The big difference between the two structures is that the Dublin Spire is not a commemorative memorial. Thus, its design and selection were not determined by political and emotional forces, as was the WTC Memorial.

Witold praises the Dublin Spire because it has no overt meaning -- it means whatever you want it to mean. And I suppose one could say something similar about the Vietnam War Memorial -- some see it as an ugly gash commemorating an ugly war, and some see it as a magnificantly simple statement of the overwhelming deaths in that war.

But I don't think the WTC Memorial is as banal and literal as Witold suggests. True, not re-building the WTC on the two original footprints is pretty literal, but I think it was a bold and sympathetic decision. Instead, the two footprints will consist of pools of water with waterfalls cascading down the sides.

I think such a memorial does, in fact, lend itself to several interpretations -- for some, the pools will reflect Heaven, for others the pools and waterfalls will suggest nature's vitality and renewal -- or purity, still others might see the waterfalls as a force that transcends man's buildings.

I like the idea of the pools being surrounded by 300 oak trees. I think they will offer solace to both victims' families and to office workers on a lunch break. Is that such a bad thing?

As for listing on the pools the names of all those who died in the various 9/11 attacks as well as in the 1993 WTC attack, well, that's become de rigueur since the Vietnam War Memorial. After reading about the disputes over how to list the names on the WTC Memorial, I can see the problem with trying to accommodate the wishes of the victims' relatives. But the names will serve as a way for survivors and victims' relatives to connect with loved ones, just as the names do at the Vietnam War Memorial.

MaryAnn wrote that the Dublin spire's design and selection were not determined by political and emotional forces, as was the WTC Memorial. That's simply not true. The Irish wanted the replacement of the Nelson column, a symbol of British domination for hundreds of years, to be something different and modern - forward looking. Hence the spire. That's why it works, because of the political and emotional forces at play.

I agree with Witold that I don't think the significance of the WTC memorial will last. The names have great meaning, now, for the families and friends, but 100 years from now the families and friends will be gone too. (The Vietnam memorial works, not because of the names, but because of the dark stone along the mall.) Reflecting pools and waterfalls are pretty old hat, hard to maintain, break down and get dirty, and hardly reflect our era.

What would work? I don't know, it takes imagination and design, and I don't think (for example) copying the Irish and putting up a spire would have worked (though a 2,000 foot spire might have possibilities). Creating meaningful memorials that will last is not easy and few succeed.

nealea, your point is well-taken about the Dublin spire replacing the Nelson column. However, the WTC Memorial planners had to deal with the raw emotions of people whose relatives had recently died. Perhaps if the planners had waited for reason and aesthetics to replace emotion, they might have come up with a better design.

I agree that in a hundred years, the names will have no meaning. But every time I go to the Vietnam War Memorial in nearby Washington, I see people -- relatives, army buddies -- making rubbings of a particular name on the wall, leaving flowers tucked into a specific part of the wall near a particular name. I have seen pictures indicating that the named graves of soldiers who died in France during WWII are also still visited by relatives. Memorials can have short-term as well as long-term resonance.

Reflecting pools may be old hat, but they are, I think, better for the footprints of the destroyed WTC than two new buildings on the very same two footprints.

We both agree the WTC Memorial is not the greatest memorial and that creating great memorials is difficult. Perhaps the personal belongings of victims in the WTC museum will serve the same emotional purpose as the room of photographs in Washington's Holocaust Museum, which so memorably remind us of people whom we never knew, innocent people who were also killed unnecessarily.

The trees and the water are needed, indeed. They will provide solace, shade, respite, space for thought & calm and a moment's (or an hour's) break from the hectic pace of life in Manhattan. There is nothing quite like the sound of rushing water, even if it is moving at a slow pace, or the sight of a gentle body of water, 'sitting' still in a pool or pond, to calm our tense nerves and aching souls. Most of the newer structures and urban parks seem to recognize this and water features are starting to be included, almost as de rigueur indeed, in their designs.

All the poets know this, eh? In a separate post on this Fray, I suggested to 'slipped voussoir' that he visit the PFray today, where the posted poems (and the link to the outside website) provide their own form of non-monumental, non-physical, memorial.

As for the "Nightmare" that is today's date, we can only pray it will not happen again. [You read me, of course.]

Last, agree with you about the names. I think they are necessary and hope that, in time, those family members who may be against the idea now, come to accept it. Naming the names is, historically as well as artistically, critically important; may they never be forgotten, in any way, shape or form. Thanks for your post and comments here.

How can you say that in 100 years, "the names will have no meaning." People have descendants, and everyone in New York is, in a way, related to those who were killed on 9/11. That's a huge and categorical generalization with which I cannot agree. Do you ever visit historical graveyards? We do and reading the names of those who died hundreds of years ago, is an inherent part of the experience, and in no way, irrelevant.

Also, there is a fine article on the front page of today's New York Times about Mayor Bloomberg of NYC trying to "balance rebuilding and remembrance." Worth a read, imho.