Rebuilding the Towers
|· · · "Recall the original with longing?" That's like waxing nostalgic for wood paneled dens and quadraphonic sound — and not in a good way. As un-PC as it may be to say it out loud, the towers were hideous and I, for one, don't miss 'em. Architecturally, a Dairy Queen on the site would be a vast improvement.
· · · Personally i feel that rebuilding the towers is irresponsible, pig-headed and childish.Rebuilding the same thing is insensitive, you can't just pretend like nothing happened there. It is a special space now, that deserves to be used, but not just to rebuild the exact same thing! That seems ludicrous to me!
· · · No, we don't want the Twins to be rebuilt. Neither do we want that yokelvision/Freedom Tower Pataki et al has foisted on us. Freedom tower? What are we, Dubuque? Horrible building, horrible name, horrible idea. Also, will any of the monuments, plaques ever state who attacked us that day or are we too PC to state, Arab Islamic fascists? Imagine the Pearl Harbor Memorial not saying that the Imperial Japanese fleet attacked us? Bunker hill not mentioning the British, Nah….don't think so.
· · · you're absolutely right. i read that piece and my jaw dropped. let's be honest — the wtc plans aren't beautiful (anymore), nor are they looking like they're going to, you know, happen in our lifetimes, but rebuilding the towers would be morally egregious (i miss my best friend who died years ago but i think her likeness in my living room might actually make it HARDER to get over her death) and, well, a big, hard, square blue eyesore. of course the freedom tower is looking a bit like it was made up of bits and pieces found at a williamsburg stoop sale, but isn't that strangely appropriate? a truly beautiful new york building has become an anomaly, and, well, maybe we should just give into that. haggling and politics is the new cooperation here at the national crossroads, and if we didn't like it we wouldn't pay exorbitant rent. and subway fares. when the subway works.
· · · I always thought that those two towers were not balanced with the rest of the island's buildings. They were oversized, boxy, and ugly. I always had a sense of the possibility of their weight tipping the island over. Obviously, that wasn't possible, but it was definitely the impression they gave, because they were so huge and solid. I can't imagine that anyone would want them to be replaced exactly as they were. Have we learned nothing in the years since they were built?
· · · I am originally from NY and I just can't imagine trying to put back what is gone. That, to me, is just like people who, when their beloved pet dies, go out and get the same breed, color, etc. and name the pet the same name as if the death never occurred. Mourn what is lost, remember it fondly, but love something new.
· · · I never liked the WTC. The architecture was crude and brutish. The mall at the bottom was … well a mall. The interruption of the street grid was an imposition that is being partially cured by new plan. I will not miss the WTC although I will never forget nor forgive the assault on my country and my city that brought it down.
· · · I work 4 blocks south of the WTC site and saw the towers fall from my office windows. Everyone is talking about rebuilding them as a sign of pride, strength? Has anyone given thought as to whether anyone would want to work for a company in the towers as rebuilt on an upper floor???
· · · I spent 1950-1978 growing up in Brooklyn, Manhattan and Queens before moving out to this desert (Burbank,CA). One of the last things we did before driving to the coast was a dinner at Windows on The World. Then, on one of our visits (maybe around 1985-87), friends took us there again.These memories remain and affect us deeply.No matter what replaces the Towers, there is no replacing the lives lost. We must never forget this. It doesn't matter what happens to be built there, as long as we cherish the memories of the poor souls lost there, the brave police and firefighters and the perseverance of the City itself. I truly love New York, in spite of people like Donald Trump and the writer for the Post.No building…office or residential…should ever be constructed at a height that doesn't allow rescuers to reach the upper floors in a reasonable period of time. Forget egos and vanity. Let's learn a lesson from 9/11. We've proven we can build them taller than anyone else. Let's work on safer now.
· · · I am all for rebuilding the towers, maybe they weren't great architecture, but they did symbolize the city. I commute out to NJ and drive back in everyday, I miss seeing them. So my reasoning is purely for personal edification. Obviously, they were never the first space leased, or the most desirable location from a real estate perspective. In that regard, there is no justification to rebuild them. Again, selfishly, I would like to see a tower to balance the skyline.From a planning perspective, I think there is too much being made of the memorial space. I think the competition was a sham anyway, take nothing from the person who won (I did not enter). From a personal perspective, I lost a 1st cousin in the trade center, Lee Adler, I don't go to his place of business to remember who he was, and really think there are people making too much of the memorial and site of the tower… In life, it is a fact that we will get knocked down, our strength and grace as humans, relies not in how hard we fall, but how gracefully we get back up. It is time for the politics and monument building to end and time to rebuild life in this part of our city. One (or two) well built towers with the requisite life support systems and engineering (not to withstand a fully loaded airplane, but you get the idea) and the supporting cast of other office space, residential space, retail space, and culture needs to move forward.
