Architectural icons as an element of tourist attractions

ARCHITECTURAL ICONS AS AN ELEMENT OF TOURIST ATTRACTIONS

Autor: Nahal Fathi

Tutor:Dr. Jaume Font i Garolera

1

LOS ICONOS ARQUITECTÓNICOS COMO ELEMENTO DE ATRACCIÓN TURÍSTICA.

Trabajo final para la obtenación del grado de master en gestión turística de los destinos urbanos

Autor:Nahal Fathi/Tutor: Dr. Jaume Font i Garolera

2

1. INTRODUCTION 1.1. Justification of the subject 1.2. Objectives 1.3. State of art 1.4. Methodology 2. TOURISM AND CONTEMPORARY ARCHITECTURE 2.1. Architourism 2.2. Architecture and mass tourism 2.2.1. Authentic 2.3. The Tourist perception - Spectacular 2.4. Iconic buildings 3. CASE STUDIES 3.1. Guggenheim Bilbao by Frank Gahry 3.1.1. Bilbao connection 3.1.2. Frank Gahry 3.1.3. A cultural space 3.2. Centro Cultural by Oscar Niemeyer 3.2.1. Niemeyer effect 3.2.2. Oscar Niemeyer 3.3. City of Arts and Sciences by Santiago Calatrava 3.3.1. Valencia connection 3.3.2. Tourist statistics of city of art and science 3.3.3. Santiago Calatrva 4. GUGGENHEIM BILBAO ANALYSIS 4.1. Guggenheim Bilbao and Global imagination 4.1.1. The four part strategy 4.2. Focusing on a city 4.2.2. Beyond physical building 5. INTERVIEWS 5.1. Josep Maria Llop 5.2. Mauro Bianucci 5.3. Richard Pie Ninot 5.4. Kamran Heirati 5.5. Mehdi Bakhshizade 5.6. Kiarash Milaninia 6. Conclusion 7. Bibliography

3

ABSTRACT Modern architecture creates iconic city landscape that increasingly shape our mental imagery of city destinations. Architecture and tourism are more connected than ever now. Contemporary buildings has created tourist destination in the cities which may not have been even known before the creation of the building. Creating an iconic architecture has shown that it can attract tourist from thousands of miles away and put a pin on the unknown destination. The new term, Architoursim, unveils the possibility for a single work of contemporary architecture by a name architect to attract hordes of tourists to previously marginal place.

Its immediate provocation was the “Bilbao effect� one of the architectural surprises of the end of the last century. Within the past decades, many of the nation’s leading museums and concert halls have hired starchitects such as Gehry, Calatrava, Libeskind and etc to create singularly stunning structures that attract the tourists like a massive titanium magnet. Using a building to simulate tourism and solidify urban identity is hardly a new phenomenon, having a history dating back to ancient Greece.

In modern times, landmark skyscrapers have been the boldest signature of urban identity, attracting tremendous number of tourists.

This study seek to further the effect of contemporary architecture, as an icon in the city , on tourism industry. A bilblographic analysis and interview with several experts placed in this investigation that how these building gain attention of the tourists in their particular way. keywords: Iconic building, Contemporary architecture, Architetural destination, Architourism, Starchitect.

4

RESUMEN La arquitectura moderna ha conseguido crear ciudades con paisajes emblemáticos, auténticos y particulares, que han conseguido permanecer en los recuerdos. Arquitectura y turismo hoy en día están más unidos que nunca. Edificios contemporáneos han creado destinos turísticos en las ciudades que anterior a la construcción de tales edificios no eran conocidas.

Está demostrado que una arquitectura icónica, es capaz de activar el turismo de cualquier localidad y llevar los turistas a destinos incluso desconocidos. El nuevo término, Arquitoursimo, habla de la posibilidad de conseguir atraer a turistas desde miles de kilómetros a una zona marginaria simplemente construyendo obras arquitectónicas adecuadas.

“Efecto Bilbao” es mundialmente conocido como una de las Sorpresas Arquitectónicas de los finales del Siglo Pasado. Durante las ultimas décadas, muchos de los principales museos nacionales y salas se conciertos han contratado starchitects; arquitectos de renombre como Gehry, Calatrava, Libeskind y etc para crear ambientes singulares e impresionantes que prometan atraer a masas como un Imán.

Arquitectura como estimulo de turismo e Identidad urbana no es un fenómeno nuevo, y se remonta a la época de la antigua Grecia. En Los Tiempos Modernos, los rascacielos más emblemáticos han sido la firma Más audaz de la Identidad urbana.

El presente estudio reflexiona sobre el efecto de la arquitectura contemporánea como sello de identidad, atravesando la industria del turismo. Un Análisis bilblogohica basada en las entrevistas de varios expertos en como dichas construcciones consiguen promover el turismo particularmente.

Palabras clave: Edificio Iconico, Arquitectura Contemporánea, Destino Architetural, Arquitourism, starquitect.

5

1. INTRODUCTION Its almost impossible to refer to the tourism without mentioning the role of architecture and their reciprocal effect. Tourism is a highly growing activity all over the world. It includes the activities of person traveling to and staying in places outside their usual environment for business, leisure and other purposes. Architecture in the form of monuments, buildings, towers, religious buildings, particular elements and even objects are one of the most desired attraction of tourism industry. These are valuable assets for a country to contribute to its economic while at the same time show the people of other countries and regions its artistic and historical values and qualities. The reason for visiting a place may have nothing to do with its architecture. However, within a touristic frame, architecture is always in play. Architecture provides context, even when it is not the primary object of attention.

At historical attractions, the fame of the building as architecture can eventually eclipse the fame of memories and famous or infamous figures associated with it, simply by outliving the memory or the figure.

The impact of architecture on tourism describes a wide field from the architectural infrastructure needed to transport and host tourists to architecture as tourism attraction. Tourism sells beautiful experience and places and architecture makes thus an essential contribution to design successful tourism destinations.

Architecture always had a strong influence on tourists. In last decades, however, a distinct transformation has taken place where as some years ago only historical monuments were able to draw masses of tourists but nowadays outstanding modern architecture exerts the same force of attraction. This recent development offers a completely new perspective to destinations that have yet not even been present on the tourist’s maps, for instance due to lack of attractive landscape or cultural heritage. Modern architecture might be an instrument to enhance new and existing tourism destinations and to create a new image of tourist destinations. Survey has shown that the architectural image has a considerable influence on the selection of a holiday destination. Film, photography and souvenirs have thus been deployed to help mediate and mythologize specific sites.

1.1. JUSTIFICATION OF THE SUBJECT This investigation concentrates on the role of iconic architecture which brings the worlds attraction and how it affect the tourism industry of the destination. Although that architecture has been a destination for tourists, Bilbao embodies a new kind of architecture focused on modern architecture.

Bilbao has set an example on how architectural can be used as means of development, and urban tourism development in particular.

The building of the Guggenheim Museum does reinforce an emerging new paradigm concerning the relationship among urban design, urban space morphology and urban tourism: irrespective of the particular functions and activities accommodated in space, it is avant-garde design of both buildings and open spaces that can make urban space morphology in itself and of itself a sightseeing, a tourist resource.

