"It's truly the most vulgar thing I have ever seen in my entire life," said Jennie Farrell, whose brother James, 26, an electrician, died on the 105th floor of the south tower.
"To call it art is reprehensible, and to place it at Ground Zero is committing a second criminal act against our dead," she added.
"It's offensive, it's America-bashing, it's a despicable insult to the families of people defending us in Iraq, and I'm sick and tired of it," said Jack Lynch, who helped carry the body of his firefighter son Michael, 30, out of the rubble.
"On 9/11, the families were violated by terrorists. Now we're being violated all over again, and it brings 9/11 right back home to each of us."
congratulations to our friend and jersey city artist amy
wilson for stirring up some real shit on the front page of the daily news!
NYTimes' coverage
Holland Cotter on the same day
(o, and unrelated, but then again not really, an opinion piece written by none other than the me myself and I man, Libeskind
By PATRICK D. HEALY
Published: June 25, 2005
Gov. George E. Pataki delivered an ultimatum to two important cultural players at ground zero yesterday, demanding "an absolute guarantee" that they would not mount exhibitions that could offend 9/11 families and pilgrims to a proposed memorial nearby.
Enlarge This Image
Fred R. Conrad/The New York Times
Demonstrators, including about 200 relatives of Sept. 11 victims, at ground zero on Monday to protest a planned museum near the 9/11 memorial.
Museum Building
Where Drawing Is What Counts (June 25, 2005)
Enlarge This Image
Associated Press
The museum model for the International Freedom Center and the Drawing Center. Some art at the Drawing Center has been criticized.
Treading warily into the nexus of art and politics, the First Amendment and the symbolism of the twin towers site, Mr. Pataki made the demand after learning that one of the groups, the Drawing Center, has featured some politically themed and controversial artwork in its shows. A current display at its SoHo gallery, for instance, appears to make light of President Bush's description of Iraq, Iran and North Korea as the Axis of Evil.
While saying that he respected artistic expression, Mr. Pataki invoked the solemnity of past battlegrounds in promising to preserve the hallowed ground in Lower Manhattan and ensure that no one will come away feeling offended by the reborn site.
"I view that memorial site as sacred grounds, akin to the beaches of Normandy or Pearl Harbor, and we will not tolerate anything on that site that denigrates America, denigrates New York or freedom, or denigrates the sacrifice or courage that the heroes showed on Sept. 11," Mr. Pataki told reporters in Albany.
Referring to the two cultural groups, he continued, "They have to do that, or they will not be at the memorial site - to the extent that I have the ability to do that." As governor, Mr. Pataki appoints members to oversight boards for ground zero's redevelopment, and after more than a decade in office, he almost certainly has the allies and the clout to change course and block cultural institutions from the site.
Mr. Pataki's demand, which was denounced by several arts groups and Democrats as a violation of free speech, is the latest episode in a series of public disputes and flash points for the redevelopment of Lower Manhattan. Last month Mr. Pataki ordered a redesign of the 1,776-foot Freedom Tower to address security concerns that New York City police officials said had at first been ignored. Mayor Michael R. Bloomberg said yesterday that there would be an announcement next week about the redesign.
At the same time, several relatives of Sept. 11 victims have complained increasingly about the location at the memorial site of the proposed cultural center for the two groups, the Drawing Center and the nonprofit International Freedom Center. Commentary in some New York City newspapers has also been warning that both organizations may mount exhibitions that could be seen as anti-American, and yesterday The Daily News published a front-page headline, "Draw the Line, Now!" about incendiary artwork at the Drawing Center.
In a quickly drafted response to Mr. Pataki's remarks later yesterday, the Drawing Center acknowledged the "inevitable tensions" between the state's goals of remembrance and cultural activity at the site, and promised to try to resolve them.
"The dilemmas raised by this juxtaposition are challenging for all responsible parties," the center, a small SoHo museum, said in a statement. But it added, "Clearly, the Drawing Center, like any other cultural institution, has a responsibility to adhere to its mission."
Tom A. Bernstein, a founder of the Freedom Center, said he shared Mr. Pataki's determination to preserve the sanctity of the memorial site.
"Our programming must, and will, respect those lost on Sept. 11, and honor the country we all love," Mr. Bernstein said.
A spokesman for the governor, David Catalfamo, said Mr. Pataki was "horrified" by The News's examples of Drawing Center artwork that seemed to mock President Bush and depict torture at the Abu Ghraib prison; at least one example, however, predated Sept. 11.
"The Drawing Center is only tentatively selected, and they don't have any contractual rights," Mr. Catalfamo said of the center's claims on space at ground zero. "But I hope they make the effort to figure this thing out."
Mr. Pataki's ultimatum drew criticism from some arts groups and Democrats, who called it a violation of free speech.
"It's extremely inappropriate and wrong to have any censorship of what a cultural institution that's there would provide," said Tom Healy, president of the Lower Manhattan Cultural Council, an advocacy organization. "That's just anti-American."
Museum Building
Where Drawing Is What Counts (June 25, 2005)
Several relatives of those who died in the terrorist attacks were contemptuous of the governor's strategy, saying they did not trust the cultural groups and were skeptical that state officials could act as artistic arbiters in the victims' interests.
"This kind of ploy completely undermines our confidence in the governor's ability to do the right thing, or even know what the right thing is," said Debra Burlingame, a member of the World Trade Center Memorial Foundation, whose brother, Charles F. Burlingame III, was a pilot of the hijacked American Airlines Flight 77, which crashed into the Pentagon.
