I like this kind of thread. In aesthetics, unlike politics, everybody can disagree without acrimony.
I'd pondered the idea that perhaps the space should be left vacant (that is, a park or plaza, but no buildings) as a powerful memorial. I was swayed by the argument expressed by Robert EB and Lee that to do so would be to symbolically give in to the terrorists. Lee's idea of two Atlases holding up the world would be powerful, if impractical.
But going with the idea of putting some buildings there only reinforces my dissatisfaction with the designs presented so far. Seems to me that the most powerful message of all would be to rebuild exact replicas of the Twin Towers (with internal improvements based on 30 years of advances). A new design would be just another building, no matter how creative; while the Towers were unique when they were standing, and would be a unique memorial to themselves if rebuilt.
To hell with some architect's egotistical "vision". How about the simple message that the Twin Towers cannot be (permanently) destroyed?
--Robert
Current Events » in reply to 'WTC proposals: Cast your vote'
WTC proposals revisited
The whole thread (30 posts)
- 'WTC proposals: Cast your vote'
- Atomic Vortex Tower
- Re: 'WTC proposals: Cast your vote'
- All this shows me is that sculptors should not be architects.
- Re: 'WTC proposals: Cast your vote'
- The owners of the land get to decide.
- WTC proposals revisited
- I understand that high rise similar to the original WTC is impractical
- The designs seem like something out of Bladerunner
