Official Freedom Tower Thread

[Recchia]

I really like it actually - it's a very modern version of the North Tower. I think it's very fitting - everyone wants some crazy modern design that doesn't fit the skyline at all (like Fosters - it's nice but it doesn't fit at all). I think this is perfect.. but thats my opinion.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

I agree. I like it alot. Anything is better than the first rendering....

[CtownMikey]

beautiful

[Urban_Legend]

I liked the original. Liebeskinds original, before it got turned mediocre. And I like the height of 1776. It was symbolic. I don't think it needs to be the tallest to make an impact. Lord knows, that tragic left a big enough impact.

[monsoon]

I agree the first design was a mess and I am glad they didn't build it. The new design however lacks imagination and looks like they took parts from 3 different skyscrapers and jammed them together into this new mess. Its big for sure, but that is all you can say for it.

Trump's design was much better.

[Cotuit]

I also wish that they would jsut build the thing. Build the other 5 smaller towers and get SOMETHING moving down there.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

7 WTC is racing into the sky as we speak.

[CarolinaLove]

I don't really like it. Indeed it lacks imagination, and it is also tacky. It doesn't blend well with the other buildings in the area.

[lammius]

I agree that this is much better than the first, AND that it's reminiscent of the North Tower. But what about the South Tower?

If we had two of these new buildings side by side I think they're dignified and similar enough to represent the original towers. I don't like the idea of replacing two buildings with only one.

[M. Brown]

I think it looks great. Very simple and strait foward. It looks civilized and tame(I don't know how to explain it really). And no lattice to try and make it taller than it actually is.

[Urban_Legend]

OK, this design is growing on me. Who knows though, they might end up changing it again lol.

[Zissou]

They are not just replacing it with one tower. 7 WTC is already nearing completion and there are 3 other towers planned for the site but more around the 60 story range. The other towers arent even close to the size of the Freedom Tower so that may be why you overlooked them.

[jackson]

they should call this building the fear tower, because it is designed out of fear of safety and nothing in the design conveys freedom in any sense. This is a building designed to be attacked, and it has a 20 story base designed for a hostile environment. From the street, its gonna be a big ugly wall and say F-you to the surrounding environment. Anybody on this forum could have designed what david chillds did. first, draw a box. Then draw 4 triangles, and a line between the top of each. There you have it, that's the freedom tower. I cant beleive anybody would be paid to do something so easy.

This is the most retarded thing i've ever seen. These guys are retarded because even if you made it impossible to attack this building, terrorists could just as easily attack another. They'd even kill more people if they attacked, say, the sears tower, which is not designed to withstand terrorist attacks. In essence, there is really no way to make this country safer by building every building to withstand terrorist attacks. The only way to make anything safer is for the united states to change its foreign policy in a way that will diminish any reason to hate the country in the first place. Right now, we are doing just the opposite. This architect is a moron, so is the president and anybody who stands by this. it is something that represents fear and i hope that if it is built that we will deconstruct it in the future when we recognize what a monstrosity it is.

[CtownMikey]

thanks for calling me a moron

just playin'

I do agree with you about the base of the building. It should be pedestrian friendly and bring vibrance back to that area.

BUT... I still love the rest of the building.

[IBruton]

The only way to make anything safer is for the united states to change its foreign policy in a way that will diminish any reason to hate the country in the first place.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

That's right! Everyone remember...anytime someone or some group of people is hated, it is that person or group that must change in order to appease another group. We must all get along and make friends with everyone because evil is not real. People don't really want to destroy you or hate you, they just want to be our friend. September 11, 2001 was just a knock on your door to say "hello".

Jackson, you must have lots of friends and I'm sure nobody hates you. Thank God you're not in charge.

There will always be people who hate what this great nation stands for. It isn't something to be ashamed of.

[lammius]

They are not just replacing it with one tower.  7 WTC is already nearing completion and there are 3 other towers planned for the site but more around the 60 story range.  The other towers arent even close to the size of the Freedom Tower so that may be why you overlooked them.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

What I meant is there is one "freedom tower." I would prefer twins.

[jackson]

There will always be people who hate what this great nation stands for. It isn't something to be ashamed of.

why would people hate for what this nation stands for?? that's not why they hate us. they hate us because in order to sustain our supply of petroleum (in which we are utterly dependent on), we must employ an aggressive foreign policy. Unfortunately, in order to sustain this lifestyle that we live, it must come at the cost of someone. In this case, it comes at the cost of Muslims in the middle east. Think of how many civilians have died in this war, in desert storm, and the numerous covert operations conducted throughout the last three decades. President Regan was once close buddies with none other than Osama bin laden, but this relationship changed during the end of his administration, and since then, the US and bin laden have been bitterly pitted against each other. Bin laden is able to draw so much support in the middle east because our armies have been occupying their lands and infringing upon their lifestyle in addition to being responsible for so many innocent deaths. I think if you lived there, you'd hate this place too, because of the same reasons i just mentioned.

Once again, I think your argument is worthless because you cant make this country safer unless we change our relationship with the rest of the world. How are you going to make this place safer? do you have any idea how easy it is to break into the united states? or how easy it would be to take a bomb on a train in to grand central? or to blow up any chemical plant in new jersey and take out the entire NY metro area? you are simply ignorant if you think that we can actually protect this place. If they want to attack, they will, and there is simply way too many things to defend to have everything protected. Once again, I will stress, THE ONLY WAY TO MAKE THIS COUNRTY SAFTER TO CHANGE THE WAY WE DEAL WITH THE WORLD. If this means we gotta cut down on our dependency on oil, thats what we have to do in order to make this country safer. You make one building terrorist proof, they will attack another. from a distance, this building is not a terrible design. but everything has been sacrificed on the street level to make this building safer, which in the end isn't really making anything safer.

