Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Also in what world is a Mustang better than a BMW?
A world called earth... I don't literally think they were referencing winch is better just that one is an American Classic, and one is shiny, New, and foreign. IMO opinion though
A world called earth... I don't literally think they were referencing winch is better just that one is an American Classic, and one is shiny, New, and foreign. IMO opinion though
Agreed.
IMO I prefer the WTC. The Sears Tower has just not won me over yet, and I have been here for 26 years. Although I do prefer Chicago's skyline.
Um I got the "point" (if that's what passes as one..) just fine, I was more responding to this:
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dallaz
Says the person from Chicago
which was in response to the aforementioned "point". I didn't see how the "point" was indicative of any hometown boosterism, which is what I felt the above quote was insinuating. Seeing as how a Mustang being compared to a BMW doesn't exactly imply that the Mustang is better, which is along the lines of what you all are saying, so..
Anyways, I also assumed the Mustang reference wasn't a reference to present day Mustang's which are ****, but more around the time of the golden age of Mustangs (about a decade before the erection of the Sears Tower). And Mustangs were more known for their classic American muscle as opposed to a sleek design. Where as a BMW is a luxury car that has always been about the design and functionality first. Which is also along the lines of something that has been said here.
Ive watched and followed the entire proposal and construction process very carefully as I lived in Jersey and had great views prior to 9/11 and post-void.
To me, it is rightfully named One World Trade Center. "Freedom Tower" is tacky, and given the current state of the US (Patriot Act, NSA, you know, all that good stuff), it means nothing.
Freedom? You mean the freedoms we used to have?
Same here. Only difference is I still live in NJ.
That is your opinion and of course you're entitled to it, but it doesn't make the meaning any less real - 1 WTC is symbolic, no matter how tacky or unnecessary some think it is - and there are people who strongly dislike everything about this building. Me? I think it's very beautiful, and its height in comparison to the Sears Tower means nothing to me because I know the architect had symbolism in mind when designing it, not beating Chicago for the country's tallest building.
That being said, I have a had time understanding why some people from Chicago and beyond take this whole building thing so seriously - who cares that 1 World Trade is technically taller, but the spire makes it controversial? As I said, this isn't and has never been a contest. People can think whatever they want about which one is taller, counting spires or not, but this has never been about one-upping one another. 1 WTC's height is clearly symbolic at 1776 feet considering what happened at that site.
I was watching a video on YouTube the other day which showed the new World Trade Center from above and I couldn't help but think it would've been much better if they built twins of the new building like the old World Trade Center. The way the building 'twists' to have a square top that is rotated 90 degrees from the square bottom could've been quite symbolic if there actually were two of them to show the new World Trade center rising from the (symbolic) footprints of the old and oriented in a new direction (to show the country being oriented in a new direction after the attacks).
When I first saw the new One World Trade Center up close in person and from the a distance I felt it to be a compromise and disappointment. It looks skinnier. I've always been a big fan of the original WTC. That will always be NY to me. The look of the new tower doesn't make the kind of bold dominant statement in the skyline like the twin towers once did. Here's some photos I shot.
One World Trade Center (I know this photo is old but the only current one I have at the moment)
Thankfully, the original twins still has a surviving sister replica in Tulsa but half the size. You also have another in LA but the color tone and style of this tower in Tulsa is much closer to the original WTC. I think this tower in Tulsa even looks more dominant looking than the new One World Trade Center despite being half the size of the former sister towers. Every time I visit Tulsa it triggers flash backs of the old towers when ever I see this building because they were actually designed by the same architect using the same exact materials.
Here's another one of my photos showing the new 1WTC in the skyline shot from ESB. (circled in yellow)
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
