clock menu more-arrow no yes mobile

Filed under:

Freedom's Friends: Inevitable Critical Backlash Edition

Following Friday's insta-reviews and reader vote (current tally: 61.6% for, 38.4% against), two august architectural critics weigh in on the three towers proposed for the World Trade Center site...

1) Nikolai Ourousoff, NYTimes: "The designs rise above the mediocrity we have come to expect... But for those who cling to the idea that the site’s haunting history demands a leap of imagination, the towers illustrate how low our expectations have sunk since the city first resolved to rebuild there in a surge of determination just weeks after 9/11."

2) The Guttersniper, The Gutter*: "Yes, it is passing strange that Lord Foster's design should so closely mimic the idiot blanks of Danny's master plan and not his own spire circa 2003. Yes, Richard Rogers' busybee trusselated mass should be aborted post haste. Sure, Fumihiko Maki's tower is a straight rip of that triangular thing at 53rd and Lex that is already a sad homage to its noble Midtown neighbor, Citicorp. But the real action, as ever, is elsewhere."

*The Gutternsiper's slowly awakening from a late-summer nap. Drop in.