Posted May 12, 2011, 7:42 PM
|
 |
Back to Basics
|
|
Join Date: Oct 2009
Posts: 1,226
|
|
While I agree the quality of the curtainwall is excellent, I find it puzzling that so many people like the idea that a future icon of this magnitude, is basically being clad like a chameleon which is camouflaged to blend into its surroundings. And I tend to agree with this critic's take on the glazing:
Quote:
...I don't want such a prominent building to visually vanish from a scene. I want imposing architecture to be exactly that: Imposing. Not clad in a way that it blends with the background and disappears, but so that it stands out.
Many other architectural critics have applauded the design of 1WTC and used poetic terms to describe its glass, like: "A river of glass that virtually brings the sky to the earth." While that sounds flowery, personally I don't want to look at a building and see a perfect reflection of the sky. That's what we have the actual sky for.
I want to see amazing architecture, brilliant engineering, remarkable detail, fantastic materials. All of those may be employed here in building the new 1WTC, but they are effectively disappearing before our eyes as the glass rises, just like the Predator monster in the Arnold Schwarzenegger movie of the same name. Even if the glazing was gold or green or amber or any other colour it would be more of a psychological impact.
In the future when strolling along the yet to be reopened Greenwich Street, without looking up, 1 WTC will be invisible in your peripheral view, diminishing its visual impact and therefore the emotional impact on the psyche as well. The originals dominated their environment, while this tower and the others (with perhaps the exception of 3WTC and it's exposed structure.) will apologetically bow to their surroundings and quietly disappear to the background of your consciousness.
If this was a conscious decision by the architects: To allow peaceful reflection at the memorial and to not steal focus away from the somber gravitas of its meaning, they have missed the point of rebuilding. Rebuilding this center is to show the world that America will not bow to ideals imposed from fanatical beliefs; America will proudly stand for whatever she deems important and not kowtow to other's demands. So why produce such a weak presence at such a sanctum of importance?
This is where the maxim "Go big, or go home" could have been employed by paraphrasing it "Go Bold, or give up" and unfortunately the designers took the safe road...
|
__________________
_______________________________________
This is the Internet and is only the place for huge egos, narcissistic belief structures, imflamitory opinions, jumping to conclusions and knee-jerk reactionary thinking.
Any clear-headed, rational comments or balanced viewpoints will be considered Trolling and you will be reprimanded.
|
Prev
Linear Mode