The most visited cities in the world are valued because of their architectural characteristics either the historical or modern architecture. Modern architecture has brought a massive tourists to these new destinations which some of them are more successful and some aren’t but the question is what make a destination in terms of modern architecture more popular than the other destination and how this phenomena will be continued in the future?

The iconic building, a term generally used in connection with contemporary architecture, star architects(starchitect) which gave rise to another term, architourism, initiated several years ago as the hottest trend in tourism, it has been a hugely successful branding marketing tool.

This investigation consist of three chapters, the first chapter describes the vinculation between contemporary architecture and tourism and what makes a building iconic and to also gauge the iconic effect it has on the growth of the city and it’s tourism industry. In this part we will discuss the term architourism although architecture pilgrimage as a form of tourism are not new, the focus is on visiting contemporary buildings, specially the iconic buildings.

In the second chapter we will make general overview of some of the famous iconic contemporary

6

architecture masterpiece and how they had impact on the tourism industry of the area. The term starchitect, those in charge of regeneration and commissioning, who followed the route of using an attention grabbing building as a catalyst for change, called upon high profile international ‘signature’ architects (dubbed starchitects by the press) to design them. Many examples abound such as Calatrava’s work, the city of art and science in Valencia, Guggenheim Bilbao by frank Gehry, Oscar Niemeyer intentional and cultural center in Aviles. which will be discussed in this chapter of the research.

In the third chapter of the research there will be a complete analyses of Guggenheim Bilbao In the Basque region and it’s influence on the tourist industry of the area and it’s international image and how it became an iconic building that attracts a lot of national and international tourists. The use of a spectacular piece of contemporary architecture in regeneration project to simulate the economy by attracting visitors, local and otherwise, has been dubbed by academics the press alike the ‘Bilbao effect’.

The fourth chapter will be dedicated to a series of interviews with the experts related to architecture and tourism industry and at the end of the interviews there will be an analysis about their opinions.

1.2. OBJECTIVES General objectives - The evolution of contemporary architecture in Tourism industry.(The evolution of Architourism).

- The role of contemporary architecture in regeneration of tourist destinations.

- Understanding the tourist behaviour in architectural spaces.

Specific objectives -Identifying the principals of contemporary architecture and how a building become iconic as a tourist attraction.

-Analysing several tourist case studies in Spain such as: Guggenheim Bilbao, Cultural center Oscar Niemeyer, City of Arts and Sciences by Santiago Calatrava.

-Determine the strategies behind the “Bilbao effect” and why it became world successful example of architourism.

1.3. STATE OF ART Several studies discuss the use of architecture to create a sense of civil heritage, regional or national sharing such as in cases of Spain, France and Cuba. Jordana Mendelson, Debora D.Hurtt and D.lasansky show how to construct new identities for these places by displaying a strong architectural character. In each case, the final product is a combination of existing and imagined places, reconstituted separately and presented to the public through various communication strategies.

High quality architecture stands for function and well-being, Orientation, functionality and quality of space are hygenic factors and due to this reason are indispensable for guest satisfaction. High quality architecture stands for corporate identity, the very first impression of guest and potential customers is mostly enmeshed in architecture. The iconic building, a great snapshot, the ‘it’ destination, the ‘must have’ holiday visit, the pinup poster of modern urban tourism, the celebrity age tourist hotspot.

In terms of tourism, it is a vacuous representation of the age and all its slogans, a mere spectacle.

7

When you think of Paris the Eiffel tower comes to mind, with New york,it might be the state of liberty and with sydney, it is undoubtedly Sydney Opera House. All these buildings have become icons for their respective cities. What makes these buildings icon are their individual and highly recognizable design so when people see a picture of them, they know exactly what city they are looking at.

1.4. METHODOLOGY: An iconic building is one that shouts about its presence thats transcends its context and makes a commanding statement. The starchitect and architourism terms plays an important role in this context that make a building iconic. there are wide veriety of resources to fulfill this chapter such as: Architecture and tourism:perception,performance and place by D.medina Lasansky, Brian Mc laren, Architourism: Authentic, Escapist, Exotic, Spectacular, Joan ockman, Tourism Culture and regeneration, edited by Melanie Smith.

Architects in charge of regeneration and commissioning, who followed the route of using an attention grabbing buildings as a catalyst for change, called upon high profile international signature architects to design them, Such as Calatrava, Frank Gahry and Oscar Niemeyer project in Valencia, Bilbao and Aviles. Gathering of information in this section also is based on documental analysis of the resources such as:http://www.guardian.co.uk/travel/2011/jul/01/aviles-asturias-northern-spain-niemeyer, learning from guggenheim Bilbao, Ana Maria Guasch, Joseba Zulika. There will be a compression between these these three examples and their functionality in the national and international context.

The case study of Guggenheim Bilbao is remote from the main pilgrimage routes of contemporary tourism and the most successful example which saved the basque region after its post-industrial crises.In this section there will be thorough exploitation of sources in different aspects such as: New Politics of the Spectacle: “Bilbao” and the Global Imagination by Joan Ockman, learning from Guggenheim Bilbao, Ana Maria Guasch, Joseba Zulika.

Some of main concentration of the analyses will be according to these four items: 1. Analysis of Guggenheim museum in it’s context in relationship with the city.

2. Marketing tools of the project.

3. Analysis of it’s national and international tourists.

4. Guggenheim as a cultural tool for regeneration of the city.

8

2

TOURISM AND CONTEMPORARY ARCHITECTURE

Many well-known architects of the 1990’s such as Frank Gahry, Santiago Calatrava and Christian Marclay, has created buildings as icon of their own individuality. These modern buildings are designed to be pure spectacular.

These buildings are synonym with the architects, “starchitect” , fusion of a star and architect. The importance of the buildings is being evaluated based on their reflection of the architect’s personality and authentic design. Just as people travel to gaze at celebrities and locations of movie sets, a new desire is being cultivate with people wanting to view spectacle of modern buildings designed by “starchitects”.

The use of architecture to stimulate commerce and solidify an urban identity through the cultivation of tourism is not rare. There has been a strong recognition that tourists are becoming interested in modern architecture when considering a tourist destination for vacation.

9

2.1. Architourism The term Architourism1 is referring to architecture as a destination for tourism. Its immediate provocation was the “Bilbao effect” one of the architectural surprises of the end of the last century was undoubtedly the spectacular success of Frank Gahry’s Guggenheim Museum in Bilbao, Completed in 1997. That a singular building in a provincial local could be so captivate the popular imagination, globally and locally. It should be credited with regenerating a whole city at a time when bricks and mortar has supposedly been displaced by lighter and faster forms of cultural currency was reason for celebration -at least among architects- as much as for reflection.

The Architourism planning started back in 2000. The term Architourism is coined by analogy to other types of tourism like ecotourism, art tourism, and heritage tourism, in order to suggest that architecture is becoming a marketable destination today, now has its own niche in the tourist industry.

Nowadays, large swaths of cities around the world fall to the tourists. These districts rhythm follow the comings and goings of buses, boats, trains and planes. A tourist precinct is in some ways less apart of its own region tan a point along the international lanes of travel. In summertime especially the number of tourists can approximate or exceed the number of locals. When it comes to old monuments, the gap between the tourist zone and local culture can become as wide as grand canyon.

