... had this thought re-cycling through my brain all afternoon- of Nina and Daniel Libeskind who are often read about as a team, dressing alike and one deals with business, the other design, or in some way, yet also sharing their stark aesthetic similarity of style, dress, mannerisms ...

New Tower 1 = Daniel Libeskind
New Tower 2 = Nina Libeskind

The iconography is much more fitting that using the false 'freedom' tower brandscaping. Plus, it would sell a lot of books and cars for the first few years, until we all buy their clothes, and only their clothes, at the stores. Good idea? what say you?

Where would one need to be (in the harbor?) to view the Libeskind rendering of the skyline. Is that only for those at the Statue of Liberty to see? Or is it on some boardwalk in New Jersey, that symbol that is supposed to evoke the statue of liberty in some inherent abstract transcendent epiphany? It would be nice to see a perspective, from the base of the towers where the memorial will be, LOOKING UP, and see what a person may be experiencing from that first person perspective, of the actual space in which this memorial is to be placed in the monumental freedom tower, if anything symbolizing private belief in capital to defeat any questioning, over the public good. More perspectives, please, let’s see what the quality of light and especially, how to fit the traffic patterns of the site within infrastructures, how will perpetual morning be accomplished? How can we solidify the tragedy, perpetuating it indefinitely, so that everyone can pity us in our grand ignorance, championing mediocrity? This is negligence that will put architecture in the .US back a century, it is to have an Op-Ed by the NY Post saying no one goes to NY, NY to see architecture, that architecture does not matter at this site, that it is money. The person, a writer who did great journalism up to now, is a no-nothing of the field and complacent and resigned to mediocrity. Apparently so is the AIA establishment, to even take this serious. Stop the process now. Stop the process. Stop it now. This is the opportunity to have architectures that are mature, that are what has been called the missing ‘American’ architecture, it is the time and place to define the present, ours, and not to have emigrants from WWII’s precedents be as far as our memories can leap as to what is now possible. In the TV conference it was said there did a governor, and two creative geniuses, Childs, Libeskind, design a building. It was a see no evil, hear no evil, speak no evil moment that only a propagandist could love…

If it is really development, that’s it, and money- then yes, REBUILD THE TOWERS, as is the ‘freedom tower’ is less symbolically charged, less meaningful, and would be itself its own monument to 9/11 and restore office space and the windswept plaza to its original form. A great form of denial at a totalitarian vision of what architecture is has so taken hold in the profession that it cannot even critique itself— it is too scared and cowardly to act. The architects who do not oppose this plan are not architects; they belong in another field of inquiry, like accounting department at Ken Lay’s Enron. This pathos is so large and widespread that the WTC 1 and 2 are not even able to be challenged for why one would NOT nor NEVER rebuild the towers- THEY FELL there were huge structural failures, fires of enormous catastrophe, of huge loss of life, of shadows and a type of wanton unrestrained development pattern which glorified the conquering of public space, selling this as a freedom that capital affords us, as private individuals- and it has not been held responsible for its own failure, only glorified- much like loyalists to a fallen regime, who cannot believe their monstrosity of a great leader is now gone, and mourn for an exact, embalmed replica in which to then worship at the false perfection of ideologism.

REBUILDING THE TWIN TOWERs would be better than building a NEW FREEDOM TOWER as the former is architecture, in the wide-ranging human imagination; all find relation to it in some way in their experience. The latter only simulation. This is, if one ignores all architectural details of architecture, safety, fire systems, structural and construction techniques and integrity, space, a context on the ground and relation to the site, the environment, social, cultural impacts, and common sense about what is at question. The WTC should be rebuilt in its original form, as the masses of mourners are right to have their symbol back, when in its place false symbolism and false profits are proposed in its place. Yet this is not a truthful examination or review of what is at stake. It is a highly managed and stage-set constructed campaign for buy-in, to ‘capture the flag’ of patriotism, and put it atop a tower of GOP design in lower Manhattan. It is to place radio waves at the height of American democracy and freedom, not people, it is to have as its value a quixotic energy plan which uses decentralized energy in a centralized way, to enable and increase the likelihood of attacks on this building as its power sources are open and revealed and contained in this, not symbol, but monument to the past, trying to forget like a streamliner into the future, and the NY public is the iceberg that awaits in dense hanging fog.

