Posted by Per Corell on February 07, 2003 at 03:11:39:
In Reply to: What Is Your Opinion On The 2 WTC Submittals? posted by Barry on February 06, 2003 at 13:16:14:
You ara quite right that you do not need to build this high tho offer the same and even bigger office arears.
I agrea that my contribution is Ponyes and building methods besid ignorance , --- but when you seriously se this as a task where you must produce what is needed you must work around what is asked.
In the end no one want emty office arears, and those who talk about rebuilding the hights, acturly is talking about somthing different than the actural buildings ; then why not trust that there are a vision that offer even more.
Who say that the next time it will be an attack , as with structures reaching the sky, a simple fire seem to be able to perform the same dameage, ------ then what's wrong being critic about the idear of rebuilding an icon, when the role as Icon is _not_ just bount to the hight of a building.
Wery early in this debate I been promoting, that what is needed is progress and jobs ; somthing pointing to a bright future as why build the wrong Icon now, when those building will go bankrupt in 4 years when the wrong is build. ----- I mean if you spend the money building the wrong thing ,that _must_ carry the same functions as the lost towers and no one want to rent the arears as "this" did not reflect the spirit bringing progress, new technology and jobs ; wouldn't it then have been a better idear to listen to the needs of that city.
What shuld be build must be somthing that challance this oppotunity of the century.
Now this must combine a lot of needs and it is rather a city than a building , so why is everybody so cirtain, that what is needed is the vision of one master architect ?
Is the education system not focused on very different issues and is the idear of the master architect somthing we shuld rather leave with the past century. Why must this design be directed by demands it never fulfilled , ------ only in our minds and only when it was not there anymore.
Sorry about my ignorance and my Pony, but I still think that what must be build, shuld reflect the needs of the city, carry the natural respect , and be a pointer to new technology, jobs and progress ; I simply can not se, how two new towers will provide this, I can se no reson to build the actural office arears so high when much more arear can be established much lower ,and with much more security, by building around the missing volumes making the negative impac being the walls in a structure build where there was before streets and open arears.
Guess this is the true challance for any vision, that it is easy to perform somthing like what the public expect, but the true vision is greater than this and work in a very different direction, ----- this is the architecture debate ; do we still want the master architect or must we look for a new aproach to produce what is wanted ,needed but difficult to se , before it is suddenly there as the true Vision about how to make the progress with the new technologies, that will bring jobs and progress , -------- if there shuld be no room for this vision, then what's wrong tearing down a few Pyramides, they will fall in some 4 years anyway, if the wrong is build.
Nice talking to you
And please exchouse my spelling, my pony and my ignorance.
Free 3D Models