It was an idea that a child could have had. Rebuild the twin towers just as they were, then keep going and join them together in an arch.

The idea came to me one night in 2003 as I was falling asleep — that time when consciousness forgets its separateness from the unconscious, or remembers its unity. Earlier that evening, I’d watched a TV news report announcing an open architectural competition to replace the World Trade Center. I had absolutely no delusions about my qualification to enter the most prestigious architectural competition in recent history — I made my living as an artist and director — but the idea wouldn’t let me sleep. I got out of bed, went downstairs to my studio and in a few hours, I’d modelled it on the computer.

Seeing the rendered image was thrilling. The symbolism couldn’t have been simpler — simplistic perhaps. But irresistible. The once tallest man-made structure in the world would have its supremacy restored, not for the sake of supremacy but for the sake of healing and unification. It fulfilled my intention and went beyond it: it honoured the past as the foundation of a better future. And beyond that, as an arch, it was a portal, a transition from one state to another.

I felt the best feeling an artist can ever feel. I felt gratitude.

That should have been more than enough. But in making the model in three dimensions, something else had happened. Something completely unexpected. 

I identified four distinctly different profiles at 45-degree intervals.

The significance of the arch was clear — but I had no idea about these others. 

Over twenty years on, I still don’t. Because of that, I’ve never settled on a name for the object – and it remains untitled.

I found these other profiles both intriguing and disconcerting. Disconcerting because they were intriguing. They distracted from the simple theme of unification.

But whatever the significance or insignificance of the individual profiles, the fact that such a simple structure presented such diverse and unpredictable appearances from different vantage points seemed very significant — particularly in relation to 9/11. Wasn’t that tragedy the product of seemingly irreconcilable perspectives? And hasn’t it become profoundly relevant to its legacy?  — a world of proliferating polarisations...