Lame. No one is going to experience that memeorial like the model/graphics illustrate... Critics are just reacting to the drawing, and not the design itself. Again, Lame.
manamana caught the spirit of the question i was asking. but even beyond whether a cross would be appropriate - how about something which could be construed to be a cross?
in an age when mary's likeness can be found in a piece of grilled cheese sandwich, how do architects take an intentional approach to symbolism or meaning and/or how do we avoid getting caught in symbolism which was never intended?
i think that this newsletter illustrates the revised version. (note that it's a .pdf.)
mostly the circle has just closed some that it no longer resembles the dreaded crescent. despite the hullaballoo, this version may be stronger, even, with a tighter/narrower opening, a more defined relationship to the sacred ground, and potential 'may the circle be unbroken' associations. less wishy-washy, anyway.
Okay, yeah, I think you're right. Instead of doing new renderings, they've modified the originals--most notably the one illustrating the memorial grove, as they've just continued it off into the distance. The model and plan are changed too.
I do agree that the plan, by connecting the crescent to the crash site, does define a better overall relationship between the two. The tower seems to get lost, in my opinion. They've done well for establishing the two entries I think, but I'd like to know what the considerations were for the transition between the tower and the bowl. Did the past uses [farm, mine, forest] impact the placement of the road? Views? It's hard to tell from what info I have.
I am glad that no major changes were made to the Sacred Ground. While a gate at the family entrance is a necessary evil, the rest of the immediate design for the memorial is simply sublime.
what does it mean? and to whom?
the winning designers of the flight 93 competition are finding themselves in trouble .
a tricky thing > balancing your intended meanings for the forms you propose and then testing them out in public.
should they have caught this symbolism that others are seeing? should the jury? is it just bunk?
Again, wake me when this '911' joke is over. Victims, victims,victims. That's all we want to glorify.
hypothetical question:
say a few crazed christian nutjobs bombed an abortion clinic in a busy city center and killed a couple hundred people.
would it be inappropriate for the memorial to feature a cross?
just like dracula, who freaks out looking at the cross.
Lame. No one is going to experience that memeorial like the model/graphics illustrate... Critics are just reacting to the drawing, and not the design itself. Again, Lame.
manamana caught the spirit of the question i was asking. but even beyond whether a cross would be appropriate - how about something which could be construed to be a cross?
in an age when mary's likeness can be found in a piece of grilled cheese sandwich, how do architects take an intentional approach to symbolism or meaning and/or how do we avoid getting caught in symbolism which was never intended?
unveiled.
and: flight93memorial project.org
Are there are any updated images for the new design, as I couldn't find any after a quick search.
I rather liked the crescent...
check out the slideshow...nice project.
You bet...because I'm certain that's the stuff for their competition entry.
i think that this newsletter illustrates the revised version. (note that it's a .pdf.)
mostly the circle has just closed some that it no longer resembles the dreaded crescent. despite the hullaballoo, this version may be stronger, even, with a tighter/narrower opening, a more defined relationship to the sacred ground, and potential 'may the circle be unbroken' associations. less wishy-washy, anyway.
Okay, yeah, I think you're right. Instead of doing new renderings, they've modified the originals--most notably the one illustrating the memorial grove, as they've just continued it off into the distance. The model and plan are changed too.
I do agree that the plan, by connecting the crescent to the crash site, does define a better overall relationship between the two. The tower seems to get lost, in my opinion. They've done well for establishing the two entries I think, but I'd like to know what the considerations were for the transition between the tower and the bowl. Did the past uses [farm, mine, forest] impact the placement of the road? Views? It's hard to tell from what info I have.
I am glad that no major changes were made to the Sacred Ground. While a gate at the family entrance is a necessary evil, the rest of the immediate design for the memorial is simply sublime.
Allahu Akbar
Stop the ACLU dot com
Nice friends you hang with, Pimpanzee! Really got their priorities straight!
911 was an inside job.
The only terrorists are the ones in the White House.
Block this user
Are you sure you want to block this user and hide all related comments throughout the site?
Archinect
This is your first comment on Archinect. Your comment will be visible once approved.