The Succes of Frank Gehry's Guggenheim Museum in Bilbao and Its Socio-economic Impact

Introduction

This text will discuss the success of Frank Gehry's Guggenheim in Bilbao, Spain (1997) and argue why it is not only a structure with great aesthetic properties but has also had a profoundly positive impact on the surrounding city’s economy and global perception. This renders the Guggenheim Bilbao an extremely successful piece of architecture.

Bilbao's Guggenheim museum was part of an ambitious urban renewal program conceived by the Basque regional government due to the city's aging port and industrial centre which had experienced a significant economic decline during the 1980s. However, since the museum opened in 1997, it has captured both local and international imaginations. For the travelling public it is a spectacle and ‘Instagrammable' art museum; for politicians, city planners, architects, and museum directors it represents the ability of cultural institutions to regenerate run-down regions. Whilst the museum combines innovative design and cutting-edge technology to create an enticing background for the art exhibited within, the big success of the Guggenheim is that it demonstrates the impact that the visual arts can have on a city's capacity to attract cultural visitors whilst positively changing its own psychology. The museum has brought hope to citizens and city officials and has united political parties, trade unions, and civic associations in an extensive urban regeneration still underway.

Description

The Guggenheim Museum in Bilbao, designed by American architect Frank Gehry, opened its doors in October 1997. The Guggenheim Bilbao, reminiscent of a gigantic sculpted ship evokes the past industrial life of Bilbao’s port and sits anchored on an irregularly shaped lot on the south side of an estuary along the Nervión River. Making a tangible physical connection with the city, the building circulates and extrudes around the Salve Bridge, and creates a curved riverside promenade and a public plaza on the south side of the river where the city grid ends. The museum consists of 24,000 square metres, 11,000 of which are reserved for exhibition space. In plan, ten of the nineteen galleries follow a classical rectangular shape and can be identified outside by the Spanish limestone finish. The rest of the galleries are formed of random organic shapes and are clad in titanium tiles less than 1mm thick creating an interesting juxtaposition with the orthogonal galleries.

A metal pin is placed in the centre of each titanium plate, making the surface appear to ripple in the changing light, giving a soft and elusive reflection. This undulating form is designed specifically to reflect light and appear to change its appearance depending on Bilbao’s unpredictable weather. There is not a clearly defined pattern of symmetry on any axis of the structure and the design is freely and somewhat randomly expressed. Each room is placed at a different heights and none are the same size, however many are very similar conceptually. All sections of the building seem to converge somewhere in the centre like a lotus flower. The central atrium acts as the point of entrance, convergence, and orientation. This space consists of a large open and curved volume flooded with natural light, is surrounded by large glass curtain walls, and is crowned with a large skylight. The three levels of galleries pirouette around this central space. Gehry used a 3D design software called CATIA to design the twisting curves within the structure of the museum; it allowed for complex designs and calculations which would not be possible otherwise. Essentially the software digitises points on the edges, surfaces and intersections of Gehry’s hand built models to construct on-screen versions that can then be manipulated.

Literature Review and Argument

In this section I will review texts which discuss and review the Guggenheim in Bilbao, paying particular attention to the socio-economic impact the museum has had on the surrounding area and argue why these factors render the Guggenheim a successful piece of architecture. In the article Is the Bilbao Effect Over? sociologist, Vicario, argues that as a symbol, the success of the Guggenheim Museum Bilbao is extremely apparent. The building is now the icon of the revitalised Bilbao and has placed the city on the map for tourists worldwide. While the Guggenheim Museum Bilbao was a costly venture (total cost of $228.3 million), its return on investment was complete as early as seven years after opening. Since it opened in October 1997, the Guggenheim Museum has attracted 7 million visitors, of which 60 percent are from out with Spain. In 2008 it already had nearly 16,000 individual members, this being the third largest membership in Europe after those of the long-established museums, the Louvre, and the Tate Gallery. This figure has undoubtedly increased exponentially in the 9 years since this figure was first calculated. Furthermore, the money spent from visitors on hotels, restaurants, shops, and transport collected 100 million in taxes. Figures show that since the museum's opening, it has created 907 new full-time jobs, whilst also contributing to the maintenance of approximately 4,500 jobs, principally in transport, hotels, restaurants, bars, coffee shops, and retail establishments. Additionally, it has added value to Bilbao amounting to more than €1.2 million, and earns around $39.9 million annually for the Basque treasury, which has produced an increase in local fiscal capacity and tax revenues close to €200 million.

