|
Originally posted on:
September 20th, 2001- 11:47am
If this county's collective populous had a
complete brain, it would probably take it out and play with it. This latest realization
stems from the debates whether to rebuild the World Trade Center, or make it a memorial
to the yet determined multitude of Americans that were murdered last week. The latter
idea blows my mind.
Let's take a step back just for a second and
look at the big picture here. This is 15 acres of the most expensive real estate in the
entire world and the old skyline was identifiable because of the towers to nearly everyone
on the planet. It will NEVER be a park, even if it could be a 110 story park
visible for 15 miles in all directions. This is one of the most obvious reasons why the
towers were such a symbol of Western Capitalism; it's size, cost, and world recognition.
The reason the towers were targeted in the first place is because they were this symbol.
The World Trade Center, two 110 story towers
or not, WILL be rebuilt. This is a certainty. Manhattan is not Oklahoma City.
I do not mean to suggest that either city is better than the other, but how many people
even knew what the skyline of Oklahoma City looked like before the Federal Building
Bombing? A monument there makes sense. Not only is the land there cheaper and much
more plentiful, a reminder of the tragedy will be more poignant then it is now in the
years to come. As for the World Trade Center, it will always be a memorial no matter
what is built there. The most fitting memorial is to rebuild.
Now the how...
Honestly, I feel that it should be at least as
high as it was out of spite to those who knocked it down in the first place. This may
just be wishful thinking, because the cost of rebuilding that high is much more costly
than it was 30 years ago. People may think that people are also richer now, and that it
all evens out in the end. Not so. I may be misquoting the History Channel special I saw
on skyscrapers last year, but they said that it was ten times more expensive to add every
additional floor past floor 99. This was not the case in the very early 70's. You can
hate me for saying it, but rebuilding to its former grandeur will not be cost effective,
and that's a shame. I am sure that the new complex will resemble the old complex very
closely, but if it's a more modest structure, it will stand as an insult to those who lost
there lives in the disaster, their families, and America. That's how I see it.
There are those who feel that buildings
everywhere built on a more modest scale from now on. This, to these
people, will make buildings less of a target both physically and ideologically. This is,
in both cases, ridiculous. First, physically, how small does a building have to be so
NOT to be hit or damaged by a JUMBO JET? Second, the American Ideology was attacked
by hitting (what they consider) the forefront symbol of Western Capitalism. The World
Trade Center, even if rebuilt to resemble a colossal McDonalds, will always be this
symbol, and therefore a target.
The cost of rebuilding the towers to their former
height is probably more than the net worth of Mr. Larry Silversten, leaseholder of the
World Trade Center complex. Of course, there are people in this country that COULD foot
such a cost. Why not beg Bill Gates to build two 150 story towers, then give him one?
You know he'll give it back. Maybe we could all chip in and buy some new windows? Heh,
wishful thinking...
I can't imagine the New York skyline without
those two ivory towers. Now that they no longer stand, maybe we realize that we are not as
untouchable as we thought we were. Maybe they were a symbol of arrogance, but I remember
them as a symbol of pride. If the new complex is not
at least as high, I fear we will never obtain that level of pride again.
|