Quote:
Originally Posted by Roadcruiser1
You are confusing what I just said. I am saying the new observation deck erases history by not having anything similar to the old observation deck in the South Tower.
|
Hi, I'm a newcomer here, but been watching this thread about two years ago.
I agree on Roadcruiser1's opinion, and even want to go a further step. Twin Towers are not like people, a dead person shouldn't be resurrected, but buildings can be rebuilt back.
What if Emipre State Building were taken down on that rueful day instead of South Tower? Should people replace 1930s art deco style Empire State Building with a fancy, 2010's glassy deconstructivist building? Saying that "Oh well, Empire State is dead and we should not cling to the past" ?
Twin Towers did not retire of old age. In that case we should not cling to the past. However, they were assassinated by terrorists. Now the very terrorist is dead, and they have the reason to be rebuilt.
1970's Twin Towers represent Le Corbusier's essence of international style. Speaking of the memorial, we should respect what was lost by bringing them into surface, not burying them into a grave, or an underground museum.
Of course, the new museum didn't like the Sphere much, which is the most daring symbol of surviving and hope, and trashed it into Battery Park. Perhaps they are 'terrorized' and want to 'not memorize' the past! How ironical.
I think most people are simply "rationalizers". They simply affirm the reality, they rationalize what is happening. They bash what is not gonna happen. (which is rebuilding Twins, or building a twin replica of 1WTC)
Had the Port Authority and Silverstein decided to officially rebuild Twins, then those rationalizing peole would have rationalized that decision and would've said it's the best decision ever, and say erecting a different building other than Twins a horrible idea.
p.s. I DO love 1WTC, only because it 'somehow' resembles the old.