· · · The WTC was an abomination of 70s architecture, hated by most New Yorkersuntil the tragedy of 9/11 suddenly made it a sentimental treasure. But as abuilding, I hope never to see it's like again. How often did I, and manypeople I know wish there were some way to make it just disappear from theskyline. Of course, we never envisioned that it be done at such tragic humancost. We thought more along the line of some divine entity merely lifting itup and making it disappear in the middle of the night, thus restoring thetrue beauty of the NYC skyline. To compound this error of 60s & 70smegalomania and bad taste (not to mention bad engineering) would be acolossally bad tribute to those who lost their lives and loved ones.Let us instead honor their sacrifice with great contemporary architecturewhich will serve as a rejection of the twisted logic of terror and inspireus with something beautiful and useful and reverent. To merely replicate thetwin towers would be macabre.
· · · Long before they fell, I remember commenting to numerous people that I thought the Twin Towers were some of the ugliest buildings in the city. They had that whole impersonal modernistic/futuristic feel that came out of their era that remind me of many government structures. The main reason I want something built that tall on that spot again is so when I get out of the subway and feel disoriented I can look downtown and go "aha, that's south." Which was my main purpose for the Towers in the first place.
· · · monstrosity of garbled nonsense ? Isn't that Donald's m.o. for his interior decoration ? The MSNBC poll results can partly be seen as response to the unasked question - "wouldn't you prefer that the towers were never blown up?" … well, yes. But now that they're gone, why not build something nicer
· · · The tragedy of 9/11 was the loss of life and our sense of security, and the event's appropriation by demagogues and would-be fascists. But as for the buildings, good riddance. Architecturally, the World Trade Center was butt-ugly.
· · · Their problem will be not so much in building it but in filling it with tenants.Businesses may not want to locate in a building which has twice been targeted.The twin towers were iconic for their size more than for their architecture.If you want to recall the old buildings, I think one would do it as well as two.On the other hand, that would always recall the missing tower, so better not.
· · · I know it's not possible, given the value of the property, but I'd rather nothing were built on the site. Instead, we'd have those two light beams that shone every night for a month after the Towers came down. Nothing I've seen comes as close to memorializing them as those two beams.
· · · as far as the twins is concerned i believe that the competition results were very disappointing. i disliked all of the designs and if indeed it were possible rebuilding the twins would be my choice. they were nyc to the tee. tall, proud, majestic and easily recognizable. just looks at films made before 9/11. so many skyline shots of the twins.just my opinion and i'm not married to it. hopefully the new buildings will as loved and admired.
· · · Rebuild them as they were, or perhaps just one of them and albeit larger without violating the "footprint" thing that gets the lost folks' families so upset — they were SO REGAL as is [was]!
· · · Absolutely do NOT rebuild the towers. First of all, they were NOT perfect as they were. They were cold and unsympathetic to their surroundings as well as over scaled for the site. To rebuild them as they were simply for sentimental reasons is absurd. They would never be perceived as they were and would always be a reminder of the tragedy. A new and optimistic building needs to be built. Hopefully one designed with more thought about the site and the impact on the surroundings.
· · · Yet another example of shamelessly co-opting New York as some kind of twisted banner for right wing nostalgia. Those buildings were ugly and New Yorkers know they were ugly. Is it bad to say that? Is it like saying we hate the war so the neocons can spin our words to say it means we hate the soldiers?
· · · Rebuilding the WTC exactly as-was isn't really the sexiest proposition out there. For starters, although the 110-story north and south towers were nothing short of iconic, they were originally lambasted - and leave room for improvement in many ways. (that said, the reappearance of those forms on the skyline would be a dream come true). Second, the plaza and underground mall were urban design monstrosities in context with the rest of the city - even if they did complement the centerpiece towers.However, incorporating two massive towers back into the design is a far better option than anything we've been given so far.
· · · 9/11 was a tragedy in many ways but the architectural aesthetic was not one of them. The opportunity to replace the mundane and ordinary with something significant and user-friendly seems to me to be a gift we should cherish.
· · · Seeing the towers again would depress the hell out of me. I think a new structure with a memorial element in its public space would be preferable.
