Girders for Potters Fields Park

Like BDIM, I'm also a little surprised by the extent of negativity to the proposal. Potters Field park is not just a local park, it's an international one, with many thousands of visitors: I'd argue it's a fitting place to site such a 9/11 public art/memorial.

I understand the event at 160 Tooley Street the other night was quite charged (would have attended but was out of the country) with a good turnout of those objecting (50 maybe?) to those supporting (20?) Now there's a good few thousand of us in Shad Thames and this seems hardly representative!

I reached out to STRA twice to lodge my support but heard nothing back. Moreover, their emails only seem to want to solicit objections rather than support for the proposal. On the point of consultation, I don't recall there being any before the STRA voted 'no' at the PT Trust meeting!

Anyhow, I fully respect people's opinions as set out in this forum and the personal views of STRA members but there are those of us who support the proposal, and I would have liked the STRA to have taken a more balanced approach to this sensitive subject.

Just wanted to offer a little (different) perspective...

I have not read all 10 pages of the comments on this forum item BUT:

1. Surely the gardens of the Imperial War Museum would be a more appropriate location for this memorial. It is not "artwork" -- New York is only making girders available (more or less to anyone who wants them) for "memorials".

2. I support some form of memorial or artwork (including that proposed), but the lovely Potters Fields Park is NOT the right location for the blood stained, violent, sombre and depressing artwork proposed. It will change the whole atmosphere of the Park, and bring more non-locals to what at times is a very busy area.

3. The Board of the Potters Fields Park Management Trust did not reject the proposal outright, but said: "the scale of the installation was inappropriate given the size of the park", and agreed to reconsider a "fundamentally revised proposal" or a "smaller and radically redesigned installation". The 9 11 London Project team has revised the design (but only by removing the pool of water from which the girders were originally intended to rise), and will be seeking approval from the PFPMT Board. In my view THAT APPROVAL MUST NOT BE GIVEN.

What is wrong with the existing London 11 Sept memorial? I don't see why there should be a further memorial in an arbitrary location. I also find the whole idea of the use of destroyed girders a bit distasteful and inappropriate. Why would anyone (other than Al Qaeda) want a memorial that symbolises the death and destruction, and could be seen as celebrating it? While we're at it, why don't we find an exploded tube carriage from July 05 and stick that in the park as well. Using the material of the girders in a memorial would make sense, but installing the actual wreckage of the building that people died in? Not pleasant.

I have read all of the contributions on this rather sensitive and emotive matter. By far the most succinct is that of ColinHP, the last but one writer. I agree with all his points and can but hope that the PFPMT will see sense.

bdim wrote:

I do not understand the objection to a piece of art/a memorial in principle here. Regardless of what happened afterwards (and our political views about the actions that were taken), 9/11 was tragic beyond all proportions and many Londoners had family or friends caught up in the attack. To remember and honour this, to my mind, is appropriate and offers educational opportunities (like our other memorials/monuments to other wars/atrocities throughout the city also do). .

A good statement but there already is a memorial in London that remembers the victims of the attack. It is also a good deal more peaceful than the proposed new memorial. It also has steel girders but these are buried underneath the monument.

Why should there be another, more violent memorial when we already have a superb public memorial.

This seems like a vanity exercise for all of those concerned.

If my favourite racehorse wins for the third time at the Cheltenham Festival in a couple of weeks, I would love to see a monument to it on Potters Fields Park.

There will be 50,000 people watching the race live, plus lots more watching on TV. I'm sure that all of them would support a campaign to get a monument erected. Some of them might even agree that it was an artwork.

No doubt we could get a few celebrities to back the campaign as well: quite possibly ones with a greater degree of recognition amongst the general public than Simon Schama.

Oh, and I bet we could get it done for less than £600k.

I'm struggling to see why my pipedream is any less worthy of consideration than these girders.

Change of plan:

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2011/mar/08/september-11-london-sculpture-on-hold

is the proposed replacement of nick with any labour councillor not an attempt to 'stack' the potters field committee and therefore reverse the decision by the leaseholder to refuse permission?
i hope so ...

Cllr Barrie Hargrove told cabinet last night that the artwork will be going to "another London borough" - anyone heard where this might be?

Interestingly the 9/11 London Project seems to have started its educational work, despite the lack of the physical artwork which it was claimed was indivisible from the outreach activities

The project's work at Walworth Academy was featured on London Tonight this evening:
http://www.itv.com/london/history-lessons73629/