Most tours to Greece concentrate on sunny islands and ivory columns dating back to classical times.

Many tourist are surprised when, and if, they find out that modern Greece grew out of Roman/Byzantine civilization and christianity.

Work of modern architecture customarily have been left off the postcards, and out of the tour and guide books. In because of its assault on tradition, the great work of the modern movement have rarely been included in mass tours premised on tradition even in the guidebooks of all strips- from the blue guide to lonely planet- omitted the accomplishments of architecture after the year 1900.

With rare exceptions, the focus was on older, pre industrial monuments. Even famous works by Mies van der Rohe, Louis Kahn, or Tadao Ando often haven’t been mentioned. The only recourse is to find a specific architectural guide or compose an architectural tour of one’s own thorough extensive research beforehand. Modern architecture neglect by mass tourism does offer some enticing opportunities for intrepid individuals. Many cities have capitalized on the audience for organized tours of modern architecture, they only rarely accommodate large numbers of tourists. Mass tourism, the kind that has demonstrable economic impacts on a city, depends on media buzz.

The term architoursim, unveils the possibility for a single work of contemporary architecture by a name architect to attract hordes of tourists previously marginal place. In 1997, the opening of Frank Gehry’s Guggemheim Museum in northern Spain inaugurated what has been called the “Bilbao effect”. Tour groups and individuals who wouldn’t have given a second’s thought to visiting the gritty industrial city of Bilbao descended in droves. The acclaimed building brought economic vitality to the region, generating hundreds of millions of euros in its first tree years. One can view the spanish city’s aging steel mills and shipyards from the side walk tables of a glitzy restaurant and then shop in one of many designer boutiques. In milwaukee art museum by Santiago Calatrava, completed in 2001, successfully transplanted the Bilbao effect to the shores of Michigan, Attracting a half million visitors during its first year. On a smaller scale, in 2004, the small northern California. city of redding unveiled a footbridge by Calatrava. Spanning the upper Sacramento River, the soaring Sundial Bridge has lured thousands of people to exit the interstate and venture into the largely unknown former cow town, turing it into a tourist stopover. The unabashed goal of the gas station, boathouse, and cemetery designs is to draw tourists to the area, along the lines of Wright’s famous house fallingwater, which, even in its remote rural location in pennsylvania, counts 100,000 visitors a year.

So many large cities around the world have become aware that striking buildings by signature architects can act as touristic magnet. In recent years, Koolhaas’s library Seattle, Gehry’s Disney Concert Hall in Los Angeles, and Herzog and de Meuron’s Tate Modern in London function in this way. Stunning new architecture can Attract tourists to the most remote parts of the globe. The recent Tjibaou cultural center by Renzo piano has put the city of Noumea, New Caledonia, on the tourist

1

Architourism: Architecture as a Destination for Tourism (organized in 2002 by the Temple Hoyne Buell Center for the Study of American Architecture at Columbia University)

10

map, one website touts it as one of the next seven wonders of the world. Using a building to simulate tourism and solidify urban identity is hardly a new phenomenon, having a history dating back to ancient Greece. In modern times, landmark. skyscrapers have been the boldest signature of urban identity, attracting tremendous number of tourists. On a slightly modest scale, particularly concert halls, museums, bridges or monuments have stood out from their surroundings and lent their cities the glamour of instant recognition and allure.

Image 1: Historical architecture as a tourist attraction, Temple of Olympian Zeus in Greece, Athens

image 2: Koolhaas’s library Seattle

iMAGE 3: Gahry’s Disney Concert Hall in Los angeles

Image 4: Tjibaou cultural center

by Renzo piano

Image 5: Tate Modern in London

Modern Architecture as a tourist Attraction

11

In the period preceding the rise of architourism , Eero Saarinen’s Gateway Arch in St. louis(1966) and Joren Utzon’s Sydney opera house(1973) became icon of their respective cities, drawing millions of visitors over the years. The difference today lies in the number of tourist magnet buildings underway, as well as the marketing considerations that go into all aspects of project planning, including design. Tourism is a far more important sector of the world economy that it was fifty or one hundred years ago.

What makes Gehry’s Guggenheim Museum Bilbao and Calatrava’s Milwaukee Art Museum unique in their settings, and the reason they were chosen from among other possible designs, is their iconic lasting form. At the time of their construction they looked like no other architecture. This exceptionality accords well with the mechanic of mass tourism. Tour groups greedily consume one-of-a-kind things. It has helped that both buildings photograph well. Their size and complexity can be captured in a single immediately identifiable shot. Such reductive image-bites are employed in a variety of sales campaigns from billboards to postcards, brochures, magazine spreads, and the internet. In the tourism it is the consumer not the product that moves, Because the product is usually sold before the consumer sees it, the marking of tourism is intrinsically more significant than in conventional case where the product can bee seen, tested and compared to similar product in site. It means that the representation of place, the images created for marketing, the vivid videos and persuasive prose of advertising texts, can be as selective and creative as the marketer can make them.

Increasingly, the kind of contemporary architecture that stimulates mass tourism has to be not only photogenic but also telegenic -buildings that look striking in a sequence of rapid fire cuts or that stand out in static shot behind the pretty features of a talking head. Many buildings of this sort end up as backdrops. In marketing these kind of destination, the iconic building is a powerful tool. For generating architourism, there is no doubt these seductive value of these highly photogenic buildings. To attract the potential visitor, attention grabbing images combined with the celebrity of the signature architect, are a great publicity generator. Development and regeneration are the creation and recreation of a place respectively, an adoption of a new identity. Through publicity, images of these buildings become symbols of a place’s new identity. 2 With the cities looking to position themselves as a destination in the global market place, the use of architecture creates a visible distinction, an identity opportunity in a city’s destination brand development. Abu Dhabi is a prime example of this Publicity on the website for the Saadiyat development describes the culture district as the soul upon which the entire fabric of the island is built. With its array of architectural icons Saadiyat island Cultural District fuels the imagination, Supported further with lots of glossy pictures of these proposed buildings, Saadiyat’s point of difference is then explained as “the home of dazzling architectural icons, the only place in the world to house architecture designed by five individual Pritzker (International architecture)prize winners.

Iconic buildings are a powerful tool when it comes to the marketing cities with such buildings as tourist destination. Great architecture did this. There are a lot of cities around the world which experienced a newly refined identity because of being associated with great architecture. The hotel industries has also benefited from this phenomena. Within the past decades, many of the nation’s leading museums and concert halls have hired starchitects such as Gehry, Calatrava, Libeskind, Zaha Hadid and etc, to create singularly stunning structures that, attract the tourists like a massive titanium magnet. So too hoteliers are renovating landmark buildings in major cities into new use as signature hotels.

2 Architourism: Authentic, Escapist, Exotic, Spectacular, Salomon Frausto (Author, Editor), Joan Ockman (Editor)

12

Image 6

Image 7

Image 8

In the photos above we can see some of the most iconic work of contemporary starchitects from left to right: Guggenheim museum by Frank Gehry in Bilbao, Denver Art Museum by Daniel Libeskind , Milwakee art museum by Santiago Calatrava.

