-
ADD TIME NEWS
- NEWSLETTERS
9/11 + 6
So here it is, the sixth anniversary of that morning. Last night I was walking down the Hudson River boardwalk near my apartment in Jersey City, N. J., which is directly across the water from where the World Trade Center used to be. Every year, there's a memorial at this time produced by scores of floodlights positioned some blocks south of where the towers used to be. They shoot two broad columns of light into the sky.
I've read complaints that the columns of light remind people of the vertical spears of floodlight that Albert Speer contrived for the outdoor Nazi party rally in Nuremberg, the one that Leni Riefenstahl made infamous in Triumph of the Will. Noted. But the Nazis do not own verticals of light against the sky forever. Last night, which was cloudy in New York, the columns of light were filled with changing formations of mist that reminded you, if you were there on the first 9/11, of the smoke that filled the air that day. From where I saw the lights last night, standing in roughly the same place I stood on parts of that day six years ago, they operated very powerfully, like a Light Art work by James Turrell or Robert Irwin, but one that intersected with a specific historical memory.
So when it comes to 9/11, there's always a lot to talk about. (You have heard, no doubt, of the Iraq War?) Just a few weeks ago, two New York City firefighters died fighting a blaze at the Deutsche Bank headquarters, a skyscraper on the south edge of the Trade Center site that was badly damaged on 9/11 and which is now being slowly dismantled. A few days later two more firefighters were injured when a forklift plunged off an upper floor of the same building and through the roof of a ground level shed where they were sitting. You get the picture. This is an unlucky location.
But let's just take a look at what things have come to at the endlessly contested site where the Trade Center once stood. For a long time I've been mostly discouraged about the direction of developments there. Earlier this year I set those feelings out. Not much has changed since then.
To begin with, there's One World Trade Center, or the Freedom Tower as its sometimes called.

Work has been underway for a while on the subterranean portions, where a hugely complicated nexus of railway tracks, including the PATH commuter system that comes in from New Jersey and several New York City subway lines, will link up. Don't expect to see structural steel rising much above ground level before next spring. The design of the Freedom Tower is now credited to David Childs of Skidmore, Owings & Merrill, though the New York City police department should probably get shared billing. They were the ones who came into the design process at the last minute to insist that the base of the tower had to be almost literally fortified to withstand truck bombs. The tower now promises to be a Roman candle held in the grip of a steel candle holder.
Childs' design is a tower with its sides chamfered (that mean sliced at the corners) so that its roof is turned at a 45-degree angle from its base. The top of its antenna will still rise to 1776 feet, a sentimental Yankee Doodle gesture that is about all that remains of the earlier (very rough) conceptions of the building by Daniel Libeskind, who has long since removed his name from the project.
One building has been completed at the site, 7 World Trade Center. Also designed by Childs, it replaces a squat office tower that also fell on 9/11. The good news is that the new, taller building — 52 stories — sits on a smaller site, making it possible to re-open a Manhattan street that the old building had blocked off for decades. As a LEED's gold-rated building — LEED is the body that recognizes eco-friendly design and construction — the new 7 WTC is also one of Manhattan's greenest new towers.

The building is unusual because its first ten stories are taken up by a Con Ed substation and two floors of mechanicals. What that means is that except for its glass fronted lobby, its first ten floors are windowless. Childs did what he could to turn that into an advantage by cladding the substation levels in stainless steel arranged in patterns of alternating vertical shafts that glimmer in daylight. At night a complicated lighting program plays various games behind them. There's also a Jenny Holzer electronic wall installation in the lobby.
So it all could have been worse, but in its overall vertical-carton silhouette 7 WTC remains a standard developer's box. And in that it's a sign of the general failure of imagination that rules at the Trade Center site. (Except in the case of the Santiago Calatrava-designed train station, which is still just a glimmer on the horizon.) Is "could have been worse" the best we can do? And this problem only gets worse, much worse, when you consider the trio of towers now planned for the eastern edge of the funerary punctures that will form the 9/11 memorial.
