Tikun Olam-תיקון עולם: Make the World a Better Place

Pages

• Home
• Photo Gallery
• Advertising
• Comment Rules
• Subscribe to Posts (per post)
• Tikun Olam Store
• Donate
• Subscribe (daily digest)
• Contact
• About
• Monthly archives
• Terms of Use

9 Responses to “Jerusalem Museum of Tolerance in Disarray, Gehry Withdraws”

1. Shirin says:

   January 15, 2010 at 10:48 PM

   “given the bad luck of the project…”

   Looks more like bad karma than bad luck.

   Reply
2. Gene Schulman says:

   January 16, 2010 at 1:54 AM

   Everything about this project is bad, including the architect. How can anyone wish to see this piece of Lego dreck desecrating something that is supposed to memorably holy – Muslim or Jewish?

   Ghery’s architecture is as big a con as Maddof’s hedge fund investments. They both deserve their comeuppance, along with the rest of that hubristic breed of Jewish pharaohs. Simon Wiesenthal must be resting a bit easier now.

   Reply
   • Shirin says:

     January 16, 2010 at 11:02 AM

     I have to agree with you. It looks like a big haphazard jumble of leftovers from other failed projects. I can’t figure out either the form or the function. And what’s with the big blue pile of dog doo on the left there>

     Reply
3. mary says:

   January 16, 2010 at 7:02 AM

   The whole idea of this project stems from the unholy and utterly draconian practice of ethnic cleansing. The Arab Muslims are so dehumanized that even their cemeteries are not respected as places where human remains are laid to rest, but can instead be desecrated and paved over to build, of all ironies, a “museum of tolerance.” There have been numerous efforts made by various activist groups to stop this project; I hope they have been successful. At the risk of being repetitive, this is the kind of thing that makes me think Israel has gone crazy.

   Reply
4. Robin says:

   January 16, 2010 at 8:35 PM

   http://www.wiesenthal.com/site/apps/nlnet/content2.aspx?c=lsKWLbPJLnF&b=4441467&ct=7807791

   Might I posit a possibility as to what Craig Webb meant when he used the term “politically sensitive”? You have to think outside the box with this use of the word “political” Think project, think what it would have taken to pull this off, think at what point Frank Gehry has pulled out coupled with the fundraising shortage, think of payment schedules, think of costs going up as time goes on, think of outrageous cost to begin with. Now think, isn’t it a “politically sensitive” thing to have Frank Gehry pull out because the money just isn’t there to pay him on this crown jewel of the Wiesenthall Center’s efforts. Of COURSE it is and I think this is what he meant, not that Frank Gehry’s conscience all of a sudden got the better of him. It is “politically sensitive” that the money isn’t there to pay Frank Gehry after he charged God knows what for his design and time on the project, it is politically sensitive that this is EMBARASSING. Think in terms of construction costs/architectural fees and who muttered these words, Craig Webb then watch this video (it’s part 3 so there is more to watch)

   http://www.vimeo.com/8339594

   “Yeh, most of those breaking points happen around money, you know about project budget” (gotta think like THEY do to understand what he more than likely meant when using the term “politically sensitive”-especially concerning a controversial project to begin with)

   Reply
5. DICKERSON3870 says:

   January 16, 2010 at 8:50 PM

   Perhaps it’s just me*, but that big blue ‘thingy’ (to the left in the photo of the design model) reminds me of those children’s play areas they once had on the front of some McDonald’s. They incorporated a lot of primary colors, and that deep blue color seemed to predominate. I think concerns involving ‘risk management’ put an end to those things. I remember the “we are not responsible…” signs getting bigger and bigger and bigger. Oops, I just spilled some really hot coffee on my lap.
   *It almost always is!

   Reply
6. Robin says:

   January 16, 2010 at 8:59 PM

   Haartz reported this:

   “The Wiesenthal Center has begun searching for an architect to replace Gehry to join the planning team, which was composed of Gehry and Kolker, Kolker, Epstein Architects. Gehry resigned shortly after rejecting a request by the center to reduce the scope of the plan, the cost of which has been estimated at $250 million. Kolker, Kolker, Epstein said Gehry withdrew due to planning and financial disagreements”.

   Yes, I would definitely say it is “politically sensitive” to say no to the Simon Wiesenthall Center after they have sunk millions of dollars into the project already and are obviously asking to reduce the scope of the project due to funding shortages. (250 mil project estimate was made WHEN? Again, think in terms of construction/architectural costs when Craig Webb uttered this phrase)

   BOONDOGGLE!

   Reply
7. Robin says:

   January 16, 2010 at 9:30 PM

   One more thing, postulation, I wonder just how much the Simon Wiesenthall Center was willing to pay Gehry for a redesign? BINGO–think I found the “politically sensitive” issue (mixed with design ego probably-ask Gehry to reduce the scope of his drawings/plans? HAH!) Here’s egg in your face Winnick for choosing your buddy as the architect for your dream and not even be able to keep him on the job!

   Oh yeh baby, VERY “politically sensitive”.

   Reply
8. Robin says:

   January 17, 2010 at 7:54 PM

   Here you GO Richard! Winnick Foundation 2008 990

   http://www.guidestar.org/FinDocuments/2008/953/855/2008-953855792-04cdd2ae-F.pdf

   Almost at the bottom, grant to MOTJ originally 4.5 mil, adjusted DOWN to 1.5 mil and paid! WOW, did that gift ever shrink!

   Reply