Question

This passage is adapted from an essay exploring the debates surrounding nineteenth-century architectural restoration in Europe.

[Paragraph 1]
During the early 1800s, Europe experienced a romantic resurgence of interest in its medieval past. Writers like Victor Hugo drew public attention to the dilapidated state of Gothic structures, which had suffered decades of neglect, vandalism, and poorly executed modifications. This cultural shift sparked a widespread consensus that these monumental structures must be saved, yet it also raised a contentious question: how should architects approach the physical renewal of these historic buildings?

[Paragraph 2] (lines 11–24)
In mid-nineteenth-century France, the restoration of medieval monuments became a battleground between historic preservation and creative reconstruction. Eugène Viollet-le-Duc, the architect charged with restoring Notre-Dame de Paris, championed a philosophy that went beyond mere stabilization. He famously asserted that to restore a building is not to preserve it, but to reinstate it in a state of completeness that may never have existed at any given time. Consequently, he did not hesitate to add features—such as the cathedral's iconic chimera statues and a towering new spire—that were entirely his own nineteenth-century inventions. While critics decried these additions as historical fabrications, Viollet-le-Duc argued that they fulfilled the stylistic ideal of the original Gothic builders, prioritizing aesthetic unity over archaeological accuracy.

Which of the following statements best describes the main idea of Paragraph 2 (lines 11–24)?