Quote:
Originally Posted by kznyc2k
Uh, everything he said was correct. The way you interpreted it is what's wrong. I can see how it might sound like he implies Libeskind was the one who named the FT, but he didn't come out and say it, so technically he's not off. And perhaps he's making a point that the FT will be renamed when Bush (not Pataki) leaves office..? yes it's a far stretch, but he's not wrong in saying it. I do agree he's condescending, but really what art critic isn't?
|
Uh, everything he said was correct except that
the things he said that are dead wrong. Bush didn't name the tower, Pataki did, and (while I don't know what your personal definition of "wrong" is), there is certainly nothing "correct" about saying that the most famous tower in the world will suddenly be referred to as the anonymous-sounding "1 World Trade Center" just because Bush leaves office in 2 years.
Frankly - I don't see what your point is. You concede that he's wrong about a
Bush connection with the name of the tower. You concede he was condencending. So what are you arguing over, anyway?