"The Freedom Center personnel have already assured us they will be respectful while they are making plans to be disrespectful," she added.
Ms. Burlingame said she was mistrustful of Freedom Center executives because "they claim they met with family members, and that we were part of the process, but we've been stonewalled," she said. "We were told this was going to be a Sept. 11 museum, and then we learned it's going to be a freedom museum," with human rights advocates and academics included as advisers.
In a June 8 opinion column in The Wall Street Journal, Ms. Burlingame wrote that "the I.F.C. is getting 300,000 square feet of space to teach us how to think about liberty," while the memorial center "will get a meager 50,000 square feet to exhibit its 9/11 artifacts, all out of sight and underground."
In the column she accused some organizers and consultants at the Freedom Center of a blame-America bias, igniting a movement to remove the proposed cultural building altogether. About 200 relatives of victims attended a protest rally at ground zero on Monday, and thousands of signatories have lodged complaints on takebackthememorial.com, a Web site.
Aides to Mr. Pataki said he was upset with officials at the Lower Manhattan Development Corporation for not vetting the Drawing Center's history of exhibitions more closely. Yet the fact that officials appeared caught unawares reflects the difficulty of policing artwork and judging its potential to offend untold sensibilities and psyches.
The governor's aide, Mr. Catalfamo, said the Lower Manhattan Development Corporation would conduct talks "rather expeditiously" to gain compliance from the two cultural groups. A spokeswoman for the corporation, Joanna Rose, declined comment other than to say that officials would work to carry out the governor's directive.
At his own news conference yesterday, Mayor Michael R. Bloomberg appeared to wrestle with his own sense of obligation to the site, to the governor and to First Amendment principles.
"The problem is, of course, that you can probably not find any reputable cultural institution any place in the world where some of what they display or do would be appropriate there, but not appropriate at this site," he said. "And so the balance has got to be, and the challenge for the curators is going to be: given the context of where these cultural institutions are, what's appropriate here?"
Mr. Pataki, when pressed on the matter of freedom of expression at the Freedom Center, said he strongly supported "the ability of people to say what they want, so long as it meets the standards of not shouting 'fire' in a crowded theater." But he said there was a singular line to draw at ground zero.
"Not at that site," he said.
"Not at that site," he said.
What does protesting US torture at Abu Ghraib prison have to do with 9/11? As much as the Iraq war did, which is to say, nothing.
but mr. moody, laura bush tells me it is okay if I don’t know the difference between Iraq and Iran (let alone Afghanistan)! Erg!
What was it called under giuliani? The “decency committee”? this is way beyond, far far and away.
NYTimes editorial today
"It is no contradiction to hope that ground zero will become a place that commemorates death and reaffirms life at the same time. But it will be the worst of bad beginnings to turn it into a place where only grief is acceptable, where the vital impulses represented by the arts are handcuffed in the name of freedom."
Freedom and Ground Zero
E-Mail This
Printer-Friendly
Published: June 27, 2005
Gov. George Pataki's decision to side with increasingly vocal critics of the cultural plans for the World Trade Center site is not surprising, but it is alarming. The governor has been deeply and rightly sensitive to the concerns of the families of the victims of 9/11. Like all of us, he honors their loss and their grief. But by bowing to some of the survivors' growing hostility to any version of 9/11 except their own, Mr. Pataki is doing a disservice to history and to the very idea of freedom.
Forum: Today's Editorials
The protesters have objected to the proposed International Freedom Center, which they fear might someday sponsor discussions that cast America in a negative light, and to the Drawing Center, one of the cultural institutions invited to move to ground zero, which has displayed art that appears to criticize the Bush administration and the war in Iraq.
The protesters - and the governor - seem to have little faith in the emotional power of the memorial to the victims, which will be the central focus of ground zero, emotionally, politically and architecturally. The memorial's force will not be diminished by any other activities at the site, and it will inevitably serve as a locus of grief and remembrance for everyone who was touched by 9/11. But it is meant to remember something more than a day of tragedy. It's meant to remember the lives of those who died there, lives that were rich, complex and politically and culturally divided.
What those lives stand for now is American freedom, in its full implication and all its contradictions. That is what has gone missing in the governor's remarks, in which he demanded that the cultural organizations promise never to display art that might "denigrate" the victims of 9/11 or America in general. Mr. Pataki has accepted at face value the tenor of the protests at ground zero, which are, frankly, a call for censorship, indeed for censorship in advance - for political oversight of an artistic process that has only begun to evolve.
It is no contradiction to hope that ground zero will become a place that commemorates death and reaffirms life at the same time. But it will be the worst of bad beginnings to turn it into a place where only grief is acceptable, where the vital impulses represented by the arts are handcuffed in the name of freedom.
wow / thx selma
on the Freedom-Tower-front:
this is ridiculous in so many ways. The new Fort Freedom, two hundred feet of concrete base, but thank goodness still 1,776 feet high. ugh.
NYT"The new obelisk-shaped tower, which stands on an enormous 20-story concrete pedestal, evokes a gigantic glass paperweight with a toothpick stuck on top. (The toothpicklike spire was added so that the tower would reach its required height of 1,776 feet.)"
