Now that Helsinki's city council has rejected the latest round of financing plans for the Guggenheim outpost, it appears that the winning design by Moreau Kusunoki most certainly won't be built. We reached out to the architects for comment, and they provided the following statement:
Guggenheim Helsinki was an extraordinary adventure despite the disappointing result of the vote from the City Council of Helsinki.
The reflections we had in conceiving the 21th-century museum in Helsinki were thought-provoking and revelatory, such as the participatory and social dimensions of the museum, the studies on in-between spaces and flexible use, and the use of charred-wood cladding.
This journey was also an opportunity to meet exceptional professionals, whose commitment to promoting art and architecture we deeply admire.
We are confident that this project represents a stepping stone and the possibility of an exciting future for our firm and for the field of architecture. It encourages new thoughts towards competitions, including openness and transparency, for an upcoming generation of architects.
The record number of participants in the competition and the high degree of international media interest towards the process demonstrate how people, despite the vicissitudes of life and economic difficulties, continue to find art and culture essential to life.
Get the full story on the Guggenheim Helsinki competition:
Updated December 5, 2016: Moreau Kusunoki's statement has been slightly condensed and revised since original publication, per their request.
4 Comments
Sad. They won the competition and that's super excellent.
I wish them all the best. More commissioned work is sure to come.
I'm also confident Sorkin is spinning with glee and his bogus counter competition can rage on with bitter jealously and contempt.
How many thousands of hours of free work went into this fiasco?
The design was good, the fault being the Guggenheim's stale program. You could easily fit in a more innovative program other than "not another dumb art museum"
How many of us know people who work of projects that were pro bono or fees were adjusted because the client needed somethings make develop financing for the project- only to have the project indefinitely mothballed. This competition was a big endeavor for a small practice, but was a similar situation- we need compelling images to make the financing work.
And I'm going to put forth the highline as a parallel. A major competition won by a small paper firm, that led to a major cultural project and a "real" practice" -after the funding was secured.
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.