By Paul Beston on 5.20.05 @ 12:19AM
You don't have to like Donald Trump to know that he's right about the World Trade Center.
NEW YORK -- "If the Statue of Liberty was destroyed, you
wouldn't replace it with the Eiffel Tower," Donald Trump said at a
Wednesday morning press conference in New York. You certainly
wouldn't replace it with the Freedom Tower.
Trump is proposing an 11th-hour scrapping of the plans for the
World Trade Center site, specifically the much-maligned Freedom
Tower, in favor of what he calls Twin Towers II. His idea is just
what it sounds like -- a rebuilding of the original towers, a bit
higher for good measure, with enhanced safety features. His timing
is terribly late and his motives unclear, but his aim is true. Who
would have thought that nearly four years after the attacks of
September 11, Donald Trump would represent New York's last chance
for a dignified redevelopment of Ground Zero?
Trump says that he wants to build "a taller, stronger, more
beautiful version of the Twin Towers." He also says, more
memorably, that the Freedom Tower is "the worst pile of crap
architecture I've ever seen in my life." Given that Trump is an
authority on crap, his assessment carries weight, but more
importantly his view of the Freedom Tower is widely shared. Beyond
its creator, the German architect Daniel Libeskind, few are in love
with the monstrosity that is the Freedom Tower. Trump describes it
aptly as a "skeleton," and it does have the appearance of a
starved-out, postmodern pastiche of a skyscraper, or a sort of
nightmare architectural vision of America conquered by the European
Union. For those who point out that the original Twin Towers
themselves were hardly an aesthetic ideal, the Freedom Tower
reminds us of how much worse things can get.
Trump's plan was completed nearly two years ago, but most people
are hearing about it now for the first time. The idea itself dates
back to the day the towers were destroyed. Almost immediately,
there were voices urging that they be rebuilt. But just as many, or
more, saw an opportunity to build something new on the site, and
still others argued that replacing the towers would constitute
disrespect to the dead, one of those non sequiturs that becomes
accepted if repeated often enough. The "put 'em back up" caucus
never had much of a chance. Now, just at the moment when the design
for the Freedom Tower has been sent back for adjustments due to
security concerns voiced by the NYPD, Trump has stepped into the
breach. Being Trump, he arouses speculation about his motives.
Some allege that Trump's press conference was nothing more than
a promotional stunt to hype the series finale of his TV show,
The Apprentice, which aired last night, and on the set of
which Trump displayed a model of Twin Towers II. If he were really
serious about redevelopment, they say, he would have made a major
public push for Twin Towers II a long time ago. It is odd that
Trump, who has become a television star in no small part due to his
reputation (however stylized) as a can-do entrepreneur, would
choose to advocate a proposal that has virtually no chance of
adoption. It would take many more problems with the Freedom Tower
and a massive demonstration of public sentiment to reverse the
course of the planning now.
My own guess is that, vanity aside, Trump detests and is
offended by the Freedom Tower. As the moment for its construction
approaches, he has tossed out one last alternative. The city would
have benefited if he had become disgusted sooner. He is a vivid
example of how a man can be egomaniacal, tacky, vain, self-seeking,
manipulative...and correct.
At this late stage of the redevelopment process, trying to
divine Trump's motives is beside the point. Whatever minuscule hope
exists for ditching the Freedom Tower design resides with his
proposal. If by some miracle Trump's bluff is called, he would
surely answer. And he would have a good deal of public support in
proceeding.
Earlier this year, New York was afflicted with Christo's
The Gates, which for two weeks made Central Park look
like nothing so much as a construction site. The Gates were ugly,
garish, and intimidating, but temporary. Barring some extraordinary
developments, the Freedom Tower will soon become a fixture of the
Manhattan skyline, a reminder of the success of terrorism in
permanently altering our living space -- as if 3,000 dead isn't
permanent alteration enough. That has always seemed like too much
to concede, but even if one felt differently, the Freedom Tower is
not the building to make the concession with.
Love him or hate him, Donald Trump's proposal is New York's last
chance to fire Daniel Libeskind.
topics:
Trade, Television
