Filed under: Who in the world cares?

From the London Times...

THE World Trade Center was an “ugly box” whose loss did no architectural damage to New York, one of the world’s most outspoken art critics has said.

“It was a large, scaleless lump, which completely dominated that end of Manhattan,” said Robert Hughes, best known in Britain for The Shock of the New, his 1980s BBC television series and book. “It only became iconic when it was knocked over by a bunch of Arabs.” 

Hughes, an Australian who has lived in New York for many years, was appalled by the attacks, but he also expressed relief that Osama Bin Laden’s terrorists did not fly their planes into towers of greater aesthetic merit.

I just wish the jerk had gone out into the streets of New York within the week or so after 9/11 and sniffed, "Aw, they were ugly anyway." He'd have been handed his jaw. 

They were buildings, not paintings in a gallery. They were there to serve a purpose other than to satisfy the idiotic sensibilities of some high-brow Aussie who probably goes into a faint whenever he sees someone wear white after Labor Day. 

Now remind me...how many people died because the owners of the Titanic thought there were too many lifeboats crowding the deck, making it look "ugly"?

Posted by Danny Carlton at September 18, 2006 11:51 AM