No, Really, Let’s Rebuild the Twin Towers, Even If Not at Ground Zero

twin towers map No, Really, Lets Rebuild the Twin Towers, Even If Not at Ground Zero

We are the world. (TTGG)

For a good long while after the events of 9/11, there was a call to rebuild the World Trade Center just as it was the day before the attacks. This was an idea not without precedent. Everywhere from the Hebrew Temple to the  Madison White House to the Super Dome, humanity has been rebuilding their monuments after wars and disasters. Rarely, though, are the buildings exactly the same, as had been so vocally proposed here.

The idea, even with the backing of Donald Trump and the Post, did not succeed, and it never will now that the project has progressed so far. There was a time, in the laggard days of 2006 and 2007, with little visible progress under way, when the call was renewed. It is a persistent plea, one that echoes today, a month shy of the 10th anniversary. With that dark hallmark approaching, a design competition has just been launched by a group called Twin Towers Go Global that is seeking submissions for a new set of Twin Towers built anywhere in the world.

Living on a Prayer: Watch 1 World Trade Center Rise Halfway >>

The group has actually been working for a number of years to have replicas of the Minoru Yamasaki structures built somewhere in the world, and now it has turned to the public for help. The purpose behind the Twin Towers competition, according to the competition website, is “to create a memorial expressive of the Towers’ significance to a wide array of individuals and cultures, as well as their continuing unifying power.”

Entries are due by Sept. 2, and a few suggestions, though no renderings, have been posted to an online gallery. “They should be rebuilt on ground zero just as they were,” remarks one. Another says, “I think another should be built in Washington D.C.” Makes sense, given the attack on the Pentagon and the hot D.C. office market. “Rebuild them in Athens, Greece, the cradle of democracy,” declares a third. There are two votes for Houston and one very annoyed submission. “I’ve rarely seen such a pointless attempt to self-profit off a tragedy, you guys take the cake,” it begins.

There is one suggestion, post to the group’s Facebook, that The Observer took for an arch-commentary on what ground zero has become, until we saw it was submitted by a high school student from Indiana: “I say miniature versions, in Lower Manhattan, about one-fourth the size of the originals housing gift shops, skyscraper museums, etc. I’ll send full designs soon.”

mchaban [at] observer.com | @MC_NYC

Comments

  1. No, they were really ugly.  A complete eyesore.  And full of asbestos.  Except for the thousands of dead victims and multiple thousands of injuries, it was probably good that the US government blew them up, er, I mean 19 Arabs with boxcutters blah blah blah whatever.

    1. Steven Sladic says:

      You dont know much about the Twin Towers I presume! and show some respect!

  2. Dave says:

    I would support rebuilding them, if they weren’t the most boring landmark ever conceived. The new Freedom Tower is more memorable and quite a bit taller too.

  3. Duanebrodnick says:

    I wouldn’t exactly call the former Twin Towers ‘ugly’. Not attractive, yes. You need to remember, back in the 1950s, ’60 and 70s. buildings weren’t built for beauty. They were built to attract businesses. If they were to rebuild the Towers, let’s improve the exterior a bit. Use the same design that was at the base. The hour glass design. Let it go up the front and the back, but leave the sides as is. Now, as for the location if they were rebuilt. With the exception of Isreal, I’ll be damned if I want them built in an Arab Middle Eastern country. Need we forget where the hijackers originated. Canada, Europe, the UK, Australia, yes. But not the Arab M iddle East.

    1. Smellyhedgehog says:

      Which hijacker came from Canada? Which one came from Australia? Which one came from the UK? Names please.

    2. Jgcitygin says:

      Please remember:
      The Manhattan skyline was perfectly balanced: both symetrically and asymetrically:
      The Twin Towers on one side, and the Empire State and Chrysler Buildings on the other. The Twins’ simplicity was ideally matched with the more ornate ESB and Chrysler Art Deco. They were unpretentiously beautiful. The “tuning fork” base and the narrow windows gave warmth to their quite modern design.

      PS: They were taken away from New York. They WERE New York. they belong BACK in New York.

  4. WELLENDOWEDPAUL says:

    You naysayers, are complete a***oles.  I agree, MAYBE when first built, eyesores, ugly.  BUT I live in NEw York and miss them.    So to OCT 16 2004 , you are probably ugly.  BUT I WANT(ed) THE TWIN TOWERS BUILT AGAIN!   THAT BECAME NEW YORK, PART OF THE SKYLINE.  IF ANOTHER COUNTRY OR CITY DOES, NEW YORK MADE A MISTAKE BY NOT BUILDING AGAIN BECAUSE IDIOTS DID NOT WANT THEM.

  5. janet nella. says:

    if theyre going to build the twin towers again,id like them to be built where they belong..~~ON NEW YORK SOIL!~~! theyre new yorks pride and joy.when they were destroyed i called it the raping of the new york skyline.

