So, what do you think?
Dec. 20th, 2003 06:46 pm![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
ambitious_wenchThey've unveiled the "Freedom Tower" that will be built at ground zero.
Personally, I think it's hideous. Skewed and twisted, it will have the distinction of being the world's tallest...something.
Yes, it does "echo" Lady Liberty. I am reminded of the "gesture" drawings of me done by students--simple lines that often try to capture movement but rarely do they get beyond stick figure. Gesture drawings are not meant to be seen publicly.
*sigh*
There is no accounting for taste. Many will think it beautiful, elegant, graceful, even, and all I can think of is how that spire looks like a cheap attempt to be "The tallest building in the world".
But not being an architect, I cannot design one better.
Personally, I think it's hideous. Skewed and twisted, it will have the distinction of being the world's tallest...something.
Yes, it does "echo" Lady Liberty. I am reminded of the "gesture" drawings of me done by students--simple lines that often try to capture movement but rarely do they get beyond stick figure. Gesture drawings are not meant to be seen publicly.
*sigh*
There is no accounting for taste. Many will think it beautiful, elegant, graceful, even, and all I can think of is how that spire looks like a cheap attempt to be "The tallest building in the world".
But not being an architect, I cannot design one better.
![[identity profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/openid.png){kind=small}
no subject
Date: 2003-12-20 03:55 pm (UTC)And... not being an architect, I'm still sure I could design better.
But then, I'm feeling arrogant. ;P
"Looks like a good target"
Date: 2003-12-20 04:19 pm (UTC)I looked at the presentation of it and I agree... it's hideous. Hubris, I think a good word for it is. We "Have" to build something there. The comment about it echoing Lady Liberty I also think is poor taste. The whole of having the new worlds tallest whatever is pointless. Only the first 70 stories will be actually used, the rest will simply be over-glorified scaffolding. I'm not a New Yorker, but here in Jersey I will have to look at the bloody thing on the skyline. I just think it could be done better, more simply, and less arrogant.
no subject
Date: 2003-12-20 05:17 pm (UTC)I also shudder at it being called the 'Freedom Tower'. Enough with the propaganda already!
Propeganda...
Date: 2003-12-20 05:34 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2003-12-20 06:52 pm (UTC)If I didn't laugh, I'd cry.
Edie
eeeeww!
Bah. Anti-Hubris...
Date: 2003-12-21 07:48 am (UTC)Like doubling the height of the previous one. In inhabitable space terms, none of this "cosmetic structure" rubbish.
But then, I'd embed a 250' gold-plated dollar sign in the exterior facade, just to drive the point home with my usual seal-clubbing subtlety.
And anti-aircraft missiles, too.
no subject
Date: 2003-12-21 04:12 pm (UTC)I find myself wanting to use the expression "rogering the sky with a strap-on".
no subject
Date: 2003-12-22 07:17 am (UTC)The original towers were a much better platform that the Empire State building was for broadcasting. Some were able to migrate back to the Empire State building, but basically the it's filled. In addition, the Empire State has maxed out on power running up to the top.
A few stations have returned to a broadcast tower built over fifty years ago in New Jersy. But with all the tall buildings any reception is problematic.
The real push for taller and taller comes from the broadcasters. They lost a great perch to broadcast from.
-m
no subject
Date: 2003-12-22 08:51 am (UTC)What's your take on this tower? only 70 floors are inhabitable, and from there, it's open frame work, with wind-powered turbines for generating electricity.
How is it going to be a good broadcast tower? Can they use that spire to broadcast?
Edie