Rothenberg 31

April 2003 v. 132

April Feature: The New World Trade Center Part 1: More than Aesthetics in Design

BY GERRI HIRSHEY

T he Empire State Building, the

Sears Tower, the world’s tallest Petronas

Towers and many other buildings of

dazzling height awe and inspire as they

scrape the sky. Constructing a

successful building requires far more

than mere height and good location.

Designs that do not gain public approval

are destined to fail long before a drop of

concrete is poured. In this month’s

feature article, we examine the public

debate that surrounds the sensitive but

important decision of selecting a design

for the new World Trade Center site.

The City of New York and the Lower

Manhattan Developer Corporation

(LMDC) considered many factors before

choosing the Memory Foundations, by

Studio Daniel Libeskind, to occupy the

World Trade Center site. The LMDC

looked for a respectful memorial setting,

a bold new skyline, and an inspiring

vision to occupy the sixteen acre site.

Most of all, the importance of the new

structure rests on the rhetorical appeal of

the site, leading to two important

questions. How will the new design lend

itself to interpretation? What will the

structure mean to the city and to the

people who died on September 11,

2001? The visual analysis of the

geometric construction, layout, color,

and use of land space of the new

buildings on the site answers these

questions at least in part.

This article addresses the accepted

architectural design from three different

viewpoints. First, we have reprinted

head architect Daniel Libeskind’s

original proposal to build the Memory

Foundations and his justification for the

design. Next, we consider by interview

the opinion of a volunteer firefighter

who answered the call for help in the

aftermath of this tragedy. Then we have

reprinted a letter to the editor in The New

York Times from a family member of

one of the WTC victims responding to

the prior article, “Should we Build on

Ground Zero?” Each of these texts has a

visual included to support the argument

of the speaker, and we will draw heavily

on these visuals in our evaluation.

Finally, turn to page 38 for the stirring

conclusion.

Rothenberg 32

Studio Daniel Libeskind 12 December 2002 Windscheidstr. 18 D-10627 Berlin, Germany

Dear Lower Manhattan Development Corporation,

You have asked our firm to come up with a proposal and justification for the World Trade Center cite. I am proud to unveil Memory Foundations for your consideration (see Figure 1).

We believe that Memory Foundations best accomplishes the solemn task of creating a respectful memorial setting, bold new skyline, and inspiring vision through the visual features of layout, geometry, and color.

The seven large buildings in our

new plan represent completeness and closure through the biblical significance of the number seven. All seven of the largest buildings in our new plan lie in a hemispherical arc around the original site. We carefully constructed the picture in Figure 1 to show that the surface of each of these buildings slopes inward to draw respectful attention towards where the World Trade Center Towers stood. No building takes the place of the former World Trade Center towers in the center of ground zero, for these structures are irreplaceable. Instead, a park will occupy the footprints of these towers to provide a place of beauty for leisure and reflection.

The WTC towers were once the

tallest buildings in the world. The 1776 foot spire shown in the left of Figure 1 will reclaim that title. The WTC was a symbol for American economic strength and prosperity, but Memory Foundations embodies American ingenuity, determination, and

perseverance. The bold rectangular prisms of the six residential buildings represent strength and quiet yet fierce determination by their thick, stable foundations and uniform length and width.

Figure 1: View from West

Street (www.renewnyc.com)

Rothenberg 33

Memory Foundations provides meaning in the lighting and coloring as well. We have chosen the picture in Figure 1 in order to show that these features are powerful even in the evening. For example, the glass exterior of each building reflects the sun, the light from the other buildings, and the green from all of the plants in the park. Green is the symbolic color of life and thus careful attention has been paid to choosing tasteful and lively plants to adorn the walkways and the park. The bluish tint of the glass contributes an unforgettable look to New York’s skyline. We have done our utmost to capture the spirit of New York and the WTC towers in our Memory Foundations. At SDL, we firmly believe that the impact of our architecture is synonymous with the strength of our visual rhetoric. Hence we urge the selection committee to favor strongly those designs that pay extra attention to the visual features of their project like layout, geometry, and color. Thank you for your careful consideration in this historically monumental decision.

Sincerely,

Daniel Libeskind Head Architect, CEO

Rothenberg 34

TRANSMISSION PAGE 1 of 2

New York Volunteer Firefighter Finds Hope, Sadness in Proposed Design for World Trade Center Site February 8, 2003 NEW YORK, NY (AP) – Jordan Kaplan, a New York Firefighter who worked on the rescue team on September 11 and 12, 2001 records an interview with the Associated Press. In the transcript below, Kaplan expresses his thoughts on the new Proposed Design for the World Trade Center site. Associated Press: Mr. Kaplan, you’ve been a volunteer firefighter in New York for a number of years. Can

you tell us about your work within the city of New York?