    1. Terry Wolfe says:

      I finally got to STATEN Island after 60’s Nam tours and noticed the Japanese tourist with the first LCD screen on the rear of his camera for a time frame and then looked at what he was taking a picture of and it dawned on me  real quick that that was not their since I was here last and brought a lump to my throat that I had missed more than I thougt in my Naval tours! TWC was most impressive!

  6. Edspacc says:

    How about rebuilding both towers, with the impression of a fist, with middle finger raised on side of each tower facing the Middle East!

  7. Yaccov says:

    Build them in a place like New Zealand an area that would be good, and it would also be a blessing to that area. As far as the USA,Philadelphia is a good place it is the cradle of liberty. And Philadelphia has all new buildings, near Center city it would be a great building to see getting off the Ben Franklin Bridge. Another place would be Wahington D.C. It is the nation’s capitol, and would fit perfectly there. But so would it with th Liberty Bell and all the special monuments there.

  8. Soldiers4YeshuaMinistriesAU says:

    We have in nyc now several buildings that resemble the World Trade Center. In matter of fact there is one right near the South Street Sea Port. You Could also put it on Governours Island, or near the UN by first Avenue. Another place is in Albany. Or you can make it a monument for viewing.

  9. Anonymous says:

    It is unclear what the point was of writing this snide column. It completely missed the idea behind the “Twin Towers Go Global” site and then went on to repeat the same old nonsense about how people who wanted to rebuild our legendary skyline wanted to do it with “old” Twin Towers — a very convenient canard for those with no imagination. But state-of-the-art Twin Towers would incorporate all of the bells and whistles of the current plan and then some, and in the opinion of many of us rubes would be far more stately and impressive than the current plan — if it could actually get fully built, which is not likely any time soon. 

    And then what will we have to show for the massive infusion of public funds? A tower shaped like a tombstone (drive past any cemetery — you can’t miss it) that Paul Goldberger, dean of New York’s architecture, called “stunningly mediocre” and three other towers that his faint praise allowed are “better than the junk on Third Avenue.” 

    No, really, let’s just keep telling the same old fable about how the Twin Towers weren’t rebuilt because it wasn’t the most popular and most feasible option — and let’s pretend that the public really doesn’t own the property by virtue of their tolls which originally bought the property, built the property, and then leased it to someone who signed a contract that said he would rebuild “said premises” “with
    the plans and specifications for the same as they existed prior to such damage
    or destruction.”

    And then let’s pretend that journalists were busy being watchdogs for the past ten years — instead of lapdogs who were too busy getting their tummies tickled to look into the swindle going on at Ground Zero, so all they had time for was to print Port Authority and Silverstein press releases. Fortunately, their were private citizens who did their work for them and have a Freedom of Information record that tells a very disturbing tale — to be posted and circulated this month by the Twin Towers Alliance.

    It isn’t a surprise to read comments that assume that their opinion is the only one that counts — because that seems to be how we debate issues these days. But how is it that there are still people who repeat silly nonsense like the Twin Towers were “full of asbestos” and “quite a bit taller too!”

    That’s as close as we can get to a barometer on our phoney baloney culture. New York never needed gimmicks to set records. A tower that is virtually identical in height to the real One World Trade Center, adds a spire that is slighty higher than the original antenna, and suddenly it’s the tallest building in North America. No, really, what a crock…

  10. Anonymous says:

    Of course the twin towers belong to where they were. This shall send an in-your-face message to the terrorists who had the nerve to blow them up before they were completely evacuated.

    Love,

  11. Cory Fleming says:

    Haha, I got quoted! I wish I’d had posted that with more sleep because I feel my wording is sort of garbled, but I’m glad I got recognized, so thanks :D

  12. Romanwtc says:

    I personally would LOVE to the see the Twin Towers of the World Trade Center back in the New York skyline, just as they use to be. But if that is not a possibility anymore because of the new under construction WTC, then i really dont care where they are at. As long as they are rebuild just as they were. I never got a chance to see them so PLEASE BRING BACK THE TOWERS!

  13. Websteve says:

    If they would be built, they belong in Manhattan, not some outside state or country.  They were originally built here and would belong here again!

  14. Malcolmmehaffey says:

    So there will be ONE main building just a little over HALF the size of ONE of the TWO buildings.  The second one doesn’t even come close.  It will not have as many floors (105 and 88 compared to 110 and 100), no windows for the first few floors, a big antenna so people can say it is big, and will have nothing the TTs didn’t.  There is no “almost as good”, okay people.  We should make the towers just as big, if not bigger, than the original buildings.

  15. Malcolmmehaffey says:

    “One building” that’s “Almost as big”?  That doesn’t come close to the TTs.