The widespread success of the Guggenheim is also regarded by the museum’s director Juan Ignacio Vidarte. He declares that the Guggenheim's success is not only tied to economic factors; rather “the ‘Guggenheim effect’ has also been psychological: it has contributed to the recovery of civic pride. The museum gave citizens and politicians the courage to keep moving and be brave.” On the other hand, Vicario argues that despite the apparent economic and psychological gain caused by the Guggenheim Bilbao, recent figures on the rise of inequality and poverty in the city make it impossible to consider the Bilbao model a complete success. Severe poverty has increased in Bilbao since 2000 by 33 percent and in 2017 affected 11 percent of Bilbao households, a figure that is twice the average for the Basque region. Furthermore, the number of households receiving income assistance has increased by 38 percent since 2002. More focus is put is put on projects which redevelop the city centre to the detriment of the city’s underprivileged areas. This has exacerbated socio-spatial disparities in Bilbao and raises the risk of being seen as a ‘dual city.’ I.e. the idea of the two Bilbao's: the ‘new’ one represented by the renovated downtown, and the ‘old’ by the tired and deprived neighborhoods on the periphery.

To counteract both sides of this argument, one could argue that the idea of the Guggenheim effect is a massive oversimplification, as multiple factors have had an impact on the city. Regeneration within the city had already been underway for over a decade, for example with the installment of a new metro system designed by Norman Foster in 1988. This was followed by César Pelli's major 'master plan for Bilbao' in 1989, which suggested redeveloping derelict industrial districts into areas for business, leisure and residential purposes. Additionally, Santiago Calatrava designed the bridge, Zubizuri which crosses the Nervión River not far from the museum and was opened the same year. In 2000, the Santiago Calatrava designed airport terminal was opened. Bilbao essentially used cultural investment and infrastructure designed by world renowned architects to bring attention to the city and equal economic uplift. Thus, the specific goal of the Guggenheim was only to aid in the already existing plan for the rejuvenation of the city. The Guggenheim is very highly regarded in terms of its aesthetic characteristics. The architecture critic, Herbert Muschamp reviewed the museum in the New York Times Magazine. He famously wrote the museum was, 'the reincarnation of Marilyn Monroe. What twins the actress and the building is that both of them stand for an American style of freedom. That style is voluptuous, emotional, intuitive and exhibitionist. It is mobile, fluid, material, mercurial, fearless, radiant and as fragile as a newborn child.' This analogy clearly shows the astounding impact the museum has on the viewer; its inherent nature is to be iconic and will not easily be forgotten.

Part of the success of the Guggenheim is that despite its unconventional design, it reacts to and positively engages with its context. This argument is supported by Warren Schwart, in the article, Is the Bilbao Effect Over? who states that the Guggenheim Museum Bilbao is successful because it engages in dialogue with the psyche of the Basque people and with the context of its culture and place. Gehry used steel, stone, titanium, and water in the design of this museum to reflect the force, independence and industrial tradition of the Basque country in which it is situated. Piers Gough supports this in his article The Building as Jujitsu, by stating that the museum is also regarded as an abstracted view of the surrounding buildings, the colour, the quirks of style, and their twists on the corners.