Jordan Kaplan: <clears throat> Sure. I’ve been volunteering with the city for 27 years. Well, it’ll be 28

next month. Public service runs in the family.

AP: What do you mean?

JK: Well, my brother is a retired cop. Me and my three brothers have all worked for the city of New York

for over 20 years.

AP: Wow, that’s quite some dedication! Switching gears here, we’d like you to recall the immediate

impact that September 11 had on you.

JK: Let’s see. I was in my house, with my family, when the first plane hit. By the time the second plane

went in, I was in tears with frustration and horror. I had to help out—anyway that I could—so I put on my

gear and went to the site. But not without grabbing my camera. I always take my camera. When I got to

the site, I was in shock… Total shock… <silence> It couldn’t be real.

AP: It must have been awful! But as a firefighter you must see pain and destruction all the time.

JK: Yes, but I have never seen anything as… horrible as that day. The people of New York are very, very

important to me and I saw more suffering in minutes than anyone should see in a lifetime. And the towers

were just gone. I took photographs of the rubble because I knew, because I hoped, that this kind of

experience only happens once in a lifetime.

AP: Do you have any pictures that we can look at?

JK: Yes, I do. <pause> Here is ground zero on the same day that the towers came down [See Figure 2]. I

included the six story steel shell of one of the towers to show contrast with the 87-story buildings

themselves. And in the right side of the picture here <points> you can see the American Flag rising,

showing that American spirit triumphs even in tragedy. I also wanted to include the smokey haze and the

one bright light shining through just right of the center there. This picture represents the grief and the hope

that I feel towards that day.

AP: We understand that you were selected to a committee that oversaw the selection process for the new

World Trade Center buildings.

JK: Yes, that’s right. Several New York citizens were selected to this panel to make sure that the new

buildings would not go against how we felt our city should be represented. There were a lot of designs that

we had to consider, but most of them were too much, way too flashy.

Rothenberg 35

TRANSMISSION PAGE 2 of 2

AP: Which design did you like best, and why did you pick it?

JK: I liked the Memory Foundations one.

AP: Why did you like that one?

JK: Why? Well, first of all it was easy to imagine people visiting it. I mean, the other ones were too

formal, too… foreboding. We want to remember the tragedy of nine eleven, but we don’t want a large

tombstone or outrageous modern art in our city. The feeling of openness that this design presented was

comfortable and respectful. I didn’t care too much for the boxy buildings, but the glass effect was neat. It

allowed for reflection, ya know? <Laughs>

AP: The firm that came up with that design, Studio Daniel Libeskind, presented several pictures of their

idea to you. Which picture was most appealing? [Shows Mr. Kaplan several pictures.]

JK: Definitely the picture of the open park sold me. [See Figure 3.] The park was very large, and obviously

full of life. But the sunken aspect … I felt like I could go down there and remember. Like it is separate

from everything else. You could tell that the artists wanted it to look safe and sturdy, so they included trees

that block out the traffic, the never-ending horns and anger of city life. It is important to me to have

greenery and respect.

AP: Thanks for your time and for sharing your photos. We enjoy hearing your perspective.

JK: No problem. I do everything I can for the people of New York.

AP NEWS

The Associated Press News Wire Service

Copyright 2003

The Associated Press

All Rights Reserved

The information contained in the AP news report may not be published, broadcast or redistributed without

prior written authority of The Associated Press.

* * * * * END TRANSMISSION * * * * *

Figure 2 : Ground Zero on September Figure 3: The Memory Foundations design features a large

11, 2001. (www.time.com) park at Ground Zero. (www.renewnyc.com)

Rothenberg 36

Letter to The New York Times Editor from Shirley Baker, September 11 Victim

Feb 23, 2003

Letters to the Editor

The New York Times

229 West 43rd Street

New York, NY 10036

To the Editor:

I feel that the coverage of the New York Times front page article on February 21, 2003

was appallingly one-sided. This upsets me greatly since The Times has always claimed to

be neutral in its reporting. This article [regarding the proposed designs for the new

World Trade Center] could only be interpreted as one that gives praise to the proposed

buildings. I do not have a problem with the new design itself, but I firmly believe that

not enough time has passed to properly remember those who died by building an empty

monument in the place of the World Trade Center.

My husband Brian died on the 67th

floor in the North Building. His death was untimely,

horrifyingly ghastly, and completely unwarranted. We cannot bring him back. However,

we can—and it is our duty—to honor those that died by demanding that this space lie

desolate for a while longer.

