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.
The old Twin Towers were elegant, and very much apart of the landscape being built in the early 1970's. These new towers look gawdy, they look like maybe they belong down in Miami. They should have just rebuilt the towers exactly as they were.
I'm sorry, but I really don't get when people say this. Knowing what we know now about that type of construction and its vulnerabilities--REALLY? You think engineers are going to employ that design again and get it approved? And let's not forget that part of the reason so many people are dead is because of the fact that the only way that type of building was commercially profitable was the open floor space permitted by the staircases and elevators sitting in the core, and that presented a life-safety problem. Even if they built them to LOOK the same on the outside, the present life safety codes developed since 9/11 would take up too much rentable floor space, and the building would not be commerically viable. It's one thing to indulge sentimentality, but to spend billions on it is a little too much of an indulgence.
I wouldn't mind seening two freedom towers.
I never really liked the orginal twins, the only thing that made them really impressive is the mere fact that there were two, if only the North Tower was built, then it would just look like one giantic ugly office tower, unlike the new Tower 1 which stands perfect alond.
I always liked this aspect of the original WTC buildings (photo is from Lynn Anderson's WTC Memorial site: Lynn Anderson (Home page) :
For some reason the way the lines went made me think of a fork. As a kid, before I knew the proper name, I'd think of them as "The Fork Buildings". When we'd pass by them in the car, I'd think "oh, there are the fork buildings." But it was hard to see that feature from a distance, say when viewing the skyline.
Again, this was best appreciated the smaller scale of the plaza area. That's one of the things I liked about the original WTC towers, they could be appreciated at a distance as part of the skyline and as a smaller experience, near the towers. I do know there was a lot of protest when they went up from the neighborhood. I can also appreciate that side of it. I'm sure the people who were already there when it was being built didn't appreciate their views being blocked or having formerly sunny areas cast into shade from the shadows of the buidling.
Last edited by exscapegoat; 09-14-2012 at 12:15 PM..
It's now hard to separate what the original towers now represent, from what I felt prior to their destruction. However, I remember feeling they were very ugly though impressive in size when they existed.
I think the new towers are more attractively designed though I'm a little disappointed that WTC one isn't taller, because I feel that would have made a stronger statement. Not Dubai tall mind you, but I think an extra 20 floors would have made all the difference. The antennae really doesn't count IMO.
If we look back into the orginal plans for the new WTC we would have gotten a 2000 foot tower. I think the design we have now evokes the old wtc the best, yet I think it could have been taller. Or atleast bigger than Willis.
There better be an observation deck on top of the new tower!
I miss the old towers. The two of them together added a lot of heft to the skyline of lower Manhattan. The new ones look a bit too elaborate, and not hefty enough.
So many people have short memories...or can't be bothered to read a little history. When the Twin Towers went up in '75, they were fairly widely criticized for not fitting in with the city's skyline. Now, of course, it's politically correct to wring your hands and get all nostalgic about them.
Well...sue me for not being politically correct. I didn't like them when they went up, and I'm not all teary-eyed over their not being part of the skyline now. I prefer the new building much better.
Quote:
Originally Posted by barkomatic
It's now hard to separate what the original towers now represent, from what I felt prior to their destruction. However, I remember feeling they were very ugly though impressive in size when they existed.
I think the new towers are more attractively designed though I'm a little disappointed that WTC one isn't taller, because I feel that would have made a stronger statement. Not Dubai tall mind you, but I think an extra 20 floors would have made all the difference. The antennae really doesn't count IMO.
To an extent I agree with both post.
Fred, I only get 'teary-eyed' because of the WAY they were taken out of our skyline. Growing up it was just 'Whatever, they're just the Twin Towers'. It wasn't a big deal, but then IT happened and I recall one time when I went to a music concert/festival with my Mom in front of them. I was so small so my only memory/experience was that one time. Vivid and I still remember.
Now on the other hand if I had to pick or choose which architecture I prefer it's 1 WTC. Not because it's modern and all the other bull, but just from a architectural stand point it's better. My opinion of course. I also prefer the new complex as well.
But like I said I think we'll always feel that 'The towers are gone - they were amazing' etc, feeling just because of what happened and how it happened.
This is our historic tale for our grandchildren some day. To them 1 WTC was there forever, but we'll know and we'll tell them of when....
I only saw the original towers up close once, from a ferry to the Statue of Liberty in 2000. My family had just moved to NJ from upstate New York and I was seeing the harbor area for the first time. I was 13, thought they were a fantastic part of a beautiful skyline, and had no idea what was to become of them the next year.
The new building is all well and good, but it's really a generic tower.
They should have rebuilt the iconic twin towers, but about 20% higher. Just enough so that anyone looking at the city skyline from up to 10 miles away would say to themselves "Wait, they made those buildings bigger than they were originally, didn't they??"
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.
