OUCH! Cut with the “symbolism” !! That was a very VERY painful thing to look at, and i’m not just talking about that dynamite-stick building. That website was a nightmare. sure Flash was a good invention, but overuse is MEAN!
shudder Never let that thing be built…!
I can’t get into the site, but if they spelled it storeys then that is correct. Although “story” can be a level of a building, “storey” is how I normally see it when the writer is referring to a building.
The site’s “Current Results” (ha…) say “Since May 20th, 2002”. I don’t know when the Yahoo! article was (Link? I’m curious.) But that explains why the voting stayed the same.
Another vote from here for ugly.
The original towers had an understated grace an slim power of their own.
This monstrosity just looks like a lumbering glob of building plunked in to the middle of its surroundings with absolutely no connection with the surroundings.
Man, what a crappy looking thing. Not what NYC needs.
Everybody hated the twin towers when they were first erected.
See link:
http://www.maxprotetch.com/SITE/PREVIOUS/ANEWWTC/HARIRI/index.html
This proposal is kind of interesting - the Max Protetch site also has a number of other design ideas from various artists and architects.
The scores today were 82/18. The scores on May 28th were 82/18 (sorry, I can’t find the Yahoo article again – it was a Google discovery). It could well be coincidence, but given how bloody ugly that design is the ‘coincidence’ figure suprises me.
I’ve seen many initiatives along these lines now. Build it bigger, better, more, and mostly, HIGHER!!
While I can see the symbolism in building them from the original designs, I have to ask: is there an immediate need for such a collosal building in Manhattan, from a purely economical perspective?
I mean, mr. Four Dildos And A Roof obviously didn’t provide an economical analysis, but are there voices saying that in the current economic climate, postponing the construction is a good thing anyway?
Good point, **Johnny L.A. **. Storey/storeys may well be correct British usage, but I believe that story/stories is still correct American usage. Regardless, I’ve never seen storys as an acceptable spelling, and that’s what he’s using:
I just noticed something else about the plans.
Ingenius Security Feature #1:
Ingenius Security Feature #2:
So, in other words, in the event of an emergency (am I the only one who thinks that no terrorist would be stupid enough to do the EXACT SAME THING twice in a row?), all of the occupants of the building will frantically flee to the top of the buildings to the helicopter pads, where they will then be (presumably) hurled uncontrollably away from the building.
Yep, the man’s a genius!