I am asking this because I saw this interview with Paul GOLDBERGER, and he says that Frank Gehry has had the greatest effect, greatest impact of any architect, certainly in the last 20-25 years. In my opinion, I do not think that. I understand he has designed a lot of wonderful buildings but there are other good architects, such as Santiago Caltrava, Norman Foster, Renzo Piano, Zaha Hadid, Daniel Libeskind, OMA, Herzog and de Meuron, etc. I think Paul Goldberger is wrong in this question. I even think that the old architecture inspire you.
it's a pretty valid argument. Despite criticism of Gehry's work from a design standpoint, the Bilbao museum was a very significant project. It brought Architects back into the public eye and paved the way for Zaha, OMA and those other names. They had trouble building their designs for years. Then developers started to see Architects designs from a marketable point of view (since the Bilbao mueseum was attracting large numbers).
I think it let most of those Architects take their projects off of the page.
However, I don't believe that he had an enormous impact on their design methodologies or styles (as mentioned in your post). OMA or Meier had more design impact since most of the other big names have come out of their offices at one point or another...taking aspects of their styles or methodologies with them...
As an architectural studies major in undergrad, I was inspired to become an architect by the work of Gehry, Calatrava, Meier, and FLW. These were the major architects taught by my professors. I did many precedents on Meier and Calatrava in particular. Based on my graduating class, I would have to agree that Gehry is one of the most inspirational architects of our generation and has helped bring the spotlight back to the field of architecture.
May 28, 11 1:18 am ·
·
I disagree with the idea that Gehry is the most "inspirational" of the past 25 years but I will concede that he has had a major "effect" or "impact." His pioneering use of advance digital technologies (e.g., using airplane software to achieve his complexly curving buildings) by itself has had a huge impact on contemporary architecture, yo!
Some projects should be considered inspirational, such as Bilbao, but others merely instructional, such as the Fisher Center for Performing Arts at Bard College, though it is debatable whether the later was merely instructional due to some error Gehry committed.
I think it depends on what you mean by "inspirational." He probably is - to most people outside of the architecture world. It doesn't seem like there has been another architect within the last 50 years or so that achieved that kind of celebrity status or recognition as a household name. While not a definite signifier, you could point out the high-profile tv show cameo's he has had on The Simpsons and Arthur (yes, the kids show), as well as the coined "Bilbao Effect," among other things. In terms of the architectural community at-large, however, I would think he is not the most inspirational architect outright.
Like his work or not, I think the most inspirational is clearly Koolhaas. He changed the way we talk about and think about architecture. Pre-Koolhaas, form and function, proportion, materiality and light. Post-Koolhaas, flow and congestion, program and events, density, hybridity, temporality. Gehry may have changed the way the *public* views architecture.
You can't really argue against Gehry being the most influential living architect. Asked to name famous architects, your average household would name FLW and (maybe) Gehry.
So, I can't see how anyone could say anyone else was more influential. But for actual architecture students, there's probably a lot of influences out there, not just one.
He's also pushed the boundaries of technology and construction well beyond what others had attempted to do, single handedly changed an economy and created a phenomena (the "Bilbao Effect") that is still going on.
Not to mention his lesser contributions, like his own home!
kayg on Koolhaas - while I respect his contributions to the profession, and I think he's designed a decent building here and there, I can name many that have been more influential. I'd put almost all of the other stararchitects as being more influential, overall. That's just me, though. I prefer "form and function, proportion, materiality and light" to "flow and congestion....".
Currently, the contemporary architecture is more about environment and functionality. I think that Frank Gehry is a good architect, but sometimes his buildings are too exploited on the artistic side, and not in the functionality. A lot of his buildings are more useful as museums or entertainment functions, but I do not think that his buildings are good as Skyscrapers, business buildings or medical buildings. Those buildings require more functionality than beauty.
Glad to see people mentioning Rem as being the most influencial architects.I agree with it with both my hands forever. Again without checking out buildings by yourself, it is meaningless to talk about the influence.