Image 9

Saadiyat Island in Abu Dahbi and it’s project updates including two of the most known architectonic buildings Louvre Abu Dahbi and Guggenheim Abu Dahbi, source: Saadiat island, http://www.saadiyat.ae/en/

13

2.2. Architecture and mass tourism Architecture and tourism are more connected than ever now that the museum directors and mayors of the world over are trying to redraw the globe’s cultural map, commissioning spectacular contemporary architecture by Michel Angelo and Leonardos of our time. The World Trade Center, built in 1973, was one of the earliest examples of contemporary architecture as tourist attraction, a trend which only gained significant momentum in the late 1990’s. As one of New York City’s most popular tourist attractions, the twin towers were powerful expressions of American contemporary culture.

Rather than visiting only monuments from earlier eras - the Empire State Building, Rockefeller Center, Central Park - tourists were drawn to the towers. They were the buildings that local architecture critics loved to hate, but to many tourists they spoke eloquently of their time and place. Although the future plans for the site are unclear, it will undoubtedly be of immense interest as a reflection of the ideals and values of a post-September 11th New York City.

The connection between architecture and tourism is nothing new. Since the Grand Tours of the 17th through 19th centuries, travelers have acquainted themselves with the great art and architecture of Europe. Affluent North Americans and Europeans toured Paris, Florence, Rome, Venice, London, Athens and other grand capitals of European civilization seeking inspiration, sophistication and education. Today, however, a new kind of grand tour is taking place. In place of such sublime cathedrals and grand public buildings as St. Peter’s in Rome and the pyramid Louvre in Paris, travelers are now celebrating contemporary culture, seeking out the most interesting new buildings by living architects.

The past is still key to the ability of contemporary tourist environment to attract but now in a very different way from the past. Tourism studies are also strongly pervaded by a variety of moral judgement that do not turn out to be easy to manage. The goodness of the past turn out to be easy to manage.

The goodness of the past turns out to be based on a very complex process of fragmentation, distinction and cultural construction that makes the past intelligible in some kind of contrastive relationship with the present. Physical mobility also needs more attention. Part of the origin of contemporary tourism in the “Grand Tour” centered on its direct association to social class. Now mass tourism through mass transportation has made the “classiness” of tourism much more complex. Class and tourism are inextricably intertwined and the world of the built environment necessarily embraces all these dimentions. But how to embrace this self-consciously and use these understandings to promote good architecture practices and more satisfactory experience for both travelers and residents still remains problematic.

The scholars have contributed to the development of a language for discussing tourism, Judith Adler(1989) introduced us to the origins of sightseeing or the visualization of the travel experience which is dependent upon eyewitness observation. Political scientist Dennis Judd coined the useful phrase “tourist bubble” to describe the way in which cities have constructed clean, safe and attractive self-contained environment in which to entertain(Judd and fainstein 1999). Georgy Ashworth and J.E Tunbridge (1990) identified the practice of “heritage tourism” to explain the use of history as a key component in constructing a marketable image for cities. Contemporary artists have also undertaken compelling studies of tourism such as Martin Parr photographed tourists at tourist sites.3 He artfully captured the prescribed ways in which tourist interact with sites, pretending to hold up the leaning tower of Pisa or riding gondolas through the canals in Venice. So the work of mentioned artists and other artists such as Zig Jackson and Coco Fusco whose works prompts the spectator to self consciously question practices of tourist consumption. As Mark Neumann(1999) has noted, tourist sites are discursive spaces that involves planners, politicians, preservationists, artists and tourists.

3

Architecture and Tourism- Perception, Performance and Place, Thanikaivel Selvaraj.

14

Here you can see a series of photos taken by Martin Parr, he studied the behaviour of tourists in different architectonic places.

In this folio of images we can see what we do when we arrive to the site. We all have an image of what a place looks like, especially if it is an iconic site like the Pyramids or the Eiffel Tower. But when we get there the reality can often be quite different. One of the central agendas in this folio concerns the mythology versus reality of actually being at a tourist site.

This contradiction lends itself very well to photography.

Image: 10: Barcelona, Park Guel, Iguana sculpture, source: www. martinparr.com

image 11: Italy. Pisa. The Leaning Tower of Pisa. source: www. martinparr.com

Image 13: Greece. Athens. Acropolis, source: www.martinparr.com

Image 12: Barcelona, Sagrada Famiia, source: www.martinparr.com

Image 14: Barcelona, Camp nou, source: www.martinparr.com

15

It has been suggested by architect and theorist Aldo Rossi(1982) among others, that architecture is simultaneously a site, event and sign. As Marc Auge suggested during a presentation at the architourism conference at Colombia University in 2002, it is the travel agents and advertisers that play an important role in constructing popular perception about destinations, then the concept of Architect needs to be expanded to include a greater array of “designers”.

There is slight differance in relationship between the construction of an architectural image, the actual site, its history and the way in which it is consumed. The anthropologists, sociologists and political scientists have been dealing with the issue of tourism for several decades, only recently have architectural historian began to assess the role played by tourism in the history of built environment.

The relationship between tourism and built space, it is simultaneously a part of a rich body of emerging contemporary scholarship examining this connection. Several studies explore the way in which architecture has been deployed to cultivate a sense of shared civic, regional, or national patrimony.

In the case of Spain we can see how new identities are constructed for these sites by visualizing a distinct architecture character and the final product results from a conflation of existing and imagined sites into a new whole that is presented to the public through various mass-media strategies. Like in the case of Guggenheim museum the success of this site is largely indebted to mass media but they are not mass produced this building is rooted in the cultural specificity of their respective sites and, as such, decry any sense of globalized homogeneity. The Guggenheim Bilbao is emblematic of a new kind of tourism, while architecture has been a destination of tourists for centuries Bilbao embodies a new kind of Architourism that focuses on modern architecture. No where is more evident than in the case of Bilbao where the building has been mediated by the popular press.

- Authentic The concept of authenticity cannot be defined without defining inauthentic. That which is thought to be purposeful and real always stands in relationship to an antinomic other. The history of the authenticity/inauthenticity trope is key in the formulation of a critical history of the Enlightenment-modernist project. It touches not only on the history of the different sciences and philosophies of the self but also on such obviously related phenomena as the history of capitalism, politics and tourism.

Authenticity in tourism studies is a philosophical concept which has been uncritically introduced into sociological analysis. Furthermore, in tourism studies, the concept is used to characterize criterion of evaluation used by the modern tourist as observer. MacCannell suggested that “authenticity” is a socially constructed concept. The search for authenticity is too simple a foundation for explaining contemporary tourism. Authenticity is relevant to some kinds of tourism such as ethnic, history or culture tourism, which involve the representation of the Other or of the past. Authenticity in tourist experience is a term grown ambiguous from varied usages and contexts. According to Trilling, the original usage was in the museum. It is mainly its museum-linked usage which has been extended to tourism, For example, products of tourism such as works of art, festivals, rituals, cuisine, dress, housing, and so on are usually described as authentic or inauthentic in terms of the criterion of whether they are made or enacted by local people according to custom or tradition. Postmodernism is not a single, unified, and well-integrated approach. Rather, it is conceivable that a diversity of postmodern views or approaches exist (Hollinshead 1997). However, with regard to the issue of authenticity in tourism, the approaches of postmodernism seem to be characterized by deconstruction of authenticity. While modernist researchers such as Boorstin and MacCannell were concerned with pseudo-events for staged authenticity in the tourist space, postmodernist researchers do not consider inauthenticity a problem.