Mediocrity is not good enough. Okay is not good enough. Greatness is not good enough. World- class is not good enough. Creative genius is not a commodity, it is a brand, and is sold as such, highly overrated it must be said. This architecture is engineering in everything but the words used to describe it by its sole authors. It is a travesty of historical proportions and will sink as such, along with its proponents, as the future will rise.

‘Rebuild the original Twin Towers there is no better option and it must go ahead full steam’

Instead of using the infrastructure of citizens, of those with knowledge of the profession, of the students whose lives are dedicated to learning and developing in this field— consensus is given priority to those who know little to nothing of the interior complexities, even exterior, of the issues faced. There are no calls for students to imagine better safety systems, new structural guidelines, various site plans, how to rescue people out of existing high-rise buildings, the vacancy of the reigning age of architectural asceticism known as by the vague ‘theory’ moniker. The ideas and forms presented ARE NOT GOOD ENOUGH. There is no question, under any critical review, that historically bound, these even pass muster.

They are pathetic triumphs to mediocrity, to the lack of meaning in architecture, to why those in the .US do not ‘get’ architecture, their own, as it is not their own, about their human culture, it is about business and corporate interests priorities.

Lightning will strike, taking out power to Freedom Tower, what will that symbolize, when the wind turbines and their generators explode? Or, in a space-based war, to take out the centralization of power associated with Freedom Tower by a feasible space-based laser system, darkening once again the same site, for a third time? Is it a charm to be this ignorant, to be this rueful in disbelieving anything outside the safety zone of what has been done before? The .US and New York City were not on following, but on leading, on taking risks, on doing things that were beyond the next step, that leaped into another realm, that challenged foundations at the core - and this is none of that. It is a campy, sad, pathetic waste of time. Our time. Our hopes. Of architecture, of meaning, of a reality that reflects our experience and also our wishes, dreams, visions- that is what is possible in the field, and what is now absent.

Sure, let those knowing nothing of architecture dictate what should be: what will be will be. Yet this is also a LIE. A lie of such proportions to the basic integrity of the truth of architecture, that is shared by buildings that transcend, in whatever way, to be able to communicate— buildings do not tell someone “I EVOKE THIS IN RELATION TO THAT” if one cannot see it for themselves— it is just another pile … standing up, living larger than life, pretending to be greater than it really is. Down with the status quo, down with complacency, recover the dreams, the imagination, and architecture. Recover the future, it is ours to build, and build with. Libeskind is OUT. Childs is OUT. This is treachery.

You would rebuild the past, which collapsed, and say you remember and glorify it without changing its outcome. You are unworthy of building at this site. Your motives are base, unsound, despicable. You should be shamed by your peers, not opening this process to its public dimension, and you lost the chance to engage the great questions of our time with a misguided, meaningless mockery of architecture, which is all about the architects, and not about the public or culture which it is to serve.

Damn you for defeating the future, damn you for not questioning the past, damn you for not opening up the process, for going beyond your egotistical selves. You have failed in epic ways, and what will be recorded of this event shall prove the wrongness of your approach at a critical juncture in time- there is no time left- this is it- and you failed to do what is in the best interests of NYC, the .US, and the world. You failed as architects, you failed architecture, and you are a disgrace to the very idea of building today.

New York needs to be able to see itself now, to look to itself, to reflect, not to ignore its own wounds, or it will never be able to heal, grow, and go beyond the past.

PS. Mr. Scuozzo your article is an insult to architecture. You obviously know nothing of its public value. If you don’t know what you’re writing about, then don’t write as if you do. It is embarrassing and counter-productive.

PPS. The GOP is also going to be using a ‘pit’ scheme, where people in Madison Square Garden will be ‘six feet under’ those on the stage- historically familiarity?