First, let me point out the most influencial buildings by these architects:
Gehry: Dancing house in Czech.republic, Bilbao Guggenheim Museum
Rem: Seattle pub. library, IIT student center
Zaha: museum on Ohio
Eisenman: college of architecture on U of Cincinnati
For the regular people: Bilbao Guggenheim Museum would be the choice.
For the developer: Bilbao Guggenheim Museum is the favorite
For the profession: seattle and IIT
Found out the difference? Rem design building for the people, others design building only for specific group.
Without Rem, most of American people won't know know how to design because they would feel shamed when they see Gehry and Zaha's work. These two architects put more energy on the form, Rem on the contrast, put the program in the first priority.
As pointed out, I think it depends on what you mean by "inspirational". I mean, today we look at Gehry as this guy that we are sick of hearing about within the profession. However, we all hear about him. Everyone knows his name and how a "Gehry Building" looks. Also, his work and career is proof of where architecture can take you (to celebrity status) and how experimenting and doing something different can shake up the industry. Do I like his work? No. Do I want to design like him? No. Do I think you can really learn something from sitting down with one of his floor plans? No. Do I aspire to have my work someday viewed in the public and professional realms to such prestige? Yes.
At the end of the day, however, we are all inspired by something different. What I vibe with may be different than a lot of other choices.
Do you think that Norman Foster is an inspirational architect? Norman Foster is an inspirational architect for me, even a little bit more than Frank Gehry. A lot of his works are really good. He always thinks about the future of the world too, since he's trying to spread the sustainable architecture. He has a lot of good skyscrapers, such as 30 St Mary Axe in London.
I would say that malcolm wells (who?) and perhaps bill mcdonough (plus pliny fisk) will have the biggest impact on the next 25 years as the profession shifts to performance based design and away from form-based design (ala gehry/zaha)
I would say that malcolm wells (who?) and perhaps bill mcdonough (plus pliny fisk) will have the biggest impact on the next 25 years as the profession shifts to performance based design and away from form-based design (ala gehry/zaha)
I don't think there can be much of an argument against Rem Koolhaas being the most 'influential'... just look at the spin-offs from former OMA employees: Zaha Hadid, REX, MRVDV, Foreign Office Architects, BIG, Work AC, the list goes on and on. Add in his publications and polemics and overall body of work and you've got a guy who's commented on, dissected, and created the architecture of our times. That being said, he's truly an 'architect's' architect. He's someone who pushes the profession, while Gehry is more of an artist-type who provides inspiration to the public eye and gets them to notice architecture instead of ignoring it.
I would agree that Koolhaas has definitely advanced both scholarship and intellect in architecture. Sure, I think he has inspired individuals and firms - alot of those that "tricks" just named - but overall he is an "ideas" architect. There is no mode or operation that is unique to him. Don't get me wrong, he is a fantastic architect but there is no fiber that connects his work. Much like Herzog and De Meuron, there is no identity in the work (which is not to say that the work is bad). You do not come to some unfamiliar building and say, "That's a Koolhaas and I know that because ...." You have to be in the know. So much work is being done right now that could easily be confused with a Rem Koolhaas. But when you see a Gehry, a Meier, a Niemeyer or a FLLW - you more than not know who designed that building. As I said in my earlier post, I do not like Frank Gehry's work. But he is the progenitor of "the Bilbao Effect". I don't recall a "Seattle Central Library Effect". By developers and builders taking a chance on the wild work Gehry was doing in the 80s and 90s, it opened the doors for people to realize the ability of experimental and "eye-catching" architecture in city centers and as points of destination.
Do I think Koolhaas is a better and more dexterous architect than Gehry. Absolutely I do. However, I think Koolhaas is more influential (and maybe most influential) contemporary writer and theoretician on architecture.
Do you think that Frank Gehry is most inspirational architect for the new generation of architects?
