The Louvre Museum is facing mounting criticism over its ambitious but financially troubled Renaissance Plan, with cultural experts calling for the immediate cancellation of its most controversial component - the Grande Colonnade project. During a November 19, 2025 hearing at the National Assembly, Louvre Director Laurence Des Cars faced intense scrutiny over what critics describe as a misguided €666 million architectural venture that has diverted attention from urgent safety concerns.
Didier Rykner, founder of La Tribune de l'Art, published a scathing editorial titled "A Drifting Louvre" on November 19, 2025, condemning the museum's shift in priorities. He describes the Grande Colonnade project as "grandiose and totally useless" and "megalomaniacal," criticizing it as an "unstudied and unfunded" €666 million plan. Rykner argues that the museum has been swept up by this grandiose and poorly calibrated project, losing sight of more pressing practical needs.
The safety concerns at the heart of this controversy are particularly alarming. Rykner disputes claims by the current Louvre administration that they alerted authorities to security risks upon taking office, calling this assertion "a brazen lie, easy to prove." He references a damning report from the Ministry of Culture's General Inspection that Culture Minister Rachida Dati mentioned on October 31, which allegedly remains blocked from publication due to its devastating findings. This raises fundamental questions about pursuing a massive architectural program while vital safety measures for the historic building remain unaddressed.
The financial situation compounds these concerns significantly. The museum currently has approximately €300 million in treasury funds, but still needs "at the very least, more than €350 million that the Louvre hopes to have financed through patronage." No major donors have stepped forward to support the project. Meanwhile, urgent repair work remains stalled, and the museum continues paying international architects to participate in a competition for an unfunded project.
The consequences of these misplaced priorities are already visible to visitors. The museum has been forced to close the Campana Rooms, which house ancient Greek vases across 1,000 square meters, because their ceilings are in danger of collapse. This closure dramatically illustrates how the pursuit of architectural prestige has come at the expense of maintaining existing cultural treasures and ensuring visitor safety.
Rykner proposes a more reasonable alternative approach to addressing the Louvre's needs. Instead of insisting on a monumental new facade, he suggests reallocating existing spaces, creating additional entrances at lower cost to relieve congestion in the Denon wing, and even potentially relocating the Mona Lisa to another pavilion within the palace complex. These pragmatic solutions would address visitor flow issues without the enormous financial burden and safety risks of the current plan.
This crisis reveals a broader lesson for major heritage projects about the importance of returning to fundamentals: conservation, security, and efficiency. While prestigious architectural programs have their place, they cannot be the first priority when the existing building's structural integrity is compromised. The Louvre's Renaissance Plan, as currently conceived, represents what critics see as a dangerous flight forward rather than responsible stewardship.
The situation at one of the world's most important museums highlights the tension between ambitious vision and practical necessity in cultural institution management. As the debate continues, the fundamental question remains whether the Louvre will prioritize the safety and preservation of its existing collections and spaces, or continue pursuing an increasingly controversial and financially uncertain architectural transformation.