I clipped the picture that appeared in the shocking article and attached it in this letter

(Figure 4). There is something glaringly out of place in this picture. The skyline looks

familiar from the left and from the right, but in the middle where the towers used to be

now stands an atrocity. The Statue of Liberty on the left looks to these new buildings

with sadness and disappointment. How can we be so comfortable erasing the World

Trade Center and all that it stood for so quickly? These glass buildings in the picture

reflect the light back to the viewer so that they are as conspicuous as possible. Why are

we drawing attention to the location of the greatest tragedy in New York history?

Furthermore, one of these new buildings will be the tallest building in the world. Why is

the architect trying so hard to trump the original World Trade Center? Were the first

buildings not tall enough? What is height in a building but an ego trip, a measure of

Rothenberg 37

rank? Not only did my husband die prematurely, the new builders would like to show

that he died in an inferior building. The original WTC will have no legacy left.

The strange shapes that the rectangular buildings take on broadcast the incompetence of

the builders and architects. Why can’t they build something dignified? Something that

fits in with the skyline and that will not be an eyesore? I believe that the photographer of

this picture says it best when he contrasts the color and shape of the new buildings with

all of the others on the skyline by taking the picture on a clear day with blue skies and

peaceful waters. Absolute absurdity.

It seems that everyone is glad that the World Trade Center has fallen so that we can build

the buildings that we’ve always wanted to. What has this country come to?

Sincerely,

Shirley K. Baker, Mother/Widow

Long Island, NY

Rothenberg 38

Figure 4: The New York City skyline with the glass buildings of Memorial Foundations.

(www.renewnyc.com)

April 2003 v. 132

April Feature: The New World Trade Center Part 2: Compromise Amidst Controversy

BY GERRI HIRSHEY

T he new buildings for the World

Trade Center site have begun stirring up

strong emotions years before it will even

be built. There is no solution that will be

perfect for everyone, so a compromise

must be found.

Libeskind promotes his Memory

Foundations as a celebration of

democracy and a tribute to the

Rothenberg 39

determination of a democratic people.

Memory Foundation earns its name by

both remembering the victims of

September 11, 2001 and providing a

symbolic foundation for this country to

build on.

Since New York City is the largest

city in America, its image is—in part—

an image for all American citizens.

Thus, the symbol that is chosen to

replace the World Trade Center will both

come to define the way we as Americans

handle adversity and present a message

to the world.

Ultimately, the design with the most

compelling visual rhetoric will be

chosen. Which option sends a more

powerful message—leaving the property

vacant or reconstruction? If construction

is more powerful, what symbolic and

aesthetic elements should the final

design incorporate?

The best and only way to approach a

complicated issue—like rebuilding a

nation’s economic icon—is to consider

multiple views. The architect has a

responsibility to his community to

satisfy all of its needs. In this case, the

structure needs to memorialize, reassure,

beautify, and impress. In other cases,

practicality and aesthetic value may

reign. The architect must anticipate the

needs, discover them, and research them.

In the case of the World Trade Center

site, the best solution was found by

rendering hundreds of lifelike images in

studios and on computers. The

professional architect considered

opinions from many New York citizens

to ultimately arrive at a compromise

with the strongest visual appeal.

Daniel Libeskind used a logos appeal

and his own personal ethos to convince

the LMDC to choose his design. His

argument was well supported by his

analysis of the picture he included.

On the other hand, Jordan Kaplan

appealed strongly to pathos to make his

point. In that article, the reader hears

Mr. Kaplan’s thoughts and observations

on the photograph—which he took—that

appeals to him most. His ethos as a

firefighter also contributed to his

credibility.

As a widow, Shirley Baker strongly

appealed to pathos as well. Her

argument broke down when she tried to

appeal to logos by condemning the new

skyline because she argued by personal

opinion rather than with factual support.

However, her ethos gained through her

lost loved one gives her opinion more

weight in the consideration of which

plan to choose.

Through the presentation of these

three differing sides, we hope to promote

understanding and cooperation in the

rebuilding process over the next few

years—for certainly the issue of

designing a memorial for the World

Trade Center site is an important and

lasting one.

Works Cited

Albanese, John. “It Didn’t Seem Real.” TIME Photoessay. September 2001. http://www.time.com/time/photoessays/firefighter/5.html

Rothenberg 40

Works Cited

Albanese, John. “It Didn’t Seem Real.” Time. September 2001. Web. 16 April 2003.

Bruich, Sean. “A’s ad campaign fun for fans, players alike.” n.d. Web. 16 April 2003.

Lower Manhattan Development Corporation. Memorial Foundation photos.

RenewNYC.com. n.d. Web. 16 April 2003.

New York Times Heading. Homepage. n.d. Web. 16 April 2003.