And from Kamin:
Yet there are problems aplenty. They begin with the fortresslike base and Childs' idea that the skyscraper, with its office tower perched atop its pedestal base, can take its formal cues from ancient victory columns, such as Trajan's Column in Rome, a roughly 100-foot-tall marble column set on large pedestal. The enormous expansion in scale, from modest-size column to monumental skyscraper, renders that comparison ludicrous.
True, the base's glistening metal panels (they may be titanium or stainless steel) would conceal the massive concrete walls behind it. But this "drapery," as the architects call it, will not mask the building's startling lack of transparency at ground level. Glassy entrances for the offices, the observation deck and a new restaurant, which will replace the twin towers' Windows on the World, will help, but only so much. There would be no windows in the first 30 feet of the base and only small windows above. The design does not achieve a satisfactory balance between security and openness.
And despite Libeskind's praise, the Freedom Tower's skyline presence is dignified, but hardly stirring. While the tower's triangular facets should create a constantly shifting presence in the light, its summit seems awkwardly plopped atop the tower's shaft, like a World's Fair folly set incongruously above a sober skyscraper. The spire itself is a pale echo of the mighty Art Deco mooring mast atop the Empire State or the dazzling stainless steel arches that crown the Chrysler.
freedom bunker? here are some other links relating to this manufactured (read: fake/false) scandal :
take back the memorial
911 families for america
wizbang
criticalmontages
little green footballs
john haber
matt taibbi
The Taibbi piece is good, I just wish he'd mentioned protesting Abu Ghraib torture had squat to do with 9/11.
Editorial today:
http://www.nydailynews.com/07-05-2005/news/ideas_opinions/story/325191p-277978c.html
written by "Garbus, a partner at Davis & Gilbert, is a noted First Amendment lawyer"
George is fooling himself
1st Amendment will bar government
from controlling art at Ground Zero
Gov. Pataki says he won't allow the showing at Ground Zero of anti-Bush, anti-Iraq war pictures, including photos or drawings portraying the hooded prisoners of Abu Ghraib.
The move is wrongheaded. And illegal.
The First Amendment forbids him from prohibiting the artworks, which show the world the vitality of American democracy. Even on this hallowed ground, some Americans tell the world that there is room for dissent, that Sept. 11, 2001, may not be related to the war in Iraq, that America may have acted badly at Guantanamo.
Neither the governor nor any other official can make it a condition for the Drawing Center to obtain permission from the state before showcasing certain art.
That's censorship.
The answer to speech you disagree with is more speech - speech you agree with. If the Drawing Center or some other museum wants to exhibit art that supports the war, that claims all those who oppose the war are traitors, that Muslims are inferior to Christians, they should be permitted to do that as well. Pataki may say no, but the First Amendment says they can.
Pataki claims the Drawing Center's art is not "respectful" of either those who died on Sept. 11 or in Iraq. On the contrary: The art represents a country like few others, where every viewpoint can be expressed - even at the places where they may be hardest to hear. This is the essence of our Constitution, our First Amendment.
There is a great deal of anti-Muslim, pro-war propaganda - from television recruiting spots to evangelical pulpit pounding. It will inevitably appear in one form or another at the cultural centers at Ground Zero.
Pataki's wrongheadedness is worse than that of former Mayor Rudy Giuliani, who tried to stop artists he disagreed with from being shown in the Brooklyn Museum. Giuliani and Pataki use the same words - the art is offensive and disgusting. Americans are not so timid and undiscerning that they cannot accept what they like and reject what they disagree with. Pataki should have more confidence in democracy and in the citizens of this democracy.
The business of democracy is often messy and unpleasant. As David Halberstam recently wrote, "The ability of unlikable people to do things that most of us don't approve of and to say things most of us would just as soon not hear protects in the long run the rights of all of us, rights that are vital to the continuation of freedom in a large, diverse, pluralistic society."
If you cannot speak (or draw or dance or write) freely, then you stop thinking freely. That freedom to think, to be wrong, but to think about a problem - political, scientific, cultural - from all different angles is essential. Once you take that away from us, you cripple the society. The First Amendment safeguards against crushing creativity, against crushing our differences.
We must honor the dead by honoring America.
Garbus, a partner at Davis & Gilbert, is a noted First Amendment lawyer.
Originally published on July 5, 2005
its amazing, freaking amazing that we are actually having this discussion. so much for the land of the free. welcome to whats the matter with kansas err america.
Is it as amazing as how the idea of 'separation of church and state" has evolved?! welcome back bill.
thanks selma. we're all in deep poop
LOL. at least we can smile once in a while.
Bill! Thank you, I finally got a chance to see this.
By the way, this is an absolutely excellent article:
http://www.nynewsday.com/news/opinion/nyc-opcam104336643jul10,0,3529731.stor
y?coll=nyc-viewpoints-headlines
What's the deal with NY Newsday? They've been really good through this whole thing - printing editorials in support of freedom of speech, generally not climbing on the stupid bandwagon, and now this.
artnet calls for a retreat from ground zero for the drawing center : At present, Drawing Center president George Negroponte remains firmly committed to the move. But he has only lukewarm support from his board, according to insiders, and the Drawing Center staff, including director Catherine de Zegher, is said to be less than thrilled at the prospect of leaping into the Ground Zero political maelstrom (aside from the obvious uncertainties of programming for a large non-art audience, here are the difficulties with the design -- apparently, visitors to the Drawing Center would first have to traverse the International Freedom Center, the other museum planned for the site -- and the chore of raising millions of dollars for the new facility). "How can the museum program, or hire curators, under these conditions?" asked one source. A better question might be -- when will Negroponte see the light and send the moving vans back to the garage? isnt that letting the terrorists win?!
