair ended, Louis Barillet sought to ensure the future of the creations because selling them was forbidden. In 1935, at a time when Viollet-le-Duc’s grisailles were judged to be “too dull”, Barillet offered the Historic Monument Commission to replace the old windows with his new ones by insisting that the latter were less outdated and more in keeping with medieval polychrome windows. The Historic Monument Commission gave the green light without making the initiative official.

Detail of Paul Lousier’s 1937 window of Saint François de Sales

Detail of Valentine Reyre’s 1937 window of Sainte Foy de Conques

The Pontifical Pavilion was conserved after the 1937 Paris World Fair and it was only at the end of 1938 that the new windows were finally installed, on trial, inside Notre Dame. A heated polemic ensued. The question of placing modern artwork inside an ancient monument divided art specialists, historians and the general public. It was the course of history, with World War II looming, rather than the artistic controversy, which ended the 1938 window replacement project.

In 1939, by precautionary measure, Louis Barillet’s workshop removed its windows, stored them in straw-filled crates and reinstalled Viollet-le-Duc’s grisailles. Seven of the Barillet workshop panes were recuperated by their master glass-makers and five were lost.

In 2019, just after the Notre Dame fire, the 1937 windows briefly came back to center stage. Recuperating them for the renovated cathedral was not seriously considered.

This whole debate ultimately goes beyond the question of window choices because it raises the question of whether or not we consider cultural heritage as something we receive and pass on or as something we adapt to our time.

Today, there is no consensus about the Notre Dame window project. What is certain, however, is the fact that the decision to be taken will be a landmark. It will serve as a reference, a precedent for other projets. Beyond the windows, a certain conception of cultural heritage is ultimately being played out.

The question remains: to replace or not to replace?

Keep the old or bring in the new – what do you think?

1) “Notre Dame de Paris, an Update” – posted on April 4, 2023

https://richardhowe.com/2023/04/03/notre-dame-de-paris-an-update/

“Gift-wrapped in Steel Notre Dame’s New Spire” – posted on December 18, 2023

https://richardhowe.com/2023/12/18/gift-wrapped-in-steel-notre-dames-new-spire/#comments

“Spire Update” – posted on February 2, 2024:

https://richardhowe.com/2024/02/21/notre-dame-of-paris-spire-update/

“Notre Dame the Limestone Phoenix” – posted on December 4, 2024

https://richardhowe.com/2024/12/04/notre-dame-the-limestone-phoenix/

“Notre Dame Inauguration New Flash” – posted on December 7, 2024.                        https://richardhowe.com/2024/12/07/notre-dame-inauguration-news-flash/

“Notre Dame Revisited” – posted on May 5, 2025

https://richardhowe.com/2025/05/16/notre-dame-revisited/

2) “Grisailles” are stained glass windows characterized by a non-figurative ornamental design painted in black lines on colorless glass. Small quantities of color were later introduced. This technique, which means, “paint in grey shades” was principally used to create contours and shadows. Many French cathedrals have grisailles, for example, Chartres, Beauvais, Tours, Troyes and Paris.

3) Born on September 25, 1981 in Pertuis, Vaucluse, in the Provence region, artist Claire Tabouret, admired by contemporary art collectors, is living and working in Los Angeles. The six large windows she designed are supposed to be installed in Notre Dame de Paris in December 2026.

4) See the 2nd and 3rd links of footnote #1 for information on Viollet-le-Duc’s spire.

5) “Tracery” is the intricate decorative framework that supports and divides the panes in medieval stained glass windows. Begun as simple plate tracery, it gradually became more complex and further enhanced both the structural support and aesthetic appeal of large windows.

6) See the second photo in:

“Notre Dame Revisited” – posted on May 5, 2025

https://richardhowe.com/2025/05/16/notre-dame-revisited/

7) The eleven master glass-makers who worked with Louis Barillet from 1934 to 1939: Jacques Le Chevallier, Valentine Reyre, Jean Hébert-Stevens, Louis Mazetier, Jacques Gruber, Rev. Marie-Alain Couturier, André Rinuy, Max Ingrand, Joseph-Jean-Kef Ray, Jean Gaudin and Paul Louzier.