“The concepts of real and fake, however, are too blunt to capture the subtleties of Disney simulations. At WDW things are not just real or fake but real real, fake real, real fake, and fake fake (Fjellman 1992).”

4 According to Boorstin, a pseudo event is: not spontaneous, planted primarily, ambiguous in terms of its relation to the underlying reality of the situation, usually intended to be a self-fulfilling prophecy.

16

2.3. The tourist perception In 1980s, ecotourism defines a mode of tourism in which a holiday in the sun is accompanied by a large and oftentimes sobering dose of environment awareness. Ecotourism also emphasizes the preservation of the environment through the creation of clean tourist industries, economies that can support the indigenous communities of a region minus the destructive effect of logging or mining.

Similarly, cultural tourism initiates visitors into the less visible and obvious layers of a place. Here, buildings are experienced not just for their aesthetic attributes or statues within architectural history, what counts most is their ability to conjure up the disparate pieces of community. Architourism seem to be more like the emotive side of ecotourism, those programs that features magical encounters with tortoises or moments sitting under a banyan tree and listening to the birds.

In the tourism , Dean MacCannell comments on the autonomy of the tourist world and the way it is “constructed after the fashion of all worlds that are filled with people who are just passing trough and know it”. No doubt the perception of architecture changes dramatically when people leave their homes and take to the roads. On the tourist trail we are more sensitive to the sights around us. Advance historical and architectural perceptions also deepen perception. Romantics might prefer to view the tourist trail as a never-ending series of absolutely original and unprepared for experiences with built form and space. In actuality, the possibility of such an aesthetic depends on considerable erudition. Especially with unfamiliar buildings in unfamiliar places, the more we know the more we are drown into the encounter. Tourists, historians and architects alike appreciate having a fuller idea of what they will be seeing on they travels.

In mass tourism a dose of familiarization is required if the unfamiliar is to hold its appeal. The problem lies in the extend to which familiarization can turn the unfamiliar into the recognizable. Yet traveling between monuments of the world can be as repetitive as channel surfing, and as isolating. When too many arrangements are made beforehand no room is left for spontaneity. Since most architectural monuments, including the contemporary ones, spawn a considerable surrounding infrastructure of shops, restaurants, hotels and other amusements free time is often concentrated in a separate tourist precinct. Only a fraction of tourists manage, sometimes by accident, to venture outside this zone into the neighbourhoods of the city. The perception of the architectural monument occurs against a homogeneous backdrop rather than an environment of local diversity and uniqueness.

Quite incongruously, the architecture of a tourist precinct (and sometimes the entire city) often comes under the influence of its guiding historical style. To preserve or enhance a sense of place, local architects are encouraged to design new buildings and complexes that continues the look. Tourists, often unaware of what’s fact and what’s faux, end up perceiving the architectural echoes of a monument in a host of vernacular buildings, including a wide variety of historical buildings stood. whatever happens it seems clear that the future design of all tourist precincts will be calibrated to entice and hold as many eyes and wallets as possible. In the end, it might be romantic to imagine that mass tourism in the twenty-first century can spark the sensations of strangeness that tourism did in past eras. With images of architecture readily available in a wide range of formats, first sightings of the famous monuments have changed. The shock of the new is more replaced by the satisfaction of recognition. Mass tourism is indeed like mass media. The attraction of the new works best when the new is both anticipated and well packaged.

Museums and other significant architectural works have never in history been so popular, and so enmeshed in the marketplace. Visitors and dollar counts as well as economic multiplier effects dominate media discussions of architourism. Architourism favours a streaming sort of perception, composed of pith views, and their often simultaneous representation via the camera lens. As monuments are increasely photographed and filmed, as tours more cleverly compose a tourist’s viewing experience, architecture becomes a stage set for brief visual highs.

17

Instead of offering time for leisurely reflection and close examination, which the tourist would be unable to handle day after day, the tour moves rapidly in and out. The building glanced at quickly, takes on the emotional language of distance and remove, somewhat like the aura of a movie starenhanced if the building is by a brand-name architect.

Any situation that lavishes great amount of money and attention on architecture can’t be a bad thing.

But it is doubtful that architectural monuments can be created on demand in record numbers. In the past, such works were rare achievements, crowning moments of a place and time. Older monuments derive lasting tourist value in large part because of considerably profundity and duration of their respective cultures. The appeal of their architecture is directly linked to the fascination tourists have for the lore of their cultures-the gods and warriors, the emperors and concubines, the spies and revolutionaries. Architourism’s appeal is largely formal its works are driven by our age’s captivation with theatrical spectacle.

Through architourism , tourist encounter buildings connected far more to timeless celebrity than to historical geography. Given their current global proliferation, why will people travel to Bilbao in the future if they can see a Gahry in Los Angeles or closer to home, it is fair to say that the new architourist monuments are really none places. They are pieces on global assembly line, relating as much to their location as do the brand-name products and franchised businesses that surround them.The work of architourism, while gazed at in aesthetic rapture on site, calls into existence a far larger range of states of consciousness - distraction, before, during, and after the trip. The work of architourism, while it benefits its region economically, extends its reach across the globe.

-Spectacular Nowadays, the exclamation “ spectacular” tends to draw the lines to the taste-culture battle. The adjective, of course, summon into play the “spectacle”, a key concept for analysing the condition of art and architecture in the era of mass media, a condition famously diagnosed by Guy Debord, first in the society of spectacular. The spectacular is not simply a reference to the mass media but a totalizing figure that describes the entire ensemble of social, political and cultural relation under capitalism and the subject’s complete inscription within and domination by spectacular relations.5 Debord’s anatomy of the mechanism of the spectacle and their aesthetic and ideological effect is a denunciation of the alienation caused by a society based on commodity production and false subjectivity of commodity fetishism. Debord locates in the spectacle’s distraction an absolute form alienated spectatorship that separates spectators from one another and lived experiences, which, in its spectacular representation, becomes the ultimate commodity in the circulation of capital. Debord’s discussion dedicated to architecture as spectacle and to architecture to a tourist attraction an architecture intended from it’s very inception not only to enter the global Baedeker(a series of travel books) as an asterisked site/sight but also to remap and to colonize the Baedeker itself in terms of Architourism, such as Bilbao. This subject can even bring us upon to the events of the september 11, 2001, perhaps the most decisive event in the history of spectacle culture, the way in which we may speak of “spectacular architecture” and the pleasure it confers. Indeed, the memorial to the world trade center towers threatens to become one more station of the cross in junkspace, pay homage to architecture terrorism, the ultimate spectacle in our society of the spectacle and memorializing the terrorists. In the society of the spectacle, Debord also wrote critically of tourism as one more instance of spectacular separation produced by the banalization and homogenization of the built environment that dissipate the difference between space and place: Tourism has become our dominant way of being in the world, weather at home or abroad. Tourism is appropriate the appropriate field for excursions trough the fabulous architecture remains that now is all over our urban and suburban surround. Junkspace is the built environment through which the world is spectacularized according to the “anaesthetics” of postmodernist urbanism and architecture, a cross between Disneyland delirium and the Bilbao effect. The Architect, in designing a building intended to serve as a tourist destination, endow a building with a number of touristic functions that may go beyond the general aestheticization and spectacularization of the site.

