Ground Zero site

I know I'm way behind on this...but I just read an article in the Times online about the review process for the arts institutions tagged to go into the new Freedom Center they're building on the Ground Zero site. One of the conditions for the Drawing Centre is that they must promise that they will never produce anything that may be offensive to the families of the victims of 9/11.

Does anyone else think this is totally ridiculous??? I mean, besides being totally subjective it's a gross violation of 1st amendment rights!!

Am I the only one?? I just think it's really a shame they've tried to turn this into some ultra-PC conservative center for 'creative thinking', nevermind the fact that the name the 'Freedom Centre' is so utterly lame...

I don't understand how anyone can agree with the conditions...seriously...We did lose a family member in 9/11, but I think it's completely selfish to censor other people's reactions to what happened and how they choose to express themselves in the aftermath...It didn't only happen to those who died...

And putting such restrictions on the tenants of a building called the Freedom Centre is totally hypocritical!

---

Posted by MonkeyLuv

---

Posted by usuk2004

I know I'm way behind on this...but I just read an article in the Times online about the review process for the arts institutions tagged to go into the new Freedom Center they're building on the Ground Zero site. One of the conditions for the Drawing Centre is that they must promise that they will never produce anything that may be offensive to the families of the victims of 9/11.

Does anyone else think this is totally ridiculous??? I mean, besides being totally subjective it's a gross violation of 1st amendment rights!!

Am I the only one?? I just think it's really a shame they've tried to turn this into some ultra-PC conservative center for 'creative thinking', nevermind the fact that the name the 'Freedom Centre' is so utterly lame...

---

Utterly lame and also paradoxical if only 'approved' art installations are allowed. Mr Boots and I are always talking about this and he agrees (because he's a facist ) with the conditions. I think it totally undermines the ideaology of the country from which icons of power, like the WTC, sprang.

---

It's wierd, I completely agree with both of you, art is subject to interpretation-and can not be regulated....at the same time, I also understand why they wouldn't want to display/produce anything that might disrespect the victims.
I hate the design, I wish they would rebuild the towers, and just make the top 10 floors in each a memorial.....

---

Posted by LFitzy79

It's wierd, I completely agree with both of you, art is subject to interpretation-and can not be regulated....at the same time, I also understand why they wouldn't want to display/produce anything that might disrespect the victims.
I hate the design, I wish they would rebuild the towers, and just make the top 10 floors in each a memorial.....

---

You know, part of me agrees that there is a line to be drawn and that sometimes artists are in it for the shock value (I wasn't a big fan of the dung covered Mary at the Brooklyn Museum). But they should look at these special cases as and when they occur, not impose a blanket statement that basically precludes anyone from even touching on the subject of 9/11 ever in fear of potentially upsetting someone else...The standards are not even definable!!

I'm going to write a letter!

---

Posted by MonkeyLuv

---

Posted by LFitzy79

It's wierd, I completely agree with both of you, art is subject to interpretation-and can not be regulated....at the same time, I also understand why they wouldn't want to display/produce anything that might disrespect the victims.
I hate the design, I wish they would rebuild the towers, and just make the top 10 floors in each a memorial.....

---

There's the rub, I wouldn't want the families or victims disrepected either. But why set themselves up for such a hypocritical situation, as Farah said. Why don't they incorporate the the memorial into the architectural design, like you said.

It's a tough situation because it wasn't just a public tragedy, it was also a political tragedy, you have to blance memorialization with politcal idealogies.

---

You're completely right....

I think the whole process to date has been a little off.

Here's the article if anyone's interested:

August 12, 2005
Freedom Center's Place at Ground Zero in Question
By DAVID W. DUNLAP
The International Freedom Center was all but shown the door yesterday by state officials, who demanded that the fledgling institution undergo a new round of vetting - by relatives of 9/11 victims, among others - before it can claim the spot it was assigned last year in the World Trade Center's cultural building.

John C. Whitehead, the chairman of the Lower Manhattan Development Corporation, said the Freedom Center had been asked to develop 'specific plans, program and governance structure' by Sept. 23, which would then be presented to the public. 'If at the end of this process, the L.M.D.C. is not satisfied with the I.F.C.'s proposal, we will find another use or tenant,' he said at yesterday's board meeting.

