Time To Scrap Arad’s Billion-Dollar Memorial

Bloomberg, May 2006

Michael Arad conceived a compelling image of loss for the memorial at Ground Zero: torrents of water pouring into two apparently bottomless voids in the outline of the vanished World Trade Center towers. His memorial, which officials have touted as the centerpiece of the trade-center rebuilding project, has been priced at nearly a billion dollars, double what the World Trade Center Memorial Foundation thought it would cost.

Arad planned long ramps that would gradually take the visitor out of the bustle of the city and down into two vast galleries. He planned to inscribe the names of those who died on low parapets backed by those shimmering veils of water.

Although Arad’s work has been heavily doctored already, the ramps and underground galleries may not survive the cost-cutting chainsaw that prudence demands. Hacking apart what’s left of the design no doubt contributed to the resignation of Gretchen Dykstra, President & CEO of the World Trade Center Memorial Foundation on May 26. Instead of gutting the original, it’s time to scrap the design and start over.

Politically, this is unthinkable, but time will not be kind to a conception so out of proportion to what it commemorates.

As the memorial has leaped in cost, its commemorative possibilities have shrunk. In the immediate aftermath of the September 11 horror, a memorial seemed to promise that life would go on, that we would not let our essential values be rattled by an enemy who was willing to sacrifice innocents for an inchoate goal.

The moral clarity that defined the months after September 11 has been replaced by the quandaries of the War on Terror and the quagmire of Iraq. Since it is too soon to know the outcome of events set in motion by the attacks, the memorial has become symbolically introverted, defined strictly as a commemoration of the surviving families’ grief and an expiation of the nation’s failures to protect lives on our own soil.

The very officials who are shocked, shocked, at the price tag bear considerable responsibility for it. A steep cost became inevitable when politicians acceded to the early clamor to define the entire footprints of both towers as sacred ground.

It is understandable that people who lost loved ones would want some tangible representation of the towers to remain. Clearly, no one at the Port Authority or Lower Manhattan Development Corporation was willing to discuss the costs that would result by devoting almost half the trade center site to the memorial -- about the same acreage as the World War II Memorial in Washington.

Instead, officials said yes to calls for the sacred precinct to grow even more, adding the slurry wall at the edge of the site and the stubs of columns that supported the towers. An underground museum, 70,000 square feet at about $100 million, was tacked onto Arad’s design. Since the Freedom Center was unceremoniously axed last year, the governor has asked the legislature to approve $80 million for a 60,000 square foot ``visitor center’’ to replace it. What purpose the center would serve has not been disclosed.

Some of the items tucked into the estimate by the construction management firm Bovis Lend Lease scream boondoggle. We need to know why a cooling plant, at $71.5 million, costs the same as a public school. We need to know why a ``vehicle screening center’’ - truck-bomb-sniffing devices and a bus-parking area -- costs almost half a billion.

And on and on. These are Pentagon procurement-scandal numbers. By the way, the figures don’t include an endowment to run the memorial, which, conservatively, must total at least $800 million.

So what to do? Drop the visitor center, because no one connected with it has even offered justification for its existence. Then kill the museum, which, in its latest incarnation is a combination chamber of horrors and disaster thrill-ride. There are many museums in the city that could do a perfectly good job of telling the story of the disaster from many perspectives by using the artifacts that have been preserved.

What we need now is a memorial scaled to honor the fallen of 9/11 and that can look at the tragedy’s ramifications for the future -- to the extent we know them. That is a tall enough order. It is worth considering a design that can be built quickly and need not be regarded as permanent.

Erect an elegant temporary footbridge running toward the river, for example. It would restore connections severed by the World Trade Center’s construction, and create opportunities for residents and visitors to contemplate the excavated site. Like Santiago Calatrava’s winglike rail-station entrance, the form of the bridge could inspire and commemorate.

A temporary memorial could be superseded in a few years, as grief over September 11 melds with the emerging meaning of what comes after. There’s no reason it could not someday remember the sacrifice Americans have made in Iraq, Afghanistan, and perhaps elsewhere -- in the name of 9/11.

Most important, the memorial must be funded privately, demonstrating that it has the support of the American people. Congress long ago required that national memorials on the Washington Mall be privately funded and endowed. At the moment, $130 million of private contributions have been committed to the trade-center memorial, which is actually quite impressive. Nothing really justifies spending more.