The first of them is a skyscraper with a canted roof by Norman Foster's firm, Foster Partners...

The next is by the firm of his fellow Brit Richard Rogers....

....and the third is by the Japanese architect Fumihiko Maki...

And the problem here? It's not so much the individual towers, it's their collective impact. Daniel Libeskind's original master plan for the Trade Center site envisioned a collection of high and lower rise buildings — an urban ensemble, not a wall of near-identically scaled behemoths. For Larry Silverstein, the private developer who still has influence over the site, recruiting Foster, Rogers and Maki, all three of them Pritzker Prize winners, as the architects for this Murderer's Row of towers was a shrewd move. It adds cultural cachet to a flagrantly overbuilt street plan. When I look at it these days I'm reminded of nothing so much as the way Walter Gropius was brought on in the 1950s as the architect of the grossly overscaled Pan Am building, now the Met Life building, in New York. As the founder of the Bauhaus, Gropius brought Modernist street cred to a dreadful project, which to this day sits astride Park Avenue like the Hoover Dam.
As I said about the WTC triplets on "Looking Around" last February:
"at its heart the problem those buildings represent is one that mere architecture cannot solve. It's a question of urbanism, or rather the abandonment of urbanist principles when they get in the way of maximizing floor space."
Is it impossible to build an an ensemble of beautiful and powerful buildings in New York anymore? The core dilemma is that the Trade Center site is a civic monument in an age when there is no civic life, when private interests trump every other kind— and yeah, Trump is a good word for it — and when it's easy to misthink that the best we can do is a tight bundle of tall compartments dedicated to rental income. Maybe a project so bound up in coils of sentiment, sanctimony, cynical politics and raw commerce never had a chance of coming to any satisfactory conclusion. For now at least, it's plainly not headed for one.
And while we're at it, anybody who thinks of their office building as a Freedom Tower, raise your hands.
-
1
The one thing that no one seems to understand, is that rebuilt "Twin Towers" were NEVER even presented as an option, in any of the "Rebuilding" plans. Is anyone listening? WE never voted for the current plans at ground zero, let alone, Pataki's "Freedom tower!" The Port Authority and the Lower Manhattan Development Corporation robbed New York City, and the United States, of the Twin towers. Too many political hands in the pot, too many political careers at stake. Yes, Osama Bin Laden knocked the Twin Towers of The World Trade Center down on 9/11/01. But it was our corrupt political machine, that buried them forever. Should the current plans be scrapped? Yes. Can new Twin Towers be constructed at the site? Absolutely! Will Larry Silverstein listen to the people, on this sixth anniversary of the attacks? We can only pray. Let's make New York, New York again!
-
2
Design by committee does not and never will work. It's too bad because this would have been a perfect chance to really shine...instead we get this nonsense.
-
3
I think all the designs are ugly .. surely we can do better than that...
-
4
I'm amazed that people care more about what the buildings will look like, than the safety of the inhabitants. How has nobody realized that these buildings will literally be the #1 target for future attacks? Who would actually be crazy enough to want to work in these buildings, especially in the upper floors? The fact that the article has this line "the base of the tower had to be almost literally fortified to withstand truck bombs" tells me that the city is almost expecting future attacks, and they are ignoring history. Lets not forget that the WTC was attacked before with a truckbomb, when they (extremists) realized that didn't get the effect they were looking for, they decided to hijack planes, which worked better than they could have imagined. The capabilities to repeat 9/11 are still there, not to mention any future ways of attacking that we havent even thought of yet. Remember that the WTC was built to withstand a plane...in the 1970's, they never thought of the size of planes in the future, or 2001 to be specific. What i'm getting at is that this is a disaster in the making, both visually and logically, I hate to say it but we should have learned a big lesson from 9/11, and now it looks like were going to repeat the past and ignore our most basic instinct, you can't do the same thing twice and expect different results.
-
5
I don't like the aesthetics of any of the buildings. I think you can still design something that looks halfway decent and still be safe. Just because something is safe does it have to be ugly?
-
6
Can we just rebuild the original buildings? Seriously---what better way to show that we can't be beaten down than rebuilding and moving forward. It's been 6 years---get on the ball already!
-
7
These buildings are boring and they will not benefit New York's image. We need a real landmark in our nation's largest city, not an assortment of random silver shapes. We should be building something like Burj Dubai.
-
8
thank you for writing that article.
i've often felt dissatisfied with the progress/decisions made surrounding ground zero, but haven't exactly been able to put words to it...
anyway, thanks for the brain candy...it really made me think.
-
9
I think it's sad that nothing has been done yet. I understand that constructions and architecture are slow processes, but one would think that something of this magnitude would be set into motion with fervor. It's depressing that people can't get together and decide on something, and it's depressing that the people aren't involved. I understand that three hundred million people live in the US and it would no doubt be a difficult task. Every year I see people care less and less. Where was that passion the world had seen after the initial shock wore off? That American Imperialism? Call us arrogant but now, if not never you would expect that to truly shine. As for the building, I think there are some basics that should go into it. I think the building should embody everything America is. Let's build this building to show the world that if we can survive through terrorism, so can everyone else. We can put an end to it. The problem is we haven't gotten up yet.
-
10
The safety of the citizens inside the towers, should of course be a consideration, however, this travesty of design and architecture that has been cobbled together through bureaucratic committees is a tremendous let down. There is nothing here that is worth being built, not just in New York but specifically on the site its being built on.
-
11
The biggest message to send to a terrorist would be to build the twin towers again, but higher, a lot higher.
-
12
"We need a real landmark in our nation's largest city, not an assortment of random silver shapes. We should be building something like Burj Dubai."
Americans do not have enough style to create something as elegant as the architecture in Dubai. They just want a tall and shiny building. I think that the next big Las Vegas casino should incorporate some of the Arabian Gulf architecture that Dubai has.
-
13
I'm speechless with disappointment.
-
14
Im only 14 and i can tell that these designs arent safe. And how much are these buildings going to cost. Did they think aboout that?
-
15
I don't think the buildings proposed are necessarily ugly. But I agree with everyone's sentiment that they do NOT do the site justice. These architects have come up with very innovative designs elsewhere in the world. They missed a chance to truly change the skyline. Tis a sad affair indeed.
-
16
I have never been to New York, but I would like to go sometime to see these new builidings. I like that they will be green, and they look nice to me in the pictures. I do not live in a big city, so I am having trouble seeing the problem.
-
17
THE SITE AT GROUND ZERO IS A CEMETARY; THE LAND IS HOLY, SACRED, AND SHOULD NOT BE BUILT ON AT ALL. BUT SINCE GREED IS MORE IMPORTANT TO THIS COUNTRY THAN THOSE WHO WILL BE BURIED BENEATH THESE LEGO-LOOKING STRUCTURES, PLEASE REBUILD THE BUILDINGS JUST AS THEY WERE PRIOR TO THE ATTACK.
-
18
It's downright Scary! Anyone in their perfect mind can be called insane to want to work in a building built upon a gravesite. Honestly. The entire area should be made into a Memorial Park. Now that is ECO-FRIENDLY. I will protest these buildings until the day I die. We have enough commerce and enough business offices and enough places for people to live. How many people do you want to pack into New York anyway? Oh, one more question ~ Is it ethical to build ontop of a cemetery knowing people were killed there? I thought in our wonderful American Life that we Preserved History and Respected our Dead for dying for our Country? This should go down as the biggest outrage on American Soil and WE THE PEOPLE are against it. If this gets built then Shame on us we might as well open our doors to the enemy and invite them in for a Tea Party.
I hope you let this appear. I'm really sad for New York and I'm really sad that I lost my brother in law who was a FireFighter on Sept. 11. I miss him and I miss NY the way it used to be. -
19
The first flight of the Boeing 747, still the largest American built civilian aircraft and only second in size to the new Airbus 380, was on Feb. 9, 1969. So if the world trade center was designed in the 1970s to withstand airplane strikes, it should have been designed to withstand what hit it on 9/11/2001. Thus either the design was faulty, or it was insufficient due to an inadequate understanding of the severity of a real-life strike by a large airliner on one of the towers.
As for the new plans, I agree that they are inadequate. A better result would have been achieved by having one firm design all the buildings so that they could have been designed as a cohesive ensamble of buildings. -
20
I agree with Kristin, Denise and others. Build a replica site, but fortified this time. A Patriot missile battery on the roof of both towers would help defend all of NYC? As to the aesthetics, the current plans look like a dysfunctional mash-up to me IMVHO.
-
21
Hi. I am french... I wouldn't say these buildings are ugly,but they are.. anonymous. And that way, tremendous.
-
22
I think that so much has been done by these concerned agencies of the U.S. government to bring to life what has been devastated by the evil. With that short time of conceptualization, design, detailings and actual construction, these groups undertaking their individual portions of bringing the Ground Zero to life again SHOULD be COMMENDED.Talking and just criticizing are two different and contradicting terms. It is easy to talk and not easy to work and undertake what is supposed to be a landmark of the U.S. I am not a U.S. citizen, but soon to be, but I commend all these who work and are still working hard to bring back the true image of New York City.
-
23
I think Foster's design does contribute a great deal to the skyline, and seemingly in a good way. And yes, you've really nailed it in the last sentence. It's like calling McDonalds the Tree of Good and Evil.
-
24
The new wtc is good and i like the new towers, but the twin towers were much better, great on the nyc skyline they should have been rebuilt as they were on 9/10/01, just turn the plaza into a memorial park.
-
25
Please just build the towers back. I am from N.C. but I bet very little people in New York will even go see the Freedom Tower. I wanted to see the twin towers in person, and if they are not built back, I have no reason to ever visit New York City. I hope you take this into consideration because I know for a fact that I am not the only person that feels this way.
-
26
The designs aren't ugly or hideous..They belong elsewhere far away from that sacred site. People say the twin towers don't deserve to be rebuilt because they have no artistic architecture. Shame on them for saying that. At least the twin towers exterior had beauty with the gothic style bars on the windows. These designs are just boring glass tanks.
-
27
they are gorgeous but I feel they are asking for trouble again. it will be an awesome sight.
Most Popular »
- Palin on Oprah: Can You See the Real Me?
- Curb Watch: Seinfeld 2.0
- The Bishops' Line in the Sand
- Motorola DROID review (Verizon Wireless)
- Cell-Phone Bills: Even Economists Can't Make Sense of Them
- 'Expert' Wine Sippers Take Us All for Suckers
- IA Poll: Culver Far Behind In Battle Of Govs
- Doug Hoffman Tell Glenn Beck He's Hoping for Miracle
- Palin Was Against SNL Before She Was For It
- 20 Money-Saving iPhone Apps
- Obama's Half Brother Mark Ndesandjo Speaks Up in China
- Five Things the U.S. Can Learn from China
- China: Two Die After Swine Flu H1N1 Vaccine
- Abortion Funding in Health Care Reform Splits Democrats
- Spain: Teen Masturbation Sex Ed Workshops Spark Outrage
- The Vanished Army: Solving an Ancient Egyptian Mystery
- The Meaning and Mythos of Manny Pacquiao
- Manny Pacquiao vs. Cotto: Filipino Phenom Wins by TKO
- Why Does the U.S. Want to Seize Mosques?
- Forgotten Australians Remembered by PM Kevin Rudd













RSS