The building itself, designed by the Norwegian firm Snohetta, will end up about 30 percent smaller than the version unveiled in May, Mr. Whitehead said. It will certainly contain a visitors' center but may lose its other designated tenant, the Drawing Center, which Mr. Whitehead said was 'finding it difficult to comply with the requirements that have been laid down that they would never present anything that might be offensive to the families' of 9/11 victims.

Richard J. Tofel, the president and chief operating officer of the International Freedom Center, which describes itself as an institution concerned with the history and role of freedom, said, 'We look forward to the opportunity to further detail our plans for content and governance, and will do so.' He said the center was 'fully and enthusiastically committed' to staying in the Snohetta cultural building.

In order to remain, however, the Freedom Center will have to clear hurdles that have no evident dimensions. It is not clear - and Mr. Whitehead declined to elaborate - what criteria the corporation would use to judge the center's plans, what standards would satisfy the corporation or what the exact vetting procedure would be, other than that it would involve discussions, presentations and Web sites. Mr. Whitehead would not even say whether the Freedom Center would have to meet the test of offering no programs that might offend victims' relatives.

It is also unclear how many board members endorsed this new review procedure, since the measure was not voted on, though Mr. Whitehead said he believed his statement reflected a consensus.

Mayor Michael R. Bloomberg and Deputy Mayor Daniel L. Doctoroff immediately objected to the manner in which the review procedure was adopted, contrasting it with the master planning to date.

'We decided to have cultural institutions and picked these cultural institutions through a deliberative process that tried to involve all parts of the community with all different kinds of input,' the mayor said, 'and Dan and I both think that the L.M.D.C. erred in trying to change that without going through another inclusive process.'

Plainly, what began two years ago as the search for cultural tenants to enrich the new World Trade Center has turned into a significant dilemma for Gov. George E. Pataki as he explores a run for the presidency.

If the governor defends the initial selection of the Freedom Center, he faces growing opposition by victims' relatives like Debra Burlingame, who say they fear that the center might be used as a forum for anti-American debate and want nothing in the memorial area that is not related directly to the terrorist attacks.

If Mr. Pataki tries to eject the center himself, he can expect objections that he is repudiating a master plan he once embraced, buckling to political pressure and denying a place for free speech at a site that is supposed to embody American values.

Leaving the matter in the corporation's hands would insulate Mr. Pataki from having to make the choice personally. On the other hand, the board itself might split on the issue, since many of its members already support the Freedom Center and would be reluctant to upend the process under which it was selected last year.

Ms. Burlingame, who attended yesterday's board meeting, said both the Freedom Center and Drawing Center should be removed from the memorial area, though she endorsed the Snohetta building if it can be 'redesigned to be filled with the story of 9/11.'

'The magnitude of that story would fill several Snohetta buildings,' she added.

Frances Beatty Adler, the chairwoman of the Drawing Center, a museum in SoHo, acknowledged that it was looking at alternative locations in Lower Manhattan. She added that 'no one has said that we're not in the Snohetta building' and said the center was 'working cooperatively with the L.M.D.C. to restore cultural life downtown.'

As evidence of the corporation's commitment to cultural programs at the trade center site, Mr. Whitehead also announced yesterday that it would earmark $50 million for the creation of a performing arts center across Fulton Street from the Snohetta building, for the Joyce Theater Foundation and Signature Theater Company.

Moments after Mr. Whitehead finished reading his statement, and before he could adjourn the meeting, Mr. Doctoroff - who sits at the board table as the mayor's representative, just three seats from the chairman - raised his hand to make his disappointment known about the Freedom Center review procedure.

'To reach this conclusion without a significant amount - particularly within this body - of debate and public comment leading up to the debate is disappointing,' Mr. Doctoroff said.

I dont think it should be a drawing center at all. I would love to see a small park or water fountain and something with all the names of the people lost. A place to sit and reflect. There are ashes of people who were never found there. I think it should be a peaceful place. But I know this will never happen.

I was listening to a debate on NPR about this and someone said that the hurtful truth is that the Freedom Center is not FOR the families of those that died, but for everyone, and that no politician wants to touch this for fear of being labelled anti-American.

I too think that to censor art in a place called the Freedom Tower is like some 1984 doublespeak.

At the risk of sounding hokey, what makes America great is that we can openly debate - we don't suppress. We respect ALL side's right to express themselves.

NYC is THE art center of the world, and this just makes us look like arses.

I agree with you Farah. And, I have to point out how cute it is that you spell 'Center' as 'Centre'