alterity cemetery
 |
It has been almost ten years since two airplanes struck the World Trade Center in New York City; the immediate aftermath saw an incredible surge of patriotism that some critics believe helped to define a new sense of national identity. Such patriotism, while at times productive, has also led to various positions that some might argue are completely unfounded. All politicians now wear flag pins and the presence of Americana transcends most socioeconomic groups. Numerous hate crimes, however, have been reported against individuals who appear to be of middle-eastern descent. The recent controversy over the planning of a mosque close to ground zero exemplifies this position. One might ask, why is the sacred space of one immigrant group (Greek Orthodox) more or less accepted than another (Islam)? Such events remind us that we are truly living in a global world. The impacts of globalism are often discussed in environmental, social, financial, and other terms. This project attempts to focus such discussions architecturally through the development of a cemetery complex for non-Americans, sited at Ground Zero in New York. |
 |
Zach Crocker: A Dying Cemetery The questions of what is a cemetery, what is a cemetery no longer filled with dead, and what makes something sacred begin to overlap and meld together. Perhaps there is something inherent within all three that allow them to be thought of as one. The proposal for this project is not three separate programs to be put on a site in lower Manhattan at Ground Zero, but instead to think of them as one building represented over time. The intentions of the project then become to recreate a past and project a future using what is given from the site now and thereby tell the story of one character and it’s changing faces. To begin with, perhaps a cemetery dies itself. Perhaps upon its death and the destruction of something other it can become a cenotaph. And through the history and ritual of this place, it can become sacred to some. Through time these programs develop and just as much as a building material, time become a way for them to be built. All architectural projects are designed for some kind of future, but within an academic environment that notion can be stretched further, opening up the possibilities that come with it. |
 |
Melissa Peter: Temporality of Decomposition The project is broken into three main components: the burial space, the sacred space, and the cenotaph. The burial space is organized in terms of the temporality of decomposition. The way we treat bodies in a scientific manner speaks of also the cultural and emotional manner we deal with the dead. For the purpose of teaching one about the other, and thereby eliminating this cultural, situational, emotional other, every type of burial ritual is organized within one encompassing membrane. On one end of the spectrum is the cemetery, where the purpose of the casket is to delay decomposition. In the middle is the ossuary/ eco-burial, where remains are left exposed and decay naturally. At the opposite end of the spectrum exists the eco-burial, where decomposition is accelerated for sake of regeneration of new life. |
 |
Anthony Yue: { [ _ : ] } {[_:]} deals with a great many things, though none too well. It may take ADD quite too literally, lacking in ‘a’rchitecture and ‘d’esign whilst overdosing on ‘d’iscourse. It may be about “subnature” as an other of architecture, or an other of weathering, or an other of nature (which itself is an other of architecture). It may be a clumsy attempt to address the neglected elements of dust, puddles, and weeds, elements ever-so-present in metropolitan areas like Manhattan. It may consider various durations of time, from the seconds it takes to cross a street (methodically metered by beeping, flashing, crosswalk signs) to the timelessness of the sacred (artificed by an excess of time – timefulness). Perhaps this somehow reflects the temporality and permanence of memory, of death. It may be about language on a very base level, about definitions and punctuations. It may be an attempt to create something new by returning to “dictionary” definitions. (“Isn’t a cenotaph a sphere?” – fellow 3rd-year students on hearing our first project brief). It could be oversimplified into some “concept” of duality, of us and them, of ordinary men, of me and you (God only knows it’s not what we would choose to do). Indeed, the layout of this portfolio hardly helps to deny it. Or it may be {[_:]} is just be about silly architectural project titles, fraught with punctuation… |