I mean, have you ever spoken to an artist for more than fifteen minutes about the meaning of their work? Fifteen minutes is my limit. The design makes sense in an abstract way--to me the artist sees the events as a misunderstanding between two cultures. But the families see it as a tribute to their loved ones who gave their lives for a principle.

The artistic question is whether to commemorate the principle or the misunderstanding.

I mean, there were two sentiments on flight 93, one sentiment was to drive the plane into the White House, other to keep that from happening. That doesn't leave a whole lot of room for a compromising artistic vision that isn't somehow disconnected from reality.

So, Jessica, I'm missing who's hurt by this--referring to your last paragraph. Are you hurt? Or are the families whose relatives were murdered--were they hurt? Or was the artist hurt?

Did Murdoch ever talk to the families and ask what they would like to see? I'm curious if he did so. And if he did, what were the responses--and why did he disregard them? If he didn't ask--then the work would be about Murdoch himself.

In which case then I'm shocked, shocked that an artist could be so insensitive.