I am asking this because I saw this interview with Paul GOLDBERGER, and he says that Frank Gehry has had the greatest effect, greatest impact of any architect, certainly in the last 20-25 years. In my opinion, I do not think that. I understand he has designed a lot of wonderful buildings but there are other good architects, such as Santiago Caltrava, Norman Foster, Renzo Piano, Zaha Hadid, Daniel Libeskind, OMA, Herzog and de Meuron, etc. I think Paul Goldberger is wrong in this question. I even think that the old architecture inspire you.
This is the video if want to watch it
http://bigthink.com/ideas/21034
it's a pretty valid argument. Despite criticism of Gehry's work from a design standpoint, the Bilbao museum was a very significant project. It brought Architects back into the public eye and paved the way for Zaha, OMA and those other names. They had trouble building their designs for years. Then developers started to see Architects designs from a marketable point of view (since the Bilbao mueseum was attracting large numbers).
I think it let most of those Architects take their projects off of the page.
However, I don't believe that he had an enormous impact on their design methodologies or styles (as mentioned in your post). OMA or Meier had more design impact since most of the other big names have come out of their offices at one point or another...taking aspects of their styles or methodologies with them...
As an architectural studies major in undergrad, I was inspired to become an architect by the work of Gehry, Calatrava, Meier, and FLW. These were the major architects taught by my professors. I did many precedents on Meier and Calatrava in particular. Based on my graduating class, I would have to agree that Gehry is one of the most inspirational architects of our generation and has helped bring the spotlight back to the field of architecture.
I disagree with the idea that Gehry is the most "inspirational" of the past 25 years but I will concede that he has had a major "effect" or "impact." His pioneering use of advance digital technologies (e.g., using airplane software to achieve his complexly curving buildings) by itself has had a huge impact on contemporary architecture, yo!
Some projects should be considered inspirational, such as Bilbao, but others merely instructional, such as the Fisher Center for Performing Arts at Bard College, though it is debatable whether the later was merely instructional due to some error Gehry committed.
I think it depends on what you mean by "inspirational." He probably is - to most people outside of the architecture world. It doesn't seem like there has been another architect within the last 50 years or so that achieved that kind of celebrity status or recognition as a household name. While not a definite signifier, you could point out the high-profile tv show cameo's he has had on The Simpsons and Arthur (yes, the kids show), as well as the coined "Bilbao Effect," among other things. In terms of the architectural community at-large, however, I would think he is not the most inspirational architect outright.
Really, one of my best inspirations is Michelangelo because The Vatican is one of the most beautiful buildings in this world.
Like his work or not, I think the most inspirational is clearly Koolhaas. He changed the way we talk about and think about architecture. Pre-Koolhaas, form and function, proportion, materiality and light. Post-Koolhaas, flow and congestion, program and events, density, hybridity, temporality. Gehry may have changed the way the *public* views architecture.
You can't really argue against Gehry being the most influential living architect. Asked to name famous architects, your average household would name FLW and (maybe) Gehry.
So, I can't see how anyone could say anyone else was more influential. But for actual architecture students, there's probably a lot of influences out there, not just one.
He's also pushed the boundaries of technology and construction well beyond what others had attempted to do, single handedly changed an economy and created a phenomena (the "Bilbao Effect") that is still going on.
Not to mention his lesser contributions, like his own home!
kayg on Koolhaas - while I respect his contributions to the profession, and I think he's designed a decent building here and there, I can name many that have been more influential. I'd put almost all of the other stararchitects as being more influential, overall. That's just me, though. I prefer "form and function, proportion, materiality and light" to "flow and congestion....".
until about 1988, i was very inspired by gehry.
Currently, the contemporary architecture is more about environment and functionality. I think that Frank Gehry is a good architect, but sometimes his buildings are too exploited on the artistic side, and not in the functionality. A lot of his buildings are more useful as museums or entertainment functions, but I do not think that his buildings are good as Skyscrapers, business buildings or medical buildings. Those buildings require more functionality than beauty.
Glad to see people mentioning Rem as being the most influencial architects.I agree with it with both my hands forever. Again without checking out buildings by yourself, it is meaningless to talk about the influence.