Despite one’s opinion on the aesthetic qualities of the Guggenheim Museum Bilbao, one cannot deny that the socio-economic impact of the museum has been astounding. To sum up, the cost of the museum has essentially been repaid multiple times over. Clearly, the world has been inexorably drawn to the gleaming effervescence of its exterior and to the high-powered oomph of the spaces inside.

Conclusion

Bilbao’s Guggenheim is a seductive building due to its technological and aesthetic sophistication and its striking presence. It is a highly complex, active, sculptural form with elements that splay out in unexpected directions with curving planes that seem to float in space. The structure is unexpected, expressive and undoubtedly impresses all those who experience it. Furthermore, the building encourages the enjoyment of art, so that although the viewer is amazed, they are not over overwhelmed. Despite the other factors that may have contributed to the revitalization of Bilbao, the impact of the Guggenheim is indisputable. The museum cemented the idea that good architecture could create a powerful force of cultural allure.

Adrian Ellis from Art Newspaper quotes: “Bilbao” has become shorthand for the reincarnation of a rundown industrial city or district into a vibrant tourist destination due to capital investment in iconic architecture.” This is confirmed by Herbert Muschamp who stated in the New York Times: 'the miracle taking place here in Bilbao, however, is not Gehry's building, wondrous as it is. The miraculous occurrence is the extravagant optimism that enters in the outlook of those who have made the pilgrimage just to see the construction”. Many other cities have tried to recreate the ‘Guggenheim effect,’ but unfortunately few are quite as successful. After careful consideration of all sides of this argument, I would conclude that the socio-economic impact of the Guggenheim indeed renders it as a successful piece of architecture. Over twenty years after construction, the Bilbao Guggenheim remains an iconic structure for its complex form and has been hailed as a marvel of postmodern architecture.

Bibliography

1. Bruggen, Coosje van. Guggenheim Museum Bilbao. (New York, NY: Guggenheim Museum Publ, 1997)
2. Cuito, Aurora. Guggenheim. (Bilbao, Spain: Loft Publications, 2001)
3. Goldberger, Paul. Building Art. The Life and Work of Frank Gehry. (USA: Alfred A. Knopf, 2015)
4. Mathewson, Casey C. M. Frank O. Gehry (1969-Today, 21 Works). (Michigan: Firefly Books, 2007)
5. Ward, Sue. “Big is Beautiful - The Guggenheim Museum at Bilbao.” Art Book (2008) Volume 15, Issue 1 p60-62:
6. Ellis, Adrian. A Franchise Model for the Few – Very Few: The Guggenheim Bilbao Ten Years On. The Art Newspaper (2011) Volume 6 p44
7. Justin Crumbaugh, “An Aesthetic of Industrial Ruins in Bilbao: Daniel Calparsoro's Leap into the Void (Salto al vaco) and Frank Gehry's Guggenheim Museum Bilbao,” International Journal of Iberian Studies, Volume 14, Number 1 (2001), pp. 40-50
8. Garza Carvajal, Federico. “The Guggenheim Museum, Bilbao: a titanium whale sets anchor on the Nervión River.” Art Nexus. Issue 28 (1998), p68-70
9. Gough, Piers. “The Building as Jujitsu.” Modern Painters Volume 9 (1996) p50-56
10. Heathcote, Edwin; Vicario, Lorenzo. “Is the Bilbao effect over?” Apollo: The International Magazine for Collectors. Volume 185, Issue 651 (2017), p38-40
11. Jones, Anny Brooksbank. Challenging the seductions of the Bilbao Guggenheim. International Journal of Iberian Studies, Volume 16, Number 3 (2004)
12. Plaza, Beatriz. The Bilbao effect (Guggenheim Museum Bilbao). University of the Basque Country: Faculty of Economics. 2007.
13. Plaza, Beatriz; Tironi, Manuel; Haarich, Silke N. Bilbao's Art Scene and the “Guggenheim effect” Revisited. European Planning Studies, 2009.
14. Stephens, Suzanne. The Bilbao effect. Architectural Record Volume 187, Issue 5 (1999)