In this thread I implied that New Yorkers were being big babies about the new design for the World Trade Center, but then I realized that a better place for that sentiment would be here in the Pit.
My feeling is that, yes, we all want the NYC skyline to be as impressive as it once was, but the bickering and criticism of the new designs is getting a little ridiculous. Only in New York would you find so many people who think they should have veto power over the designs of a new building in their city. IMO, you’re lucky they’re consulting the public at all!
What I really suspect is that New Yorkers - and Americans in general - are hurting, and that no design will ever really live up to what they lost, as aesthetically unappealing as it supposedly was (remember all the criticism the design of the original WTC received). But the time for cutting bait is over, the time for fishing is now.
All the people who are shouting “Hideous! Disgraceful! Well I never!” and such - do they even know anything about architecture? What, exactly, is wrong with the new designs other than the fact that they don’t appeal to your completely subjective tastes in skyscraper design? Or do you just enjoy being shrill and contrary?
If the Port Authority waits to seven million personal seals of approval from New Yorkers, the thing will never get built.
There. Now flame my ass.
All I know is they better build something twice as tall. I’ll be the first person to move in.
Can’t say I can blame them too much, considering the THINK proposal. I’ve never lived in New York, but even I am pretty disturbed that that’s one of the finalists. Yeesh.
(raises his hand bashfully)
Ok, Ike, please tell me what, if anything, you think is wrong with the designs, and how you would improve them. I am sincerely curious.
I agree - architectural decisions do not lend themselves to democracy. We can usually all agree on what is uuuhhhh-GLEE but rarely on what is nice. Public input is important but eventually a decision will have to be made, and some (most?) people won’t like it.
Damn. Where’s Howard Roark when ya need him?
By the way, I am not just talking about the new ones. If I remember correctly, there were five perfectly decent designs unveiled to the public several months ago that people totally lost their shit over. That THINK one with the airplane in the middle is a little weird, but keep in mind that if people had been less huffy about one of the original designs it never would have come into being.
"All the people who are shouting "Hideous! Disgraceful! "
That would be me. I just don’t find either design to be asthetically pleasing in an urban environment. I haven’t heard one positive opinion of either design.
Newsflash: it’s not just New Yorkers and the disgust is aimed primarily at the THINK design. Two towers comprised mainly of dead space and joined by a shape which resembles a jetliner? What the flying fuck?
And it’s not just New Yorkers that would be pissing and moaning.
I think any design that involves decision by committee is doomed to have the pissing and moaning that you’re seeing with the WTC. Maybe not as much, because certainly WTC is so renowned, but you’ll get dissention nonetheless.
I’m sure there are people pissing and moaning about the ballpark they’re building right now in downtown SD. Some think it’ll look great, others will think it’s an eyesore for the downtown profile.
:: shrug ::
To be honest I liked the tower of lights the most. I’ll agree that the THINK design is pretty bad.
NPR had a short segment on the owner’s (Larry Silverstein*) opinion: he didn’t like any of them. They alluded to that partly being because he stands to lose significant rental space in all of the proposed designs. He’s had little say in what is getting built on his space.
*Full disclosure: Ms. D_Odds works for a realty management firm owned by Mr. Silverstein.
Well thank you, John Fucking Galt. These are off the top of my head, I’m not going to drag out the Vitruvius, Lewis Mumford, and Eliel Saarinen.
The THINK proposal is a ridiculous chest-beater. “HEY! These are the TALLEST BUILDINGS IN THE WORLD! Except they’re not really, uh, buildings, they’re empty shells!” That’s a metaphor I’d rather not live with every day, all right?
The other one isn’t quite as bad, if you like the idea of replicating the CitiCenter wedge (Lex and 51st) several times further downtown.
I’m not a ferocious naysayer, you know. I still think the Gaudi design is great.
I’ve given it some thought, and I concede that the THINK design is very bad.
Hey, cuauhtemoc, how would you feel if one of these was proposed for your town square?
Whoa! Awesome! I guess I have no taste.
Hell, if they won’t put up the Gaudi design, I’d go for the Lava Lamp!
I love Gaudi, but doesn’t that design seem a little dated? Maybe it’s just me, but it reminds me of the Jetsons.
No offense cuauhtemoc, but this is a lame rant. I’d rather they go through 20 design passes and end up with something good than rush the process and put up that Universal Studios attraction of a THINK design. Bad is bad, and saying so isn’t whining.
No, no…the Jetsons should remind you of Gaudi! Seeing as he predates them by sixty years or so. Like the Lone Ranger should remind you of Rossini, you know?
I don’t think the design is any more “dated” than Monticello or St. Paul’s or the Parthenon.