5 Comments on the Society of the Spectacle, Guy Debord.

18

“Human circulation considered as something to be consumed(tourism) is a by product of the circulation of commodities, actually tourism is the chance to go and see what has been made trite. The economic management of travel to places suffices in itself to ensure those places interchangeability.

The same modernization that has deprived travel of its temporal aspect has likewise deprived it of the reality of space” Guy Debord

2.4. Iconic buildings An iconic design is usually a design that is “ground breaking” and one that sets new standards in its field. It is a design that other designers and manufactures follow, as it becomes a bench mark for other similar products. Furthermore an iconic design is one that stands up to the test of time, remaining a good design, despite the passing of years, decades and even centuries, much like a photographer, architectural designs record details of specific moments in time. But unlike the photograph, physical structure go on to have a life of their own, becoming a central structure and functional part of countless people’s lives for hundreds, if not thousands of years after they were built.

An icon can be evaluated in three ways in the study of semiotics (chandler, 2004). An icon is something or someone that would be instantly recognized as famous; 2. An icon on a computer screen signifies a particular function; 3. Religious icons are works of visual art representing a devout or holy image. In this context an iconic building would be recognized or associated with a certain city. The ability of the icon to most effectively represent the symbol, the use of symbol can 1) create awareness 2) trigger recognition and 3) activate already stored images in a person’s mind. For the purpose of destination marketing these iconic images of a city serve to assist in the formation and recall of destination image, with the goal of creating image in the minds of potential visitors.

Researchers point to the importance of conducting content analysis of destination image creation in marketing material. Mackay and Fesenmier (2000) emphasize the importance of understanding how the destination choice process. Several previous studies have examined the verbal and pictorial elements of destinations promotional material, and from theses studies it has been purpose that there is a definite advantage to be gained from the further evaluation of destination generated promotional material such as guide books, websites and travel brochures.

Iconic architecture creates an image of the cities in a way that makes it distinct and identifiable from others. Therefore a side of city identity is influenced by its iconic architecture. The building that is famous inside the profession, between architects, planners, Engineers, etc and it could extend to be famous for the public, as it have special aesthetic symbolic or historical values to them.

“Icons are famous not simply for being famous, as is the case of various forms of celebrity, but famous for processing specific symbolic/aesthetic qualities, qualities that are the subject of considerable debate within the recent rise of blogosphere, debate to which the general public actively contributes” (Sklair, 2010) Iconic architecture has a direct relation with city identity as it is a representation for history, culture, economic, political and social state of the city. Globalization affects contemporary iconic architecture, as before it was reflecting national or regional culture and supports its ideologies. The global electronic revolution and high technology develop iconic architecture in a way that was not possible before, cities urban morphology changes with dozens of high-tech buildings. Iconic architecture in pre-globalization era was either a religious or cultural or state building, as it was the leading force at that time, and the reflection of people believes and ideologies. Capitalism globalization is the engine of transforming everything to a commercial product according to Sklair in 2010, the iconic architecture plays role with commercialism, as the visual aspect and the recognition of the building outline that catches the eyes helps in advertising the products inside. Another case is Alexandria library where it becomes a very important commercialized touristic attraction to the extent that citizens and tourists pay money just to enter such a unique iconic building. This shows how iconic buildings

19

becomes more important than the art or the sport or the function inside the buildings itself. Most of these buildings now have commercial functions. Culture changes with the new forms of globalization and changes the iconic Architecture reflections and values, which according to Jencks (2006) it reaches a kind of “Spiritual inflation” that people become not believing in radical values.

Today social hierarchies are suspected and perceived to rely only on power and class,the value and symbolism that used to justify an integrated culture are no longer currency ” (Jencks, 2006) Another, significant aspect of globalization is a practical side of it that is dealing with the electronic revolution, building materials, construction technology and mobility. The global electronic revolution is one of the most important elements that make a revolution in architecture, in a way that makes architects able to create unprecedented buildings.6 The computer hardware and software contributes a lot in solving complicated architecture and structural logarithmic equations and makes it easier to see it before construction, to simulate the effect of natural environment like sunlight, heat and winds on buildings, and the relation between the new building and the surrounding built environment as well, leading to more contrived designs and sculptural forms. All this kinds of computer aid software helps in creating a lot of designs in shorter time, with a lot of varieties.

The technology of construction and materials opens the way to architects for more innovative futuristic designs. As before in general concrete or natural stones, timber, masonary were used in construction, and the construction was in a conventional way. In the globalization era and with the electronic revolution, a lot of new materials are created, to respond to the new complicated designs delivered by architects, which develops with the development of the construction technology. Form this iconic architecture, the skyscraper Burj Khalyfain UAE which rise more than 800m to the sky which was impossible before, Guggenheim museum in Bilbao with the new cladding materials.

The modern transportation systems, flow of images and countries with opened borders facilitate the mobility of Architects and the flow of Architectural concepts and technologies, which elaborates new and innovative ideas forming the new morphology of iconic architecture all over the world. As now a lot of Architects like Norman Foster, Zaha Hadid, Frank Gehry, etc. Presence is everywhere in the world creating the contemporary iconic architecture.

Now it is clear how iconic architecture has an effect on city identity and its representation of History, Culture, Economic, Political, Social states. Also what is the definition of globalization and its classifications, and how it affects and forms contemporary iconic architecture, and who are the transnational capitalist class and their interest and role in iconic city and branding of the cities.

8 Globalisation and Architecture, Robert Adam,<www. adamarchitecture.com>

20

Here we have the list of the most famous iconic buildings around the world and their function : 1. Petronas Towers, kuala Lumpur Iconic landmark in Malasyaâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s capital city Kuala Lumpur, Standing at 170 meters above ground, the Petronas Towers are twin skyscrapers. The building which held the titled of tallest in the world between 1998-2004. The distinctive post modern style was created by architects Cesar Pelli and Ahmad Murdijat.

2. The white House, Washington It was created by Irish architect James Hoban. In 1972 Hoban submitted a plan for the presidential mansion and subsequently got the commission to build the white house. The mansion, which has been home to every US leader since the countryâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s second president John Adams, is made from white-painted Aquia sandstone.

1

3. Sydney Opera house, Sydney Sydney Opera house is one of the greatest iconic buildings of the 20th century, an urban sculpture set in a remarkable waterscape. The master piece was built in 1973, the building comprises of three groups of interlocking shells, which roof two main performance halls and a restaurant. Great example of modern architecture and an iconic symbol of both Sydney and the Australian nation.

4. Guggenheim Museum, Bilbao Architect Frank Gehry developed the unique concept for the museum after winning an architectural competition to design the building. The museum is one of the most admired works of contemporary architecture, Since it aperture in 1977 it has been one of the most important building of 20th century.

2

3

4 21

5. Eiffel Tower, Paris The Eiffel Tower was built between 1887 and 1889 and acted as the entrance arch for the Exposition Universelle, which marked the centennial of the french revolution. Nowadays its one of the main elements of the Paris skyline, The Eiffel Tower was designed by Gustave Eiffel.

