May 25, 2002

Toohey Sucks

ALERT: Time Magazine, May 27, 2002; an article about the re-development plans for the World Trade Tower area. Says architect David Childs (of Skidmore, Owings, & Merrill) about the World Trade Center towers:

they were symbols of "...the mid-century arrogance of architects...what they did to lower Manhattan was an act of vandalism just as complete as September 11th."
Holy crap: the spirit of Ellsworth Monkton Toohey is alive & well in New York City in the year 2002. Disgusting. I can't imagine any person - any *rational* person - comparing the genius it took to create these buildings, to the basest instincts of truly wicked people that caused their destruction. Even putting aside his snide comment about "arrogance," his linking of the construction of the towers to brutal terrorism is unforgivable.

If you would like to call Mr. Childs and express your outrage at his apparent inability to distinguish between the creation of two magnificent structures and the worst act of barbarism & terrorism in history, his number is 646-805-7300, or mobile 646-734-4181. Call him & tell him how you feel -- if he's not available, leave a strongly worded (but calm) message. Thanks.

Posted at May 25, 2002 01:14 AM
COMMENTS!

A better call might tbe to his employer, a Mr. Magill, managing partner at Mr. Childs firm, SOM, 212.298.9300.

Posted by: Howard Roark at May 26, 2002 05:11 PM

From what I can tell (and I can), his designs for the new buildings SUCK. "Then again, where will you find a developer willing to pay for 40 stories of unprofitable frosting on his cake?"
What? Shorten the building, yet stick nonsense on the top, just to make it the same height?
Clearly, Childs has never heard of clean design, nor appreciated the fact of what he has the CHANCE to design.
Granted, the way the buildings were built had a fatal flaw. We now know that the design of the interior floors caused the actual collapse (PBS did a special on it). But they were built during a time when the idea of an attack like that which happened was inconcieveable.
And as to what we should do now is as confusing as ever, but not to some. Some don't want to build over "a cemetery without tombstones." I'm sorry people, but you've been doing that since you landed here. Do you honestly believe that we Native Americans had nice neat graveyards? Should we somehow pay homage to the souls who were lost? Absolutely. But speaking pratically, it's in the economic's best interest to have a building there. Thousands of workers who survived have had tremondous loss because they no longer have a place to work at. So I think we should rebuild. Yes, the interior design of the new buildings must be different. But they were a landmark, a proud symbol of our determination. For Childs to compare them to the most vile attack we've seen on this soil. They were not "an act of vandalism just as complete as Sept. 11." They were a tremendous attempt to show who we are, free thinkers, and willing to reach new heights. Now is not the time to forget that. We must strive on.

Posted by: annessa at May 27, 2002 08:54 PM

Thank you, Annessa. And for those who are wondering about Annessa's credentials, her father was a well-respected architect; obviously, his sense of style rubbed off on her!

Posted by: davidmsc at May 28, 2002 03:39 AM

Umm….ok, I will bite. In the 1960’s-1970’s New York City was bankrupted. This was the era of declining population and increased crime, graffiti, and other elements of base society. Then one day [overemphasizing] business and government came to the realization that they could use their power of eminent domain and clean up the city, evict the homeless, and tear down the slums. No one really remembers what the Lower East Side/Point was like in the 60’s/70’s. It was a neighborhood of mostly immigrants and transients. Not the most glamorous part of the city at the time [but what part of the city is not without it’s ills when a disproportionate amount of the population are immigrants or working poor]. So the city and NJ created the Port Authority and decided to declare portions of the Lower Tip a “blighted area” with the ability for the Port Authority to begin construction. Because this project was aimed primarily as an economic vehicle, the maximum FAR [floor area ratio] was needed. So the architect cleared all of the small twisting streets [1] and created what we now would call a “superb block”. This literally tore the neighborhood apart, allowing for other businesses to enter. To compare 9/11 to this act is a bit far, but people’s lives were forever changed, much like 9/11.
We should not honor those who died with nostalgia. That building is purge 1960’s America. We have grown so much in the last 40 years. Should we rebuild, yes. Bu not the WTC Mark II, a variant, or some edifice that try’s to evoke a relation to, or stylistically copies the WTC. Let us build in the now, and remember the past, not re-build the past. Oh, by the way, the WTC was not at full occupancy at the time of collapse and there wasn’t a waiting list either. Even now with some 29 million square feet of rentable space gone, the vacancy rate is climbing. [2]. The idea of rebuilding towers as large as the WTC does not make economic sense. Therefore we won’t, probably, see anything on the size of the WTC at that site.

Posted by: plemeljr at May 30, 2002 04:49 PM
Post a comment









Remember personal info?






Site map Better Living Thru Blogging! Resources


All content on this website is © Copyright 2000-2010 - All Rights Reserved
The content on this site may not be reused or republished.
Website template powered by VooWeb.com Website Templates