DRAWING CENTER RECONSIDERS MOVE TO GROUND ZERO
After coming under fire for showing -- gasp -- political art, the Drawing Center is reconsidering its plan to move to a new facility at Ground Zero, according to a report in Crain’s New York (and following a similar story published here last week). "We would never be able to accept censorship," said Drawing Center executive director Catherine de Zegher. In any case, according to the story, the Lower Manhattan Development Corporation, which is overseeing the site, has decided to raise the $350-million cost of a 100,000-square-foot World Trade Center memorial before moving on plans for a museum and performing arts complex.
It almost goes without saying that the controversy over the Drawing Center’s "unpatriotic" art -- for details, see Artnet News, July 13, 2005 -- was entirely fabricated by the right-wing press. New York artist Amy Wilson, one of the primary targets of the attacks (for a work using an image from Abu Ghraib), said she was "disappointed" that the Drawing Center had not mounted a more vigorous defense of artistic freedom, especially on its website, which contains no trace of the controversial works. Following the fracas, Wilson herself posted an image of the entire painting in question, which is titled A Glimpse of What Life in a Free Country Could Be Like (2004). i dont understand this rolling over and playing dead routine. since when is that an acceptable approach.
Drawing Center May Drop Plan to Move to Ground Zero
>
By DAVID W. DUNLAP
nyt Published: July 23, 2005
A year after being chosen as one of the cultural anchors on the World Trade Center site, but now embroiled in a controversy over what it might exhibit there, the Drawing Center may end up elsewhere in Lower Manhattan.
Chester Higgins Jr./The New York Times
Anita F. Contini, Lower Manhattan Development Corporation's former vice president and director for memorial, cultural and civic programs.
"The prospect of operating on the World Trade Center site is not off the table," Stefan Pryor, the president of the Lower Manhattan Development Corporation, said yesterday. "But we are actively exploring a variety of options downtown for the Drawing Center."
George Negroponte, the president of the Drawing Center, a small art museum at 35 Wooster Street in SoHo, said: "What we are looking to do is find a new home for the Drawing Center as close to the site as possible, because we believe in it. At the same time, obviously we're concerned that we're living in a fishbowl and the pressures we're continuing to feel about our programming might be too much to bear."
The plan to house the Drawing Center and the International Freedom Center in a building at Fulton and Greenwich Streets has come under fire in the last month by relatives of 9/11 victims and other critics who question the appropriateness of their presence in a quadrant of the site set aside for a memorial. The objections have centered on the possibility that there would be anti-American artwork or programs.
On June 24, Gov. George E. Pataki demanded that the Lower Manhattan Development Corporation obtain a guarantee from the institutions that they not mount exhibitions that would offend victims' family members or other visitors. "We will not tolerate anything on that site that denigrates America," he said at the time.
Two weeks later, the International Freedom Center pledged in a letter to Mr. Pryor: "We will not 'blame America' or attack champions of freedom. Any suggestion that we will feature anti-American programming is wrong. We are proud patriots."
Among the possible new locations for all or some of the Drawing Center's programs, Mr. Pryor said, were areas in the trade center site outside the memorial quadrant bounded by Fulton, Greenwich, Liberty and West Streets.
Were the Drawing Center to move out of the planned building designed by Snohetta, that might help reduce the volume of the structure, which has been criticized for looming too closely over the voids in the memorial that are to mark the twin towers' footprints.
But Mr. Pryor said the building's size could be reduced in other ways and that the desired shrinkage would not dictate the Drawing Center's location. Both he and Mr. Negroponte emphasized that their discussions had been cooperative and constructive.
Mr. Pryor also said that there was no connection between the current controversy and the resignation of Anita F. Contini, the corporation's vice president and director for memorial, cultural and civic programs. He said she had achieved the jobs she was charged with when she joined the corporation in 2002: selecting a memorial design, selecting the cultural institutions and securing support for cultural groups downtown.
Last week, Anne Papageorge was appointed senior vice president of the corporation for memorial and cultural development.
In an e-mail message to friends and colleagues on Thursday, Ms. Contini said she was leaving to become the senior vice president and director of corporate and public affairs for the CIT Group, a finance company, beginning after Labor Day. "I don't have a single regret," she said yesterday in a telephone interview. "My job is really done."
While praising Ms. Contini personally, critics of the redevelopment process said they believed her departure was almost inevitable.
"The governor is the final decision-maker," said Jack Lynch, whose son Michael, a firefighter, died in the south tower. "All these people are in a very difficult position because they have to put his agenda into effect and follow whatever direction they're getting."
Critics Call for Boycott of Memorial Fund-Raising
By DAVID W. DUNLAP nyt
Published: July 26, 2005
In the ever fiercer fight over a year-old plan to build a home for the Drawing Center and the International Freedom Center alongside the World Trade Center memorial, some relatives of 9/11 victims called yesterday for a fund-raising boycott.
"We urge you to not donate to the World Trade Center memorial until the I.F.C. and the Drawing Center are eliminated from the memorial plans," said "An Open Letter to the American People." The letter appeared on a Web site, Take Back the Memorial, until questions arose over how many of the 14 relatives' groups that were signed to the letter had approved the use of their names.