6. The Burj Al Arab, Dubai Its the world tallest luxury hotel designed by Tom Wright. Including 202 rooms, itâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s the icon of Dubai and Emirate. It was completed in 1999, Nevertheless it is not just its height but itâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s particular form that makes it distinctive, inspired by a sail swollen by the wind.

5

7. Fallingwater, Seatle Designed by famous American Frank Lloyd Wright, he created this unique design for Kauffman family in 1939. The unique design makes it look like the house stretches out over a waterfall, with no solid ground beneath it. It became famous instantly and is now a natural historic landmark.

8. Empire state building, New York The building was designed by William F Lamb.

It was declared by the American Society of Civil Engineers to be one of the seven wonders of the modern world and is known around the world as an icon of New York City

6

8

7

22

9. Lloyed’s building , London Built by Richard Roger in 1986, Won award-winning futuristic design makes it one of the most recognizable structure in the London skyline and an iconic architecture landmark.

10. Villa Savoye, outskirt of Paris Villa Savoye was originally built as a country retreat for the Savoye family in 1928, Designed by Swiss architects Le Corbusier and his cousin, Pierre Jeanneret, Villa Savoye is an early and classic example of the international style.

11. Burj Khalifa, Dubai The mammoth skyscraper and magnificent centerpiece of Downtown Dubai stands at a whopping 828.9 metres high. Construction began on the 160-floor building in 2004 with its doors opening six years later in 2010. The task of creating the world’s tallest man made structure was awarded to the Chicago office of American architectural and engineering firm Skidmore, Owenigs and Marril LLP.

9

10

11

In the following page you can see the location of these iconic buildings on the world map:

23

24

The table below shows the time line of the modern and contemporary buildings and their functions.

According to the map and the data of the table we can see the majority of the these iconic buildings they are either high-tech or towers. The major countries of these iconic buildings are France, United Arab Emirates and United States. As we can see the towers are on the top list of the these iconic buildings which are the representatives of their cities. Looking at their typology they all varies in their functions.

Name of the building

Year

Typology

Eiffel tower (Paris)

1887-1889

exhibition tower

Villa Savoye (outskirt Paris)

1928

villa

Empire state building (New york)

1930

Office tower

Falling water (Seatle)

1939

The white House (Washington)

1972

president resident

Sydney Opera house (Sydney)

1973

art center

Guggenheim Museum (Bilbao)

1977

museum

Lloyd's building (London)

1986

insurance institution Lloyd's office

Petronas Towers (Kuala Lampur)

1997

office towers

Burj Al Arab (Dubai)

1999

Hotel tower

Burj Khalifa(Dubai)

2010

mixed-use but predominantly residential

Kaufmann Residence,house

Table 1: Timeline of the most visited iconic buildings n the

25

3

CASE STUDIES

- Guggenheim Bilbao by Franc Gahry - Cultural center by Oscar Niemeyer in Aviles - City of Arts and Sciences by Santiago Calatrava

26

3.1. Guggenheim Bilbao The plan for a new museum in Bilbao date to the late 1980s, when the Basque Administration began formulating a major redevelopment of the region. It was not until 1991, however, that Basque authorities proposed the idea for a Guggenheim Museum Bilbao to the Solomon R.Guggenheim Foundation.9 In moving forward with the museum a site was selected and three architects, Arata Isozaki from Japan, Coop Himmelb from Austria, and Frank O. Gehry from the United States, were invited to participate in a competition to produce a conceptual design. There has been no requirement in terms of drawings or models to be produced the most important was that the architects were only asked to present what they thought would convey their concept for the new museum.

Since the opening of the museum in 1997, Gehry’s Guggenheim Museum Bilbao, with its distinctive titanium curves and soaring glass atrium, was hailed as one of the most important buildings of the 20th century. Gehry’s use of cutting-edge computer-aided design technology enabled him to translate poetic form into reality. The result of the architectural project is sculpture and expressionistic, with spaces unlike any others for the presentation of art. The museum is integrated into the urban context, unfolding its interconnecting shapes of stone, glass and titanium on a 32,500 square-meter site along the Nerion River in the old industrial area of the city.

A road and railway line is to the south, the river to the north, and the concrete structure of the Salve Bridge to the east. Making a tangible physical connection with the city, the building circulates and extrudes around the Salve Bridge, creates a curved riverside promenade, and forms a generous new public plaza on the south side of the site where the city grid ends. The building fits in with the landscape of the city such as the narrow passageway and the water features in response to the Nervion River. Eleven thousands square meters of exhibition space are distributed over nineteen galleries. Ten of these galleries have a classic orthogonal plan and can identified from the exterior by their stone finishes. Nine other irregularly shaped galleries present a remarkable contrast and can be identified from the outside by their swirling from and titanium cladding. The largest gallery, measuring 30 meters wide and 130 meters long, was used for temporary exhibition for several years. In 2005, it became the site of the largest sculpture commission in history, Richard Serra’s monumental installation The Matter of Time.

The socio-economic impact of the museum has been astounding. During the first three years of operation, almost 4 million tourists visited the museum, generating about 500 million in profit. Furthermore, the money visitors spent on hotels, restaurant, shops and transport collected over 100 million in taxes, which more than offset the cost of the building. However, the promise of the “Bilbao Effect “also sparked a building boom in “statement” architecture across the globe, one which proved imprudent in the wake of the recent economic crises. Nevertheless, the museum remains as iconic structure renowned for its complexity and form.

The museum attracts an average of 800,000 non-Basque visitors a year (compared to less than 100,000 before GMB opened), possibly a world record for any third- or fourth-tier city. Despite attempts to emulate the Bilbao effect elsewhere in the world, very few new museums or galleries outside capital cities have succeeded in getting so many visitors. Bilbao did not construct the museum simply for the sake of having an iconic building; this was one answer in a quest to address a number of serious problems. Traditional industries had become obsolete, and the city center hosted a busy riverport plagued with severe traffic congestion. Other troubles included violence from extremist Basque separatists, urban deterioration, pollution and a poor public transport system.

9 The Solomon R.Guggenheim Foundation: Founded in 1937, the Solomon R. Guggenheim Foundation is committed to innovation by collecting, preserving, and interpreting modern and contemporary art, while simultaneously exploring ideas across cultures through exhibitions, educational and curatorial initiatives, publications, and digital platforms. Dedicated to engaging both local and global audiences, < http://www.guggenheim.org/guggenheim-foundation>.

27

The city determined to tackle these problems through a holistic plan. It created a new a subway line, new drainage and water/air clean-up systems and an airport; residential, leisure and business complexes were built in town, while new river and sea waterfronts, a seaport and industrial and technology parks were built away from the urban center. The icing on the cake was the construction of the Guggenheim Museum. The iconic building’s budget was $119.6 million, whereas the total GMB project before opening totaled $228.3 million. This includes $12.1 million for architect Frank Gehry, $6.4 million for executive architect Idom, $100.8 million to construct the building and surrounding. $24.7 million to the Solomon R. Guggenheim Foundation in New York, $9.9 million for the land, $44.5 million to establish the collection and $30.3 million for other operative costs before opening.10

The museum received 962,358 visitors in 2011, 0.62% more than the previous year. The number of overseas visitors made up 62% of the total. The Guggenheim Museum Bilbao ended 2011 with an increase of 6,000 visitors, 0.62 % more than in the previous year, the art gallery announced in its latest press release. In total, the museum received 962,358 visitors during the entire twelve month period.