First, let me point out the most influencial buildings by these architects:
Gehry: Dancing house in Czech.republic, Bilbao Guggenheim Museum
Rem: Seattle pub. library, IIT student center
Zaha: museum on Ohio
Eisenman: college of architecture on U of Cincinnati
For the regular people: Bilbao Guggenheim Museum would be the choice.
For the developer: Bilbao Guggenheim Museum is the favorite
For the profession: seattle and IIT
Found out the difference? Rem design building for the people, others design building only for specific group.
Without Rem, most of American people won't know know how to design because they would feel shamed when they see Gehry and Zaha's work. These two architects put more energy on the form, Rem on the contrast, put the program in the first priority.
As pointed out, I think it depends on what you mean by "inspirational". I mean, today we look at Gehry as this guy that we are sick of hearing about within the profession. However, we all hear about him. Everyone knows his name and how a "Gehry Building" looks. Also, his work and career is proof of where architecture can take you (to celebrity status) and how experimenting and doing something different can shake up the industry. Do I like his work? No. Do I want to design like him? No. Do I think you can really learn something from sitting down with one of his floor plans? No. Do I aspire to have my work someday viewed in the public and professional realms to such prestige? Yes.
At the end of the day, however, we are all inspired by something different. What I vibe with may be different than a lot of other choices.
Do you think that Norman Foster is an inspirational architect? Norman Foster is an inspirational architect for me, even a little bit more than Frank Gehry. A lot of his works are really good. He always thinks about the future of the world too, since he's trying to spread the sustainable architecture. He has a lot of good skyscrapers, such as 30 St Mary Axe in London.
I would say that malcolm wells (who?) and perhaps bill mcdonough (plus pliny fisk) will have the biggest impact on the next 25 years as the profession shifts to performance based design and away from form-based design (ala gehry/zaha)
.
I would say that malcolm wells (who?) and perhaps bill mcdonough (plus pliny fisk) will have the biggest impact on the next 25 years as the profession shifts to performance based design and away from form-based design (ala gehry/zaha)
.
I don't think there can be much of an argument against Rem Koolhaas being the most 'influential'... just look at the spin-offs from former OMA employees: Zaha Hadid, REX, MRVDV, Foreign Office Architects, BIG, Work AC, the list goes on and on. Add in his publications and polemics and overall body of work and you've got a guy who's commented on, dissected, and created the architecture of our times. That being said, he's truly an 'architect's' architect. He's someone who pushes the profession, while Gehry is more of an artist-type who provides inspiration to the public eye and gets them to notice architecture instead of ignoring it.
I would agree that Koolhaas has definitely advanced both scholarship and intellect in architecture. Sure, I think he has inspired individuals and firms - alot of those that "tricks" just named - but overall he is an "ideas" architect. There is no mode or operation that is unique to him. Don't get me wrong, he is a fantastic architect but there is no fiber that connects his work. Much like Herzog and De Meuron, there is no identity in the work (which is not to say that the work is bad). You do not come to some unfamiliar building and say, "That's a Koolhaas and I know that because ...." You have to be in the know. So much work is being done right now that could easily be confused with a Rem Koolhaas. But when you see a Gehry, a Meier, a Niemeyer or a FLLW - you more than not know who designed that building. As I said in my earlier post, I do not like Frank Gehry's work. But he is the progenitor of "the Bilbao Effect". I don't recall a "Seattle Central Library Effect". By developers and builders taking a chance on the wild work Gehry was doing in the 80s and 90s, it opened the doors for people to realize the ability of experimental and "eye-catching" architecture in city centers and as points of destination.
Do I think Koolhaas is a better and more dexterous architect than Gehry. Absolutely I do. However, I think Koolhaas is more influential (and maybe most influential) contemporary writer and theoretician on architecture.
barry, malcom wells....isn't he dead?
plinky....now that is a name I haven't heard in years. Givem...Hell Plinky!
Block this user
Are you sure you want to block this user and hide all related comments throughout the site?
Archinect
This is your first comment on Archinect. Your comment will be visible once approved.