Despite that withdrawal, critics of the cultural plan - including two members of the World Trade Center Memorial Foundation, which is charged with soliciting contributions - said the freedom center had to be removed before they would support the use of public money for the overall project. Opponents have objected in advance to what they say will be an anti-American bias to the center's offerings, a charge that the center has just as strongly rejected.
"We owe it to the American people or anyone else who wants to donate to tell them what they're paying for and not mislead them," said Debra Burlingame, a foundation board member and one of the letter's authors. She said financing for the memorial would be intermingled with that for the building at Fulton and Greenwich Streets that is intended to house the International Freedom Center and the Drawing Center.
The assertion was disputed by Lynn Rasic, the vice president for public affairs at the foundation. "The first fund-raising efforts are devoted to the memorial and the museum dedicated to Sept. 11," she said.
"It's unfortunate and wrong to block efforts to make sure that our nation and the world remember those we lost during the attacks," Ms. Rasic said.
Asked whether it was a conflict of interest for board members to urge prospective donors to withhold support, Ms. Rasic said any potential conflicts would be reviewed by the governance committee.
Monica Iken, a board member and the founder of September's Mission, which supports the development of a memorial, said she had not approved the use of her group's name on the letter. "I never signed off on anything like that," she said yesterday.
"I have an obligation to fund-raise for the memorial," she added.
But Ms. Burlingame said her objections were in line with her fiduciary responsibilities as a board member. "You can't go out to the public and say, 'We're raising $500 million,' and not tell them they're building on the same site a building so large it will dwarf the memorial," she said.
Lee Ielpi, another member of the foundation board, is also vice president of the September 11th Families Association, which was listed as supporting the open letter.
"I'm fully comfortable asking Americans who shared our sorrow and came to help us in the worst of times to help us honor our dead and the sacrifice they made," he said. "I am not comfortable asking them to play a role in a political, economic or ideological passion play whose ending has yet to be written. I believe the freedom center is a bad idea."
Robert D. Shurbet, the founder of Take Back the Memorial (takebackthememorial.org), said that the open letter was a draft that had been "posted prematurely" and that the link to it was removed "pending final approval" by the relatives' groups.
As to the larger issue of the cultural organizations, Stefan Pryor, the president of the Lower Manhattan Development Corporation, said officials were having "continuing conversations with the two institutions regarding their response" to concerns raised by Gov. George E. Pataki. On June 24, the governor asked for an "absolute guarantee" that programs on the site not denigrate America or offend victims' families.
Eric Foner, the DeWitt Clinton professor of history at Columbia University, resigned from the freedom center's committee of scholars and advisers this month, after a letter from the center to Mr. Pryor that tried to address those concerns. News of his resignation was reported on Saturday in The New York Post.
Alternative locations for the Drawing Center on and off the trade center site are already being explored.
Editorial nyt
A Sense of Proportion at Ground Zero
Published: July 29, 2005
Somewhere in the ill-conceived campaign to "take back the memorial" at ground zero, false impressions have managed to triumph over facts. This week, Debra Burlingame, a board member of the World Trade Center Memorial Foundation, and others called for a boycott of fund-raising for the memorial until the International Freedom Center and the Drawing Center have been banished from ground zero. She argues that money for the memorial will be intermingled with funds for the cultural building that is supposed to house the Freedom Center and the Drawing Center. This is both misleading and harmful to the memorial itself. The World Trade Center Memorial Foundation has pledged that its first priority is to build the memorial and create an endowment for it. Private donors are free to specify how they choose to have their money spent.
The attacks on the International Freedom Center - and, more broadly, on the cultural component of Daniel Libeskind's master plan - make it all too easy to forget the existence of a Memorial Museum that is devoted wholly to the events of 9/11. Opponents of the Freedom Center, like Ms. Burlingame, claim that the Memorial Museum will be dwarfed by the cultural center. In fact, they overstate the size of the Snohetta building, which is being scaled back for other reasons, and they have exaggerated the floor space allotted there for the International Freedom Center. They also make it sound as if the Memorial Museum, which at 50,000 square feet is larger than the public spaces in the Whitney Museum, is somehow an afterthought relegated to the basement. It will be built underground, but that is because the 9/11 families asked to have access to the bedrock and to what remains of the foundation of the twin towers. To argue over the size of these two spaces is to assume that emotional power is solely the result of square footage. It is also to forget the profound effect that going to the roots of the World Trade Center will have on most visitors.
But this is not really a campaign about money or space. It is a campaign about political purity - about how people remember 9/11 and about how we choose to read its aftermath, including the Iraq war. On their Web site, www.takebackthememorial.org, critics of the cultural plan at ground zero offer a resolution called Campaign America. It says that ground zero must contain no facilities "that house controversial debate, dialogue, artistic impressions, or exhibits referring to extraneous historical events." This, to us, sounds un-American.
|
congratulations to our friend and jersey city artist amy
wilson for stirring up some real shit on the front page of the daily news!
- bill 6-25-2005 9:24 pm
NYTimes' coverage
Holland Cotter on the same day
(o, and unrelated, but then again not really, an opinion piece written by none other than the me myself and I man, Libeskind
- selma 6-27-2005 1:34 am [add a comment]
By PATRICK D. HEALY
Published: June 25, 2005
Gov. George E. Pataki delivered an ultimatum to two important cultural players at ground zero yesterday, demanding "an absolute guarantee" that they would not mount exhibitions that could offend 9/11 families and pilgrims to a proposed memorial nearby.
