GT: There's an awful long period in every creative person's life of self-doubt, of self-examination, wonderment as to whether or not you're doing the right thing. Ammann surely had, in all the bridges, the modern-sized great ones and the great, great ones, he must have had a kind of, not skepticism, but a healthy self-doubt as to a sense of scrutiny as to what he was doing. Having been aware, as any historian of bridges is aware, that there have been disasters in the bridge business. Not only the disasters I referred to before, in terms of the injury and death to people who assist in the building of a bridge but the out, the utter of collapse of some bridges. I mean, the famous one, of course, is the "Galloping Gertie" in Spokane. And we have pictures and newsreel film that many of us grew up seeing of this, this bridge that literally fell apart and fell into the sea. And Ammann surely knew what caused that and was so cautious about avoiding those miscalculations.

But a writer, a painter, a choreographer, the steps of, of a Balanchine, the steps of anybody that has a sense of progression in art, has to take into account the … creative, yes, but also pragmatic movement. And that's true of anybody who builds anything, whether it's a work in steel or whether it's a work in words. It has many of the same progressive concerns that see it from the beginning, through the middle, to the end.

GT: An opening of a bridge is almost like an opening night show of any kind. It can be a Broadway opening. It could be an inauguration of a president which is really to bring to one place a focal point-a president, a Broadway star, a bridge, anything that is worth attention and it also brings to it a lot of attention-getting people. But the bridge in New York, when I saw the opening of the Verrazano-Narrows was a very festive occasion. The city had waited five years and we'd read a lot about it in the process of its being created. But finally, on the opening day, you had, in residence, you had on the parade stands, you had on the platforms, the principals who had something to do with the bridge and also had something to do with this city that was the center of the bridge, the New York political force.

The business authorities, the investors, people who just were celebrities of a sort that would seize on the occasion to get their names in the paper, their pictures in the paper. You always have those people who are drawn to the light of whoever brings the light but they are drawn to the light. They're like moths that find a way to get there. And there was a lot of that on the opening occasion of the Verrazano-Narrows Bridge.

The leader of the business establishment, of course, was Robert Moses, Head of the Bridge and Tunnel Authority and had been the, probably the strongest force in terms of getting this as a political project through the legislature in New York and through the business community who would invest in it-and through the opposition, which was considerable, that opposed it. The opposition being not only those people who lived in the areas that … had to be destroyed because of the roads that led to the bridge on both sides, Brooklyn, Staten Island, but those who also thought that it was a detriment to some of the isolation that those boroughs enjoyed. And the beauty of the water that separated them-the Narrows, the Narrows part of the Hudson River.

There's always a difference of opinion on a work of art. There's always a difference of opinion as to whether it is art, and if it is art, is it necessary art? But anyway, on the occasion of the opening, all that is in the background because it's no longer debatable anymore. It's a foregone conclusion. It's worthless discussion. And here you have opening day, limousines, people waving, people standing in front of photographers and the people who were most prominent were Robert Moses and others that worked with him.

Least prominent, surprisingly, maybe not surprisingly knowing the demure nature of Mr. Ammann, was himself. I remember, when introductions were made by Robert Moses, among those who were called upon to take a bow, of course, was Mr. Ammann. And while Moses was rather expansive in his description of the bridge engineer that was responsible, he never quite got around to mentioning the name of Mr. Ammann. And it was so, I think it was so typical of the life and times of that great artist, Mr. Ammann, that he would be sitting in the shadow of his great achievement and not have his name echoed on the loudspeaker that Robert Moses was bellowing into on this bridge, this great, expansive stage with all these people watching. His moment in the sun, Mr. Ammann was not really acknowledged.

And, of course, all great bridge builders share in that rather self-effacing sentiment of having the bridge speak for their work rather than their names. There's no name of an engineer; I mean, the names of the designers and creators of the Brooklyn Bridge or any bridge. But it didn't matter, I don't believe, to Ammann whether or not his name was mentioned because his name was that bridge in its real spirit. And he was the spirit in the creation of that bridge. And everybody knew it. And he knew it. And he didn't need to be acknowledged by Robert Moses or anyone else. And when he died I am sure he had in his mind the fact that he was leaving behind like an imperishable family, all those bridges that linked their lives to him as the creator. And that's a most gratifying time, I think, to think about a life well spent. And when he died, I have no doubt that he knew that his life had been a time well spent.

<< 3 >>