Nine Lofty Ideals

[JMGarcia]

JMGarcia, the location of the memorial (footprint area) and transit center (between Church and Greenwich) are 2 of the elements we can count on being the same in the final plan.

Yes, but will the footprints be the small L shaped area or Peterson/Littenberg, the large park area of Foster, the sunken area of Libeskind, or the large plaza of Meier and UA?

Will the transport center be wholly underground or will it be a feaure building at street level and above?

These are the kind of things that should be debated beyond just the quality of the architecture.

[NYguy]

I can tell you this much from preliminary PA plans, the "memorial area" will include the entire area west of Greenwich and south of Fulton. *So anything proposed for that site will take a back seat to whatever comes out of the memorial design process....

[amigo32]

Whatever the final compromise between memorial and architecture emerges as, I sincerely hope that they do not screw it up, by creating something unpalatable to all but an "enlightened" few.

[chris]

The first article is just a guy using his editorial space to chearlead for his favorite design... ok, whatever... It was far from my favorite but not the worst.

The second
Post Modern!!!
This guy is just a moron! You almost feel embarrassed for him and the exposure of his ignorance. He casually uses the term "postmodern" as a catch all for everything he doesn't like... not even realising it is the architectural term for the type of building he seems to be proposing himself. What an idiot!

As for Gehry, I'd prefer to see him on a judging panel than submitting a design of his own. I love his work, most of it, but his work is so stylized and recognizable that it often seems as though his works are advertisements for his other works... Does that make sense? It would seem like a branded building. I'd love to see a great cultural center or a new NYU building designed by Gehry somewhere in the City. If the memorial is a "brand" of anything, it should be a brand of New York, and a Frank Gehry defined skyline would be a Frank Gehry branded skyline.

[chris]

Fabb wrote:

I can't believe Frank Gehry is so obsessed with money. I think he's using that fake argument because he was not satisfied with his own ideas.

Context: Gehry has only ever worked on one (unbuilt) skyscraper design for which he and his partner, David Childs of SOM, had a legendary falling out and withdrew from the competition at the eleventh hour, just before the judging (see image below). Gehry has no prior experience with tall skyscrapers nor with huge corporate mega-firms like SOM. He doesn't work that way. In order to do a skyscraper design he would have likely had to colaborate with another experienced skyscraper firm. After the famous debacle over the NYT's building he may have even had difficulty securing a partner and regardless would have likely been quite uneasy about such a prospect from his own unhappy experience. If there is an unspoken motive for his decline to participate, I would suggest it is this, not lack of ideas.

As for being money obsessed, Gehry is not a young man. While he achieved recognition, he had a long go of it before achieving financial success. I'm sure his attitude is that he doesn't have to work unless he's getting paid, so why at this point in his life should he? His office is full of commissions right now, why would he take on a huge expensive competition taking resources away from his paying clients. In the current economic climate, many of these other firms aren't so lucky to have his problem.

[chris]

Also, I'll add that I don't think the competition should have paid more, quite the contrary, I think it should not have paid a dime. It should have be a non-paying open competition with hundred, no thousands of entries... that would have been dificult to manage, but it would have been the right way... and Gehry could (should) have been invited as a judge.

[dbhstockton]

Carefull, Chris. *It wasn't a competition. * Dog-and-pony show is what I'd call it.

[chris]

Yes, you're right. It wasn't a competition.

Correction accepted...

My point is that it should have been a competition. An open competition.

When unfortunately it was only a show and tell... I love the phrase Dog-and-Pony show... I like to use that figure of speech in reference to client presentations/pitches and when I say it at least one person has to ask me to explain what that means. "What's a dog-and-pony show?" and I think, how many morons are in the room?

Once again: Yes, you're correct.