Enlarge This Image
Fred R. Conrad/The New York Times
Demonstrators, including about 200 relatives of Sept. 11 victims, at ground zero on Monday to protest a planned museum near the 9/11 memorial.
Museum Building
Where Drawing Is What Counts (June 25, 2005)
Enlarge This Image
Associated Press
The museum model for the International Freedom Center and the Drawing Center. Some art at the Drawing Center has been criticized.
Treading warily into the nexus of art and politics, the First Amendment and the symbolism of the twin towers site, Mr. Pataki made the demand after learning that one of the groups, the Drawing Center, has featured some politically themed and controversial artwork in its shows. A current display at its SoHo gallery, for instance, appears to make light of President Bush's description of Iraq, Iran and North Korea as the Axis of Evil.
While saying that he respected artistic expression, Mr. Pataki invoked the solemnity of past battlegrounds in promising to preserve the hallowed ground in Lower Manhattan and ensure that no one will come away feeling offended by the reborn site.
"I view that memorial site as sacred grounds, akin to the beaches of Normandy or Pearl Harbor, and we will not tolerate anything on that site that denigrates America, denigrates New York or freedom, or denigrates the sacrifice or courage that the heroes showed on Sept. 11," Mr. Pataki told reporters in Albany.
Referring to the two cultural groups, he continued, "They have to do that, or they will not be at the memorial site - to the extent that I have the ability to do that." As governor, Mr. Pataki appoints members to oversight boards for ground zero's redevelopment, and after more than a decade in office, he almost certainly has the allies and the clout to change course and block cultural institutions from the site.
Mr. Pataki's demand, which was denounced by several arts groups and Democrats as a violation of free speech, is the latest episode in a series of public disputes and flash points for the redevelopment of Lower Manhattan. Last month Mr. Pataki ordered a redesign of the 1,776-foot Freedom Tower to address security concerns that New York City police officials said had at first been ignored. Mayor Michael R. Bloomberg said yesterday that there would be an announcement next week about the redesign.
At the same time, several relatives of Sept. 11 victims have complained increasingly about the location at the memorial site of the proposed cultural center for the two groups, the Drawing Center and the nonprofit International Freedom Center. Commentary in some New York City newspapers has also been warning that both organizations may mount exhibitions that could be seen as anti-American, and yesterday The Daily News published a front-page headline, "Draw the Line, Now!" about incendiary artwork at the Drawing Center.
In a quickly drafted response to Mr. Pataki's remarks later yesterday, the Drawing Center acknowledged the "inevitable tensions" between the state's goals of remembrance and cultural activity at the site, and promised to try to resolve them.
"The dilemmas raised by this juxtaposition are challenging for all responsible parties," the center, a small SoHo museum, said in a statement. But it added, "Clearly, the Drawing Center, like any other cultural institution, has a responsibility to adhere to its mission."
Tom A. Bernstein, a founder of the Freedom Center, said he shared Mr. Pataki's determination to preserve the sanctity of the memorial site.
"Our programming must, and will, respect those lost on Sept. 11, and honor the country we all love," Mr. Bernstein said.
A spokesman for the governor, David Catalfamo, said Mr. Pataki was "horrified" by The News's examples of Drawing Center artwork that seemed to mock President Bush and depict torture at the Abu Ghraib prison; at least one example, however, predated Sept. 11.
"The Drawing Center is only tentatively selected, and they don't have any contractual rights," Mr. Catalfamo said of the center's claims on space at ground zero. "But I hope they make the effort to figure this thing out."
Mr. Pataki's ultimatum drew criticism from some arts groups and Democrats, who called it a violation of free speech.
"It's extremely inappropriate and wrong to have any censorship of what a cultural institution that's there would provide," said Tom Healy, president of the Lower Manhattan Cultural Council, an advocacy organization. "That's just anti-American."
Museum Building
Where Drawing Is What Counts (June 25, 2005)
Several relatives of those who died in the terrorist attacks were contemptuous of the governor's strategy, saying they did not trust the cultural groups and were skeptical that state officials could act as artistic arbiters in the victims' interests.
"This kind of ploy completely undermines our confidence in the governor's ability to do the right thing, or even know what the right thing is," said Debra Burlingame, a member of the World Trade Center Memorial Foundation, whose brother, Charles F. Burlingame III, was a pilot of the hijacked American Airlines Flight 77, which crashed into the Pentagon.
"The Freedom Center personnel have already assured us they will be respectful while they are making plans to be disrespectful," she added.
Ms. Burlingame said she was mistrustful of Freedom Center executives because "they claim they met with family members, and that we were part of the process, but we've been stonewalled," she said. "We were told this was going to be a Sept. 11 museum, and then we learned it's going to be a freedom museum," with human rights advocates and academics included as advisers.
In a June 8 opinion column in The Wall Street Journal, Ms. Burlingame wrote that "the I.F.C. is getting 300,000 square feet of space to teach us how to think about liberty," while the memorial center "will get a meager 50,000 square feet to exhibit its 9/11 artifacts, all out of sight and underground."
In the column she accused some organizers and consultants at the Freedom Center of a blame-America bias, igniting a movement to remove the proposed cultural building altogether. About 200 relatives of victims attended a protest rally at ground zero on Monday, and thousands of signatories have lodged complaints on takebackthememorial.com, a Web site.