· · · It is funny how the rose colored glasses of tragedy have created a black-out in the architectural memory of many New Yorkers. When the Twin Towers went up, they were oft looked at as an eyesore, hideous, and boring. I believe the original tower design had them significantly shorter, but developers' greed and hubris wanted the tallest, and the original design was stretched, losing some of the beauty on the way. Although they did become very much a part of the skyline, they began the way the Goldman building in Jersey City has begun, "a giant thumb" in the middle of nowhere.I believe that out of this tragedy has come the opportunity for originality in contemporary design in urban planning. Not only would a simple rebuilding be repeating an earlier mistake, but it would seem to me an invitation for terrorists to hit them for a third time.
· · · They were never beloved before 9/11. They were an example of poorurban development and mediocre architecture enshrined by a tragedy.
· · · The absolute last thing this city needs is a duplicate of the twin towers!I can't look at old photos of them without an immediate stomach ache - imagine the feelings of those who lost someone on that day.We need a new start and a more manageable skyline.
· · · Although New York is the most innovative, revolutionary city I know, I would think it logical to build a modern version of the towers BUT there's just something about those original towers. Something almost impossible to put into words, but what I wouldn't do to see THOSE towers standing again!!
· · · With regard to your commentary on the rebuilding of the WTC, I fully agree with you and most of the sighted world that rebuilding the same vintage early 1970s towers would serve no purpose, either from an urban planning perspective or in terms of the needs of the commercial real estate market downtown. More importantly, anything Donald Trump endorses I steadfastly oppose as being clearly adverse to the best interest of New York.
· · · hi, i would love to see the twin towers rebuilt. they were so grand and majestic. but i ,personally, would never care to work on the upper floors. would anyone?
· · · I think it would be very hard to get anyone to work high up in those towers again. I think there are designs that would enable the space to rise as high as it once did and not put masses of people in harm's way by making the top few hundred feet observatory (and a place to put sophisticated antennas). Putting up buildings mimic the old WTC would be pure folly.
· · · I think she's crazy. No one in the city that I know wants the WTC rebuilt. In fact, it is a widely held belief that these buildings were unsuccessful architecture. I am not a huge fan of the "architecture by committee" process, which is continually watering down any vision, but it is far better than simply rebuilding the original Twin Towers. I am actually most excited about the Santiago Calatrava train station. Now that is a vision.
· · · I'm not convinced that the current plans (whatever they are) are my heart's desire (I rather think they should have actually kept the majestic, cathedral-like sides of the buildings that were left standing & perhaps have the twin beams of light every evening), but I am DEFINITELY with you, it should NOT be rebuilt!
· · · Sending this anonymously because you know how much people respect free speech in this country if it doesn't exactly reflect their thinking.My thought (without diminishing the tragedy): "The bombers have taste. They selected the ugliest landmark in all of this 'insular city of the Manhattoes' to take down."I thought that for years before the attack; basically, since the things were built. I thought it right after the attack. I think it still. The idea of resurrecting an architectural monstrosity like that is completely absurd.
· · · Having watched the twin towers go up and having worked and played there as they became an icon , synonymous with the city, I am conflicted on this issue. Although I never agree with anything the Post has to say, I share the sense of loss and pride. Also, I agree with the Donald that the new plan is a quick fix and we deserve better.I know the Towers can never be rebuilt for several reasons,economics being a major one ( how could they rent the top 30 floors?).It would also be a dismissive message to families of the victims. But there was a grandeur and awe surrounding the WTC which is not present in the proposed "corporate office park with a huge TV antenna to simulate the worlds tallest building" plan. I have respect for great planning. This is not great planning. Build something worthy of the world`s greatest city on this valuable ,historic and hallowed site.
· · · No matter if they rebuilt the same design of the twin towers brick by brick, it would never be the original. It can never be the same. Building the same design would be like saying nothing ever happened here. Let's strive for something better. Something beautiful and hopeful.
· · · If a member of your family died and all traces of them were removed like they never existed, you would be offended to the core. The replacement project doesn't reflect what was taken from us by those monsters on September 11th. It lacks soul because it doesn't properly honor the Towers. We debase our spirit by being willing to wipe from our history something taken by an act of such brutal aggression. Our society may be a disposable one but, it's up to us what of ours we dispose. An exact replacement may not be nessesary but, a design that reflects them like when you see a parent in their child, might be enough.
· · · If I read it in the news section of the Post, it isprobably bullshit. If I read it in the editorialcolumns of the aforesaid rag, I can be absolutely surethat it's bullshit. The original design of the WTC wassoul-less and intrusive. Its only value now would be as a memorial,yet there is something terrifying about that. Itsmacks of hubris, not that I for one moment exaltOsama to the level of the gods. It would also beheart-wrenching to see the apparition of somethingdead return in the flesh, so to speak. It is gone, itsmoment has gone. Let's move on.
email this article