The Bilbao effect

 

In the past year, I have seen nine art museums in the United States of America. In each of the nine, not one piece of art moved me more than the building itself. That led me to question if we are going into buildings for what they assemble inside them, or are we going to experience the building itself- to ogle, grumble or awe! Let’s face it- there is much greater interest in architecture in the common public in most of the developed world now than there ever was. To use Frank Lloyd Wright’s words, there is a new “Democratization” of the “Mother Art.” What really generates this great interest is these new architectural “Icons” springing up everywhere. Why, even Milwaukee is literally on an international map of important buildings now. We are in an age where “Iconic architecture” is important to everyone. A town can have a hyper-designed building today, and every resident can look at it and experience the feeling of “ownership.”



Buildings have played a major role in the history of the world, every once in a while one is built that changes the face of a city or even a country. Over the years, these buildings become the icons of these cities. The world would not be the same without the pyramids of Giza, the Taj Mahal, Hagia Sophia, the Eiffel tower, the Sydney opera house, the St.Louis arch, Burj Al Arab, the list can go on. These are examples that were built with a purpose more than just the functional, and today have a great impact on the culture and economy of the places they inhabit. Iconic buildings are some of the most important architectural achievements man has accomplished. With this paper, I would like to closely examine a few examples of such buildings, to better understand the reality of “Iconic Architecture.”



The Guggenheim Museum, Bilbao is one of the most exciting and controversial buildings of our time. Clad in titanium scales, it has an undulating surface and great sculptural form on the outside. On the inside it is an immensely energetic space, with the galleries planned logically, spiraling up as you go higher in the building. There are several outdoor terraces to take a break from the art and stand in framed views of the Basque countryside, or the city’s landmarks. It is a wonderful building both inside, and out. The public plazas, and other park spaces in the scheme fit well with the program, the museum handles its art extremely well, a lot of sculptures extend out of the galleries to public plazas, an intricate set of stairs, bridges and fountains funnel passersby to unknowingly walk into framed views that make the people an integral part of the art, the buildings and the city. To design and build this building, Mr Gehry had to work with airplane software makers to design software for his application.  The Panels and structural members were each designed with the help of the computer model. It was one of the first buildings to use Building Information Modeling. It definitely is an icon in more than one way. It cost $300 a square foot to build, on a $100 million budget. Today it brings the city about €300 million a year in tourist revenue, has completely transformed Bilbao – It has helped clean up the Nervion River waterfront, enriched its neighborhood, and has led to new public infrastructure projects like trams, and water transport.  This occurrence is now  termed the “Bilbao Effect,” where many cities in other parts of the world have tried to emulate the Bilbao model, Pittsburgh, Indianapolis, Cincinnati, Milwaukee, St. Louis, Fort Worth, Oakland and Miami. Everyone wants to be “the next Bilbao.” The system, however doesn’t work so well in all cases, in fact, Mr. Gehry himself could not do another “Bilbao.” The reason for that is that the museum itself was part of a larger plan, to reshape many parts of the city; the metro system was designed by Sir. Norman Foster, the Airport by Santiago Calatrava. In all, it was a concerted effort by the city to cleanse its culture, plan iconic architecture (far apart from each other), so as to not dilute one another’s effect, and then let the old beaux-arts buildings in the city to stand in their place, with a matrix of almost nondescript buildings in between these marvels. Bilbao is not a great destination today because of the Guggenheim; the museum is merely a forerunner to the other buildings in the city. The people of Bilbao are proud of their museum, and take great pride in its ownership.

Santiago Calatrava’s Milwaukee art Museum is a brilliant feat of engineering, is beautifully proportioned, and even puts on a show twice a day. I am always impressed by Mr. Calatrava’s sense of proportion, and ability to engineer seemingly impossible structures. The Calatrava designed addition holds no permanent collections, and is reduced to merely being a signboard for the museum and the city. It has no real function with relation to the museum. The art is hidden from view. The burke brise soleil “wings” open and close twice a day, but do not shade the inside. The museum seems more like an amusement park attraction than a serious center for art. Nonetheless it attracts more than 300,000 visitors a year. It has become the icon the city identifies itself by. What we see here is, the city wanted to do another “Bilbao,” but failed to consider a bigger plan for the whole city.



The Burj Al Arab, Dubai is an impressive hotel designed by Atkins. It stands on an artificial island, has the world’s tallest atrium space, an underwater restaurant, and cantilevered helipad. It is the icon of Dubai, the clients sole aim was to make a building that would make a statement for Dubai. The Burj Al arab does that very successfully. It has very nicely designed rooms, a great central space, and is a remarkable feat of engineering. It is so successful at everything it does, that it almost is the seed for all the superlative structures that have appeared in Dubai over the past fifteen years! You can take any of the brilliant aspects of the building, and see it used in another project in the city, at a higher level. There are three other artificial islands in Dubai now, they are slowly changing the currents and killing marine life in the area. You can now ski in Dubai, or Visit a marine park. There are dancing towers designed by Zaha Hadid. Someone designed a building with floor plates that move. The tallest building in the world, the “Burj al Khalifa” is in Dubai. The Burj Al Arab changed the future architecture of the city, and Dubai is now the iconic building capital of the world. It “showcases” so many of these, that a walk down Sheikh Zayed road makes you feel like you’re walking down a Vegas “strip” upgrade. The Burj Al Arab was the starting point for the craziness that Dubai is now known for.

​

We are in an age where newer technologies and vastly improved CAD devices are not only making designing such buildings easier, but also practical. In most cases iconic buildings are great feats of engineering requiring immense skill and vision on the part of their designers. Students of architecture visit and study these buildings and are inspired to design even bolder structures. It is after all, up to the architects of the future to innovate and lead the way in the development of new technologies. There is something important to learn from the “Bilbao Effect” – we cannot replicate it, every city is different. No one building can change the fate of a city. Mr. Gehry, as pointed out by himself, is neither God, nor the Devil. We as citizens of this world have the capacity to understand the repercussions of both, unconnected iconic buildings, and too much iconic. The key is to find a balance, and ask ourselves is we want these buildings only to “show-off,” or could they have a greater role in humanity?

To me it feels like humankind was always ready for iconic buildings. We are so accustomed to functionalism now, that we feel something is wrong with architecture that serves a purpose other than the functions outlined in the project brief. Obviously there is no place for iconic architecture on every street corner, no one place needs too many. It does have value when interspersed with simpler structures. We need to have an open mind about our buildings. With the tools at our disposal today we are capable of designing and building anything our imagination conjures up, the sky is the limit. Why stop at anything less?