Aides to Mr. Pataki said he was upset with officials at the Lower Manhattan Development Corporation for not vetting the Drawing Center's history of exhibitions more closely. Yet the fact that officials appeared caught unawares reflects the difficulty of policing artwork and judging its potential to offend untold sensibilities and psyches.
The governor's aide, Mr. Catalfamo, said the Lower Manhattan Development Corporation would conduct talks "rather expeditiously" to gain compliance from the two cultural groups. A spokeswoman for the corporation, Joanna Rose, declined comment other than to say that officials would work to carry out the governor's directive.
At his own news conference yesterday, Mayor Michael R. Bloomberg appeared to wrestle with his own sense of obligation to the site, to the governor and to First Amendment principles.
"The problem is, of course, that you can probably not find any reputable cultural institution any place in the world where some of what they display or do would be appropriate there, but not appropriate at this site," he said. "And so the balance has got to be, and the challenge for the curators is going to be: given the context of where these cultural institutions are, what's appropriate here?"
Mr. Pataki, when pressed on the matter of freedom of expression at the Freedom Center, said he strongly supported "the ability of people to say what they want, so long as it meets the standards of not shouting 'fire' in a crowded theater." But he said there was a singular line to draw at ground zero.
"Not at that site," he said.
- bill 7-02-2005 11:26 pm [add a comment]
- bill 7-02-2005 11:31 pm [add a comment]
What does protesting US torture at Abu Ghraib prison have to do with 9/11? As much as the Iraq war did, which is to say, nothing.
- tom moody 6-27-2005 2:43 am [add a comment]
but mr. moody, laura bush tells me it is okay if I don’t know the difference between Iraq and Iran (let alone Afghanistan)! Erg!
What was it called under giuliani? The “decency committee”? this is way beyond, far far and away.
- selma 6-27-2005 3:26 am [add a comment]
NYTimes editorial today
"It is no contradiction to hope that ground zero will become a place that commemorates death and reaffirms life at the same time. But it will be the worst of bad beginnings to turn it into a place where only grief is acceptable, where the vital impulses represented by the arts are handcuffed in the name of freedom."
- selma 6-27-2005 7:01 pm [add a comment]
Freedom and Ground Zero
E-Mail This
Printer-Friendly
Published: June 27, 2005
Gov. George Pataki's decision to side with increasingly vocal critics of the cultural plans for the World Trade Center site is not surprising, but it is alarming. The governor has been deeply and rightly sensitive to the concerns of the families of the victims of 9/11. Like all of us, he honors their loss and their grief. But by bowing to some of the survivors' growing hostility to any version of 9/11 except their own, Mr. Pataki is doing a disservice to history and to the very idea of freedom.
Forum: Today's Editorials
The protesters have objected to the proposed International Freedom Center, which they fear might someday sponsor discussions that cast America in a negative light, and to the Drawing Center, one of the cultural institutions invited to move to ground zero, which has displayed art that appears to criticize the Bush administration and the war in Iraq.
The protesters - and the governor - seem to have little faith in the emotional power of the memorial to the victims, which will be the central focus of ground zero, emotionally, politically and architecturally. The memorial's force will not be diminished by any other activities at the site, and it will inevitably serve as a locus of grief and remembrance for everyone who was touched by 9/11. But it is meant to remember something more than a day of tragedy. It's meant to remember the lives of those who died there, lives that were rich, complex and politically and culturally divided.
What those lives stand for now is American freedom, in its full implication and all its contradictions. That is what has gone missing in the governor's remarks, in which he demanded that the cultural organizations promise never to display art that might "denigrate" the victims of 9/11 or America in general. Mr. Pataki has accepted at face value the tenor of the protests at ground zero, which are, frankly, a call for censorship, indeed for censorship in advance - for political oversight of an artistic process that has only begun to evolve.
It is no contradiction to hope that ground zero will become a place that commemorates death and reaffirms life at the same time. But it will be the worst of bad beginnings to turn it into a place where only grief is acceptable, where the vital impulses represented by the arts are handcuffed in the name of freedom.
- bill 7-02-2005 11:39 pm [add a comment]
wow / thx selma
- bill 6-27-2005 8:19 pm [add a comment]
on the Freedom-Tower-front:
this is ridiculous in so many ways. The new Fort Freedom, two hundred feet of concrete base, but thank goodness still 1,776 feet high. ugh.
NYT"The new obelisk-shaped tower, which stands on an enormous 20-story concrete pedestal, evokes a gigantic glass paperweight with a toothpick stuck on top. (The toothpicklike spire was added so that the tower would reach its required height of 1,776 feet.)"
And from Kamin:
Yet there are problems aplenty. They begin with the fortresslike base and Childs' idea that the skyscraper, with its office tower perched atop its pedestal base, can take its formal cues from ancient victory columns, such as Trajan's Column in Rome, a roughly 100-foot-tall marble column set on large pedestal. The enormous expansion in scale, from modest-size column to monumental skyscraper, renders that comparison ludicrous.
True, the base's glistening metal panels (they may be titanium or stainless steel) would conceal the massive concrete walls behind it. But this "drapery," as the architects call it, will not mask the building's startling lack of transparency at ground level. Glassy entrances for the offices, the observation deck and a new restaurant, which will replace the twin towers' Windows on the World, will help, but only so much. There would be no windows in the first 30 feet of the base and only small windows above. The design does not achieve a satisfactory balance between security and openness.
