Around Ground Zero - Close Up at a Distance: Mapping, Technology, and Politics - page 93

the unflinching eye of the satellite sensors, which took note of the graves and then
of the mark on the Earth where the graves had been. The important thing is to do
this without pathos: to engage in the act of bearing witness, of remembering and
of testifying, simply because something happened that should not have happened.
I think something of this was at work in the Around Ground Zero map, as well.
AT: How has the map's function evolved over the past year?
LK: At first, the imperative for the map was about memorializing through holding
on to the ephemera that were a part of the process of coming to terms with what
was going on. Now a different kind of information strategy is necessary for the
rebuilding phase. I think that people know very little about what is happening,
how the decisions get made and who sets the terms for the competitions. There
is very little debate about what an architectural, political, and economic response
should be to this act of terrorism. That's what the map is about now.
AT: What are your thoughts about the act of memorializing, both in relation to
Ground Zero and in a larger social context?
LK: It is not only the way that graphic design has been used around the fence to
interpret the event that is problematic, but what is being built on the site, too. It
seems to me that the only options being made available to architects are symbols
of recovery or triumph for a city that has overcome terrorism. There's still a battle
between memory and money that characterizes the debate downtown. I think it's
really scary.
I've done a number of projects about memory, memorials, and disasters in other
countries. I've started becoming a little critical of the whole memory machine.
Memorials have, I think, become instant answers to disasters, whether they are
battles, or dictatorships, or tragedies such as Oklahoma City and Columbine. I
think we should stop and think a little longer before building anything. The para-
digm for memorials stopped with the Maya Lin Vietnam Memorial, and now, with
no new ideas but an ever-increasing desire for monuments, it just gets repeated
and repeated in different, all too often inappropriate contexts.
So far, the architectural proposals for rebuilding downtown—both the build -
ings and the memorials—appear to be abiding by the rules. I hope the new ones
break the rules. It seems to me to do this project correctly, someone needs to break
the rules.