Racked is no longer publishing. Thank you to everyone who read our work over the years. The archives will remain available here; for new stories, head over to Vox.com, where our staff is covering consumer culture for The Goods by Vox. You can also see what we’re up to by signing up here.
The New York Times' official opinion of One World Trade Center is in, and it's a resounding "meh." To support its claim, the paper of record has implemented some similes. Exhibit A: "Counting the antenna is like counting relish at a hot dog eating contest."
This, of course, makes slightly more sense in context. The building's height stops at 1,368 feet, the exact height of the twin towers, though its antenna reaches the symbolic number of 1,776 feet (ergo, hot dogs). "So, the building is the tallest in the Western Hemisphere," the Times continues morosely, "as if that ever meant anything."
Rounding out the rest of the profile is one sigh of indifference after another:
"I find myself picturing General MacArthur in aviator sunglasses when I see the building."
"It looks as if it could be anywhere, which New York isn't."
"One World Trade is symmetrical to a fault, stunted at its peak, its heavy corners the opposite of immaterial."
"1 World Trade implies (wrongly) a metropolis bereft of fresh ideas."
The sole 1 WTC fault that didn't make the article, however? Rats.
· A Soaring Emblem of New York, and Its Upside-Down Priorities [NYT]
· Rumor: Vogue's Rat Problem Is Getting Worse [Racked]
· One World Trade Center [Racked NY]