And despite Libeskind's praise, the Freedom Tower's skyline presence is dignified, but hardly stirring. While the tower's triangular facets should create a constantly shifting presence in the light, its summit seems awkwardly plopped atop the tower's shaft, like a World's Fair folly set incongruously above a sober skyscraper. The spire itself is a pale echo of the mighty Art Deco mooring mast atop the Empire State or the dazzling stainless steel arches that crown the Chrysler.
- selma 7-01-2005 12:31 am [add a comment]
freedom bunker? here are some other links relating to this manufactured (read: fake/false) scandal :
take back the memorial
911 families for america
wizbang
criticalmontages
little green footballs
john haber
matt taibbi
- bill 7-02-2005 11:21 pm [add a comment]
the ny press published amys letter
that and some other letters responding to dummy tiabbi- bill 7-09-2005 1:39 am [add a comment]
The Taibbi piece is good, I just wish he'd mentioned protesting Abu Ghraib torture had squat to do with 9/11.
- tom moody 7-03-2005 1:02 am [add a comment]
Editorial today:
http://www.nydailynews.com/07-05-2005/news/ideas_opinions/story/325191p-277978c.html
written by "Garbus, a partner at Davis & Gilbert, is a noted First Amendment lawyer"
- selma 7-05-2005 11:20 pm [add a comment]
George is fooling himself
1st Amendment will bar government
from controlling art at Ground Zero
Gov. Pataki says he won't allow the showing at Ground Zero of anti-Bush, anti-Iraq war pictures, including photos or drawings portraying the hooded prisoners of Abu Ghraib.
The move is wrongheaded. And illegal.
The First Amendment forbids him from prohibiting the artworks, which show the world the vitality of American democracy. Even on this hallowed ground, some Americans tell the world that there is room for dissent, that Sept. 11, 2001, may not be related to the war in Iraq, that America may have acted badly at Guantanamo.
Neither the governor nor any other official can make it a condition for the Drawing Center to obtain permission from the state before showcasing certain art.
That's censorship.
The answer to speech you disagree with is more speech - speech you agree with. If the Drawing Center or some other museum wants to exhibit art that supports the war, that claims all those who oppose the war are traitors, that Muslims are inferior to Christians, they should be permitted to do that as well. Pataki may say no, but the First Amendment says they can.
Pataki claims the Drawing Center's art is not "respectful" of either those who died on Sept. 11 or in Iraq. On the contrary: The art represents a country like few others, where every viewpoint can be expressed - even at the places where they may be hardest to hear. This is the essence of our Constitution, our First Amendment.
There is a great deal of anti-Muslim, pro-war propaganda - from television recruiting spots to evangelical pulpit pounding. It will inevitably appear in one form or another at the cultural centers at Ground Zero.
Pataki's wrongheadedness is worse than that of former Mayor Rudy Giuliani, who tried to stop artists he disagreed with from being shown in the Brooklyn Museum. Giuliani and Pataki use the same words - the art is offensive and disgusting. Americans are not so timid and undiscerning that they cannot accept what they like and reject what they disagree with. Pataki should have more confidence in democracy and in the citizens of this democracy.
The business of democracy is often messy and unpleasant. As David Halberstam recently wrote, "The ability of unlikable people to do things that most of us don't approve of and to say things most of us would just as soon not hear protects in the long run the rights of all of us, rights that are vital to the continuation of freedom in a large, diverse, pluralistic society."
If you cannot speak (or draw or dance or write) freely, then you stop thinking freely. That freedom to think, to be wrong, but to think about a problem - political, scientific, cultural - from all different angles is essential. Once you take that away from us, you cripple the society. The First Amendment safeguards against crushing creativity, against crushing our differences.
We must honor the dead by honoring America.
Garbus, a partner at Davis & Gilbert, is a noted First Amendment lawyer.
Originally published on July 5, 2005
- bill 7-06-2005 12:55 am [add a comment]
its amazing, freaking amazing that we are actually having this discussion. so much for the land of the free. welcome to whats the matter with kansas err america.
- bill 7-06-2005 12:56 am [add a comment]
Is it as amazing as how the idea of 'separation of church and state" has evolved?! welcome back bill.
- selma 7-06-2005 1:24 am [add a comment]
thanks selma. we're all in deep poop
- bill 7-06-2005 1:40 am [add a comment]
LOL. at least we can smile once in a while.
- selma 7-06-2005 1:45 am [add a comment]
Bill! Thank you, I finally got a chance to see this.
By the way, this is an absolutely excellent article:
http://www.nynewsday.com/news/opinion/nyc-opcam104336643jul10,0,3529731.stor y?coll=nyc-viewpoints-headlines
What's the deal with NY Newsday? They've been really good through this whole thing - printing editorials in support of freedom of speech, generally not climbing on the stupid bandwagon, and now this.
- omigodit'samywilson (guest) 7-11-2005 5:12 am [add a comment]
artnet calls for a retreat from ground zero for the drawing center :
isnt that letting the terrorists win?!- bill 7-18-2005 3:53 am [add a comment]
i dont understand this rolling over and playing dead routine. since when is that an acceptable approach.- bill 7-23-2005 9:10 am [add a comment]
- bill 7-29-2005 6:42 pm [add a comment]
- bill 7-29-2005 6:56 pm [add a comment]
- bill 7-29-2005 6:59 pm [add a comment]