The Bilbao Effect

The Bilbao effect arose because of Gehry’s successful Guggenheim Museum in Bilbao. The term, for most, is describing a way for post-industrial cities to use architecture and art to help regeneration and development of an area and is therefore replicated by planners across different cities (Dickson, 2017). Dividing opinions of such critics using the term as a way to castigate the museum as a symbol of cultural imperialism because of the lack of regard for the traditional culture and way of life (Hedgecoe & Whittle, 2012). On the other hand, some praise it because of the sheer ability to create such an icon which transformed Bilbao seemingly overnight, with many news outlets, media and architects such as Philph Johnson praising the structure calling it “the greatest building of our time.” (Lee, 2007).

Replicating the Guggenheim Museum in Bilbao is often described as a gambled risk (MacCannell, D. 2011). This is because opening the museum netted a $20 million fee from the Basque government, the launch of ‘Guggenheim.com flop’ cost the backers of the museum $20 million and the director Thomas Krens was forced to cut the 2003 budget for the Guggenheim by 13 percent on the previous year (Sudjic, D. 2011). Yet, cities still aim for iconic pieces of architecture to help ensure economic success which doesn’t come without risk.

Figure 1. Close up of Guggienheim Musuem Bilbao, photographed by Prins (2019)

Guggienheim Musuem photographed by Prins (2019)

Figure 2. Close up of Guggienheim Musuem Bilbao, photographed by ar_ graff (2011)

Essentially, Bilbao created the trend of cities creating icons in the form of architecture to serve as a catalyst for better economic prosperity, whether or not the architecture itself is important is debatable. As said by critic Deyan Sudjic (2011) “One Bilbao can shock its way into the headlines but replicating the trick is the way to an architecture of diminishing returns” (p.392) This suggests that not every piece of architecture that aims to be as successful as Guggenheim in Bilbao actually achieves the desired attention and often times leads to designs that have more shock than value. However, others such as Benjamin Forgey claims “Gehry and others have done enough now to certify that being different from the norm -- even extraordinarily different -- is not evil.” (Forgey, 2002. N.p). This shows that although the architecture is different it’s not necessarily bad. This could reflect the views of a changing society, building no longer needing to relate to context or history but being their own entity which provides the city, in this case Bilbao with a new sense of pride.

Figure 3. Guggenheim Museum Bilbao Project Sketch Gehry F (1999)

The Bilbao effect has led to an increase in ‘Starchitects’ which is described as architects who have achieved massive critical acclaim and gained a celebrity status in the world of architecture because of it (Sklair, 2017). Gehry is the main example of a starchitect whose designs have become iconic and are highly recognisable. As critic Sudjic (2011) discussed, the Guggienheim Bilbao had catapulted Gehry into celebrity status. The partnership of the then director of Guggienheim Krens and architect Gehry made each other famous as Gehry became a star whilst Krens became “the most talked about museum director in the world” (p.362). Similar to how Krens was able to become well-known and as Gehry had ushered in a new era of iconic buildings and set the standard for what a starchitect would be, more have risen. Many city planners and investors are looking for the next iconic piece of architecture that would be able to transform areas like how Gehry transformed Bilbao from a place plagued with crime and terriorism to an affluent tourist attraction (Sudjic, 2011).