Being an oil-dependent, automobile dominated society is nothing to be proud of. it is not worth maintaining way of life if it means we have to face the threat of being killed by terrorists all the time, and the rest of the world hating us. Its also becoming so expensive, on both the private and public levels, that we are having to sacrifice other important things, such as education and healthcare. but I'm going to stop here, because I could spend a year telling you how bad cars are and what they've done to our country.

[CtownMikey]

I've had zero hours of legit. education on this topic.. so feel free to call me young and immature.. but I don't care what the U.S. does.. EVEN IF we were trotting around in the middle east, killing civilians for fun and laughing, nothing we do can be an excuse to smash planes into our buildings and "terrorize" us. Murder cannot be rationalized. Does anyone agree?

[SmellyCat]

The more I look at the design, the more I like it. Bravo, David Childs!!

[jackson]

Murder cannot be rationalized. Does anyone agree?

that's right, I agree. I wish the united states government agreed too.

[CtownMikey]

this is me playing a type of devil's advocate here-->... Just b/c our gov't may not agree, does that make it ok for other countries not to agree, and follow in our footsteps?

Is that the way to teach the U.S. gov't a lesson?

[Zissou]

Jackson lets keep architecture and politics seperate here because I think the combination of the two is really messing with your judgement.

If being an architect is so simple why dont you become one. Obviously you know what it takes. I mean draw a rectangle and some triangles and bam you have a building right? Yes it would be much better if the base was more interactive with the environment but this design cant totally be put on the shoulders of David Childs. He was told to redesign the building for safety. Certain measures had to be taken that were out of his control and he adapted to them to the best of his ability. He has attempted to make the base as appealing as humanly possible. Unfortunately right now these are the measures necessary to build a super tall building in New York. You have to convince workers that being an occupant in this building will be safe.

Its a shame but this building is a product of the world we now live in. You may see a box with some triangles with a large ugly base. What I see is an elegant tower firmly planted in the ground that says "we are here to stay". It will be the World's Tallest when done and i see it as a tribute to America. Again im not a huge fan of the base but what would you rather have: safety or aethetics? I choose safety. If you had your way no buildings would be built until we change our foreign policy and to use your words, thats retarded.

[jackson]

If being an architect is so simple why dont you become one.

that's funny you say that, because guess what: i am going to school for architecture. I don't know where i made a direct relationship between politics and architecture. Then again, every architect knows politics definitely have a huge influence over the design of buildings, and most educated citizens in any field should be aware of this as well. however, this is a building meant to serve the demands of the politicians, so I don't see how there isn't a relationship between the two, especially in this case. duh.

He has attempted to make the base as appealing as humanly possible.

if that base is as appealing as humanly possible then I might as well shoot myself right now. Even if you have to make it that safe (which again, isn't going to make anything as a whole safer in this country) you could still articulate the design as to infuse energy into the space that it creates. What this design is is a wall stripped of everything, so my advice would be to add onto the wall of the base as it is and give it some detail.

this is me playing a type of devil's advocate here-->... Just b/c our gov't may not agree, does that make it ok for other countries not to agree, and follow in our footsteps?

obviously not; nothing in the world could've justified killing thousands of innocent lives. What I am saying is the US being a world leader needs to take responsibility and initiative to create a safe environment for its own citizens, and this obviously is not going to be accomplished by terrorizing other countries with our aggressive foreign policy designed to ensure a constant supply of petroleum. Its our turn to change the way we deal with other countries and recognize the deep consequences of this ridiculous, automobile-oriented lifestyle that we have blindly embraced.

[Zissou]

It suprises me to hear that your an architecture student, as i am, because of your total lack of appreciation for the new towers look excluding the base. It is a simple and elegant shape. Great architecture does not have to be complex. The square and triangles remark caught me off guard because it sounded like something a small child would say and not someone who is a student of architecture.

And perhaps I should have rewritten my statement on how appealing the base is. I meant that Childs attempted to make the base as appealing as possible considering the safety measures that were requested of the new design.

Again I think i should have reworded some of the things I said. Of course politics plays a role in architecture. What I should have said was seperate architecture and your Bush bashing and hatred. Somehow you managed to link the design of the Freedom tower to Bush terrorizing other countries for oil.

You still didnt answer my question. Safety, or Aesthetics?

[I-275westcoastflorida]

This is a great site of this tower i like the design. Also here is what it could look like with a twin.

[brandon401]

i think Zissou has a point jackson....

[Spartan]

It is better, but is still a very boring design. Can we get a Chinese architect to design something cool for us? Does Frank Lloyd Wright have any descendents in architecture?

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

I don't really like it. Indeed it lacks imagination, and it is also tacky. It doesn't blend well with the other buildings in the area.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

I think it looks great.  Very simple and strait foward.  It looks civilized and tame(I don't know how to explain it really).  And no lattice to try and make it taller than it actually is.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

I want everyone to read these quotes, and then go back about 30 years to when they were designing the old WTC. The same can, and probably was, said about that design.

The former WTC was very bland and it didn't fit in with any of the other buidings in Downtown at the time. It stuck out, literally, like a 110 storey sore thumb. New Yorkers did not like it at first. Over time they grew to like it, and I suspect that the same will hold true for whatever they decide to build there.