The overseas visitors made up 62%, Visitors from elsewhere in Spain made up 24% of the total, and those from the Basque Country 14%.11 Frank Gehry Frank Owen Gehry is a Canadian-American Pritzker price winning architect based in Los Angeles.

There are few major American architects who have been more closely linked to art and artists, he’s often talked about the inspiration he found in a circle of Los Angeles artists in the early days of his career. As Gehry achieved celebrity status, his work took on a grander scale. His high-concept buildings, including the Walt Disney Concert Hall in downtown Los Angeles, the Dancing House in Prague and the Guggenheim Museum building in Bilbao, Spain, have become tourist attractions in their own right. Frank Gehry is known for his professionalism and adherence to budgets, despite his complex and ambitious designs. Gehry’s recent and ongoing projects include a new Guggenheim facility in Abu Dhabi, the new Facebook headquarters in California and a memorial to Dwight D. Eisenhower in Washington, D.C., slated to be constructed at the foot of Capital Hill.

Bilbao Connection The airport, almost 12 km from the city center. The new terminal, referred as “The Dove”, is the work of architect Santiago Calatrava. It is investigated that to this airport,which has become the principal one in the north of Spain. The airport is served by 13 European airlines, From Bilbao one can fly directly, in two hours or less to the principal European cities including Frankfurt, London, Paris, Bordeaux, Milan, Lisbon, Porto, Brussels, Basil, and Zurich that one can connect with the other airports, whether continental or transcontinental.

The port: Bilbao’s beginnings and its development are very much tied to the trade facilitated by its port. One could say that Bilbao was born a port. Seven centuries ago, the creation of the Port was actually the beginning of the city itself. In those years, and for several centuries, the Port was used above all for exportation. This situation lasted until 1902, in which year work was begun that would facilitate further port development: the Outer Port.

Overland port connection Bilbao-Madrid:4h Bilbao-Paris:11h Bilbao-Milan:12h Land transportation: Bilbao is the meeting point for north-south transit (from Stockholm to Lisbon) and east-west from the Cantabrian coast to Barcelona and Milan. The Bilbao-Behobia, Bilbao-Vitoria-Barcelona, and Bilbao-Burgos motorways connect Bilbao with the main national and European 10 According to the Bilbao effect (Guggenheim Museum Bilbao) by Beatriz Plaza, faculty of economics.university of the Basque Country, < http://mpra. ub.uni-muenchen.de/12681/> 11 Accordin to: < http://www.eitb.com/en/news/entertainment/detail/805625/number-visitors-guggenheim-bilbao-6000-visitors-2011/>

28

image 15: Bilbao site before construction of Guggen-

Image 16: Guggenheim Bibao after

29

A cultural space A boost to cultural activity has been one of the basic strategies, the main aim to make Bilbao a focal point of International attraction. The quest for this cultural prominence has given rise to extensive and high-quality planning, result of which is a cultural network of the first magnitude. The urban renewal plan also entailed the construction of the new Maritime Museum of the Bilbao Estuary, which is on the land at one time occupied by big shipyards. It exhibits vessels, mock-ups, pictures, engravings, instruction panels, photographs, and other objects relating to the Basque maritime heritage.

One of the cultural assets of most significance in Bilbao is its choral and philharmonic societies, with a tradition going back more than a century.

Image 18: The cover of Newyork Times magazine of september 7, 1997, source: Newyork Times

30

3.2. Cultural center by Oscar Niemeyer in Aviles International cultural center in Asturias in the city of Aviles, is built by Brazilian architect Oscar Niemeyer and has been awarded the prince of Asturias award of Art in 1989. This cultural center is the result of the combination of a cultural complex and international cultural project integrated by various artistic and cultural events such as exhibitions, music, theatre, dance, cinema and gastronomy.

The center is located on the estuary of Aviles, Asturias which was inaugurated in 2011. The architect described the center as “An open space to the humankind, a place for education, culture and peace”.

The building can be seen from many different places including the air. Its size and white, red and yellow colors highlights its location in the landscape of the town. The brazilian architect was awarded with the Prince Asturias Award for art in 1989. That was the origin of the relationship between Oscar Niemeyer and the principality of Asturias. Its innovative design has become one of the leading international projects of cultural centers. This is the only work of Niemeyer in Spain and in his own words the best and the most beloved who has made outside Brazil. The cost of the project was assumed by the principality of Asturias as over 40 millions.

The work of the architect is formed by five main elements that complements each other: - The open square: a large open outdoor space for cultural activities. It reflects the Oscar Niemeyer’s idea of a place open to humankind.

-The auditorium: around 1000 seats for concerts, theatres, conferences, its peculiarity is not having distinction between social classes. It includes the club and an exhibition room in the foyer.

-The dome: its the exhibitions building.

-The tower: sight-seeing tower, restaurant and cocktail lounge.

-The multi-purpose building: film Center, meeting-rooms, cafe, shop, information point.

The Niemeyer center is five minutes from the old town of Aviles and accessible through the gate way of the old Plaza del Pescado, Llano Ponte street. It is also possible via the foot bridge at the end of the Paseo de la Ria, Avenida Conde de Guadalhorce and there is 300 underground parking spaces for the car access. The Niemeyer Center is located in the center of Aviles on the right side of the rive, 500 meter from Plaza Espana and the city hall. The foundation stone was laid Niemeyer Center in April 2008, and since then has started to implement its philosophy, with the secretion of various cultural activities worldwide impact. Geniuses of film, music, literature and science as Woody Allen, Kevin Spacey, Brad Pitt, Wim Wenders, Carlos Saura, Paulo Coelho, Nobel laureate, Wole Soyinka, Vinton Cerf, Paco de Lucia, Yo-Yo Ma, Joan Manuel Serrat and Fernando Arrabal Aviles have been part of this dream for education, culture and peace.

The Oscar Niemeyer Cultural Center in Avilés-Asturias imminently close its doors from October until April 2012, after a political confrontation that keeps the city of Avilés (PSOE), and the Government of the Principality of Asturias. The Government of the principality of Asturias accused of mismanagement of the foundation in charge of the center in addition to asking more representation in decisions. In the same line it is argued alleged accounting irregularities within the structure and implicitly cultural organization, has questioned the cost of the managers. One of the point of disagreement was that Niemeyer manager have requested the principality to deliver facilities to the employer to authorize the transfer of use of the buildings of the cultural center, because the property is owned by the principality of Asturias, whose contract expires in December 15. The center managers argue that they need the approval process by the regional executive, since it is necessary to develop some activities, a situation that is denied by the principality as it is not consistent with the management of the foundation.

31

Niemeyer effect On these words Oscar Niemeyer, architect, who held the seat of the Cultural Center of the Prince of Asturias awards cleared any doubts about the suitability and need for the project to settle in the city. The socialist government of the Principality of Asturias Avilés to the headquarters of the Cultural Center of the Awards and formalized, with his signature. Aviles has been working steadily to achieve economic recovery that would return to the city the lost illusion. However, the city needed a push to get this continued growth. