| WIKI | FAQ | Tech FAQ | |
 http://csua.com/feed/ | |
| ||||||
| 5/23 |
| 2005/7/5-6 [Politics/Domestic/Crime, Politics/Domestic/911] UID:38417 Activity:high |
7/5 James Wolcott talks sense on the "Freedom Tower" design.
http://jameswolcott.com/archives/2005/07/gusts_of_mastur.php
\_ I think this article is better: link:csua.org/u/clz (NYTimes)
\_ I don't really understand this criticism. "An impregnable tower
set against the outside world." What exactly are they supposed to
erect, an inviting vagina in heat? "Freedom Tower" is the stupidest
name ever though. -- ilyas
\_ No, "Freedom fries" is the stupidest name ever.
\_ Freedom Fries Tower
\_ In the rush to make the world's most inviting terrorist target
"bombproof," they've managed to make it incredibly ugly. Thus
it is a telling symbol of the state of our current national
psyche. That is the argument, at least. I guess whether you
buy that depends on whether you think architecture reflects on
the society that produces it.
\_ I do think it's ugly (or at least could be better), but I
don't understand the phrasing of the criticism. It sounds like
the objection is to the very notion that it ought to appear
impregnable. -- ilyas
\_ It is a sign of cowardance to try and build an impregnable
fortress. The real worls is a dangerous place.
fortress. The real world is a dangerous place.
\_ I agree. A cheaper, more aesthetic solution is to
deploy an active missile defense system where the
missle (hidden behind the glass building) launches
to strike unidentified targets that are flying low
and coming towards the new tower.
\_ That's pretty stupid. If you know it's going to make it
a target you should strengthen it.
\_ I think the argument is more sophisticated than that.
The argument isn't that the tower shouldn't _be_
impregnable. It obviously has to be secure, given how
much of a target it will be. The argument is that it
shouldn't _appear_ impregnable, because it sends the
wrong 'aesthetic message.' I happen to disagree with
that. -- ilyas
\_ Why? A good contrast is the Statue of Liberty,
which sends a very welcoming message, and is
generally seen as a positive symbol of America's
greatness. Do you really think that the
architectural equivalent of an Abrams Tank should
be a symbol of America? Just like the Twin
Towers, this building will have strong symbolic
value whether we like it or not.
\_ I hate to point out the obvious, but people
don't work in the Statue of Liberty. -- ilyas
\_ The point is that trying to build an impregnable
signature tower is horribly misguided; there's
nothing you can do, architecturally, to protect
against a 747 full of fuel ramming into your
signature building. Perhaps you can build it
so the building won't fall down, but you're
still talking about thousands of dead and massive
business resumption costs. The proposal is
horribly ugly, and in addition is completely
unnecessary, as vacancy rates in lower
Manhattan have skyrocketed since the attacks;
no one wants to work there anyway. -tom
\_ I don't really understand. Building anything
conspicious in a major metropolitan area in the
US will render it a target. Given that something
like that is a target, you have to take security
measures. Are you proposing either that
nothing conscpicious be built or that if
something is built it not be secured? The mind
boggles. -- ilyas
nothing conspicious be built or that if
something is built it not be secured? Ugliness
is one thing, but clearly, the criticism here
isn't just that the thing is ugly. -- ilyas
\_ I think it looks like a big toothpick, and that's okay -- except
for the base, and that's a big except. Kind of makes sense they
hid the ugliest part several clicks in, huh?
http://csua.org/u/cm0 (nytimes.com)
\_ Ugh. Gotta wonder how many cavity searches and retinal scans
you'll need to go through to get to work every day in that
thing.
\_ It looks like an anal probe. Someone I know said it looks
like NY flipping the bird, maybe that's what they were
going for. -- ilyas
\_ Or an old-fashioned syringe and hypodermic needle.
\_ Freedom Tower as Rorschach test?
\_ anyone have a url for the original Libeskind design? |
| 5/23 |
|
| jameswolcott.com/archives/2005/07/gusts_of_mastur.php Calling All Squad Cars Gusts of Masturbation and Priapic Eyesores Posted by James Wolcott For a good laugh, few intellectuals deliver as dependably as George Stein er. Steiner has the feature essay in the latest issue of Salmagundi, titled " Ten (Possible) Reasons for the Sadness of Thought." I don't know why the re are parentheses around "possible" except perhaps to draw attention to themselves, but then the ways of Steiner are always mysterious, as his his prose, and his meaning. Sample sentence: "A virus of unfulfillment inhabits hope. The grammars of optatives, of su bjunctives, of every nuance of future tenses--these grammars being the i rresponsible glory and morning light of the human mind--can never be gua rantors. And in the same paragraph, the arc of despondency lands in somebody's sad lap. If our thought-processes were less urgent, less graphic, less hypnotic (as in the gusts of masturbation and day-dreaming), our constant disappo intments, the gray lump of nausea at the heart of being, would be less d isabling." That'd reduce anybody, even a non-intellectual, to a gray lump of lifelessness. Anyway, in the same issue with this fandango of delight is a review of Ph illip Lopate's Waterfront written by James Howard Kunstler in actual Eng lish. Lively English, there's nothing like it to chase away the Steiner blues. Within the review, Kunstler hauls off and lets go at the "absurd priapic 1776-foot-tall 'Freedom Tower'" to be built on the WTC site in lower Man hattan. hat sort of sadistic corporate CEO would expect his workers to functi on contentedly on, say, the 57th floor of what was sure to be the world' s most popular terror target in the years ahead?" an eloquent moan about a mega project that manages to go mo re and more wrong. If there are peopl e still clinging to the expectation that the Freedom Tower will become a monument to the highest American ideals, the current design should fina lly shake them out of that delusion. Somber, oppressive and clumsily con ceived, the project suggests a monument to a society that has turned its back on any notion of cultural openness. It is exactly the kind of nigh tmare that government officials repeatedly asserted would never happen h ere: an impregnable tower braced against the outside world." Can you imagine what the security will be like for workers, visitors, and deliverers to get into that fortress? You practically have to give bloo d and undergo a retinal scan now to get into some midtown buildings. Then factor in the phonied-up controversy over cultural institutions like The International Freedom Center and The Drawing Center, which are set to be part of the memorial site and are now under preemptive attack for potentially insult the memory of 9/11 victims and their survivors with t heir bleeding-heart liberalism, multicultural outreach, and artistic sho ck tactics. What really got the beanie propellers of cultural conservati ves spinning was a pen and ink caricature by Amy Wilson shown at the Dra wing Center of the famous hooded Abu Ghraib prisoner with a cheap punchl ine attached. Matt Taibbi made sport of this piec e of dumbfuck agitprop. "If the artist had at least titled the drawing, I Own Three Magic Markers and a Subscription to the Nation, that would be something, a joke at le ast. But a sense of humor is clearly beyond the artist, Amy Wilson, who in all likelihood was exclusively drawing horses and unicorns right up u ntil a recent collision with an AMC broadcast of Norma Rae or the Counte rpunch website." But he also saw how vacuous the supposed controversy was, another blast o f culture war Redi-Whip. "If Wilson had indeed conceived that drawing as something she intended to be displayed at Ground Zero, there is a scenario under which one could plausibly argue that this would indeed be offensive to the 9/11 victims. Nor did the Drawing Cent er plan on featuring it that way. was arguing was that the mere fact that the Dr awing Center would ever display such a picture raised serious questions about its political sensibilities, and made their very fitness to be inv olved in the Ground Zero cultural center an open question." But as we've seen in the past, picking a phony pretext for a political fi ght doesn't mean the fight that ensues will be any less ugly or patience -exhausting. I wish they'd just give up on the "Freedom Tower," which is a corny title for a building in NY (and smacks of Big Brotherism, like "Homeland Secu rity"), all the cornier for its being 1776 feet tall. But for me the main reason to oppose the building can be expressed in wor ds of a single syllable. "The WTC is right in the flyaway of migrating birds, and the original WTC was the worst violator in terms of the amount of birds that were killed flying into the buildings at night. Theyd either hit it directly or, i f it was foggy, get confused and exhaust themselves. So maintenance crew s would come out at 5 oclock in the morning to clean the dead birds off the plaza." |
| csua.org/u/cm0 -> www.nytimes.com/slideshow/2005/06/29/nyregion/20050629_TOWER_SLIDESHOW_5.html The main shaft of the Freedom Tower would begin as a 200-by- 200-foot square. As it rose, the corners would be cut away, creating an octagonal floor plan through the middle of the building. |
| nytimes.com The New York Times On The Web News Newspaper Current Event |