For more information about the World Trade Center Memorial, contact the Lower Manhattan Development Corporation (www.renewnyc.org) and the World Trade Center Memorial Foundation (www.buildthememorial.org)

Home Hot Topic Articles Books Consulting About JSR
	Time To Scrap Arad’s Billion-Dollar Memorial Bloomberg, May 2006 Michael Arad conceived a compelling image of loss for the memorial at Ground Zero: torrents of water pouring into two apparently bottomless voids in the outline of the vanished World Trade Center towers. His memorial, which officials have touted as the centerpiece of the trade-center rebuilding project, has been priced at nearly a billion dollars, double what the World Trade Center Memorial Foundation thought it would cost. Arad planned long ramps that would gradually take the visitor out of the bustle of the city and down into two vast galleries. He planned to inscribe the names of those who died on low parapets backed by those shimmering veils of water. Although Arad’s work has been heavily doctored already, the ramps and underground galleries may not survive the cost-cutting chainsaw that prudence demands. Hacking apart what’s left of the design no doubt contributed to the resignation of Gretchen Dykstra, President & CEO of the World Trade Center Memorial Foundation on May 26. Instead of gutting the original, it’s time to scrap the design and start over. Politically, this is unthinkable, but time will not be kind to a conception so out of proportion to what it commemorates. As the memorial has leaped in cost, its commemorative possibilities have shrunk. In the immediate aftermath of the September 11 horror, a memorial seemed to promise that life would go on, that we would not let our essential values be rattled by an enemy who was willing to sacrifice innocents for an inchoate goal. The moral clarity that defined the months after September 11 has been replaced by the quandaries of the War on Terror and the quagmire of Iraq. Since it is too soon to know the outcome of events set in motion by the attacks, the memorial has become symbolically introverted, defined strictly as a commemoration of the surviving families’ grief and an expiation of the nation’s failures to protect lives on our own soil. The very officials who are shocked, shocked, at the price tag bear considerable responsibility for it. A steep cost became inevitable when politicians acceded to the early clamor to define the entire footprints of both towers as sacred ground. It is understandable that people who lost loved ones would want some tangible representation of the towers to remain. Clearly, no one at the Port Authority or Lower Manhattan Development Corporation was willing to discuss the costs that would result by devoting almost half the trade center site to the memorial -- about the same acreage as the World War II Memorial in Washington. Instead, officials said yes to calls for the sacred precinct to grow even more, adding the slurry wall at the edge of the site and the stubs of columns that supported the towers. An underground museum, 70,000 square feet at about $100 million, was tacked onto Arad’s design. Since the Freedom Center was unceremoniously axed last year, the governor has asked the legislature to approve $80 million for a 60,000 square foot ``visitor center’’ to replace it. What purpose the center would serve has not been disclosed. Some of the items tucked into the estimate by the construction management firm Bovis Lend Lease scream boondoggle. We need to know why a cooling plant, at $71.5 million, costs the same as a public school. We need to know why a ``vehicle screening center’’ - truck-bomb-sniffing devices and a bus-parking area -- costs almost half a billion. And on and on. These are Pentagon procurement-scandal numbers. By the way, the figures don’t include an endowment to run the memorial, which, conservatively, must total at least $800 million. So what to do? Drop the visitor center, because no one connected with it has even offered justification for its existence. Then kill the museum, which, in its latest incarnation is a combination chamber of horrors and disaster thrill-ride. There are many museums in the city that could do a perfectly good job of telling the story of the disaster from many perspectives by using the artifacts that have been preserved. What we need now is a memorial scaled to honor the fallen of 9/11 and that can look at the tragedy’s ramifications for the future -- to the extent we know them. That is a tall enough order. It is worth considering a design that can be built quickly and need not be regarded as permanent. Erect an elegant temporary footbridge running toward the river, for example. It would restore connections severed by the World Trade Center’s construction, and create opportunities for residents and visitors to contemplate the excavated site. Like Santiago Calatrava’s winglike rail-station entrance, the form of the bridge could inspire and commemorate. A temporary memorial could be superseded in a few years, as grief over September 11 melds with the emerging meaning of what comes after. There’s no reason it could not someday remember the sacrifice Americans have made in Iraq, Afghanistan, and perhaps elsewhere -- in the name of 9/11. Most important, the memorial must be funded privately, demonstrating that it has the support of the American people. Congress long ago required that national memorials on the Washington Mall be privately funded and endowed. At the moment, $130 million of private contributions have been committed to the trade-center memorial, which is actually quite impressive. Nothing really justifies spending more. For more information about the World Trade Center Memorial, contact the Lower Manhattan Development Corporation (www.renewnyc.org) and the World Trade Center Memorial Foundation (www.buildthememorial.org)
© copyright 2006 James S. Russell \| terms