Saturday, September 10, 2005

Nonsense from Flight 93 Memorial architect

The Pittsburgh Post-Gazette reports today:

There's a growing outcry that one element of the newly chosen Flight 93 National Memorial represents Islam and is a slap in the face to the passengers and crew members who died on the hijacked plane four years ago. ( Here’s a visual of what has people upset – JinC note)

The winning design, announced Wednesday in Washington, D.C., includes what is called the "Crescent of Embrace." That element of the project calls for two rows of red maple trees to be planted around a bowl-shaped piece of land adjacent to crash site.
<…>
Almost immediately upon seeing the design, online bloggers suggested that it is inappropriate to use a red crescent in the memorial.

A few thoughts:

According to the Post-Gazette, Paul Murdoch, the Memorial's leading architect, says of the crescent:

"You can call it all kinds of things. We can call it an arc. We can call it a circle. We can call it the edge of the bowl. The label doesn't matter to us in terms of intent.”

But an arc is a segment of a circle. Arc and circle are mutually exclusive terms among people who believe words have agreed upon meanings.

“We can call it an arc. We can call it a circle.”

Murdoch sounds like he’s been spending too much time with the Mad Hatter and Alice in Wonderland.

He’s also quoted as saying, “The label doesn't matter to us in terms of intent”

Actually, it isn't only the label that has people concerned. It’s the crescent shape and color. And those are extraordinarily important concerns, despite Murdoch’s dismissal of them.

I suspect Murdoch's dismissal is a pose. Surely he knows how important they are.

Murdoch wouldn't present the International Red Cross-Red Crescent organization with a logo design dominated by a red cross and a red circle, would he?

But for a Memorial to some of America’s heroes? Well, arcs and crescents and circles – they're all the same.

And you know what's the saddest part of it all? A lot of well-intentioned people believe Murdoch.

To learn more about the planned Memorial and how you can voice your opinions visit Michelle Malkin and Captain's Quarters' blogs.

2 comments:

Jeff Faria said...

Regarding inappropriate memorials: I have had problems myself with how 9/11 is being 'remembered'. Take a look at what I've done about it. This memorial video contains no burning buildings, no rubble, no explosions, no speeches, no screeches, no Bin Laden, no bodies. Just a remembrance of some people whose lives were cut short through no fault of their own, with poignant candid snapshots from their lives, and music.

http://mistersnitch.blogspot.com/2005/09/our-after-911-site-is-online.html

Thank you.

Anonymous said...

In a way I'm glad these people are so overplaying their hands on the NYC memorial and now this one.

I think someone should point to the Iwo Jima memorial snd say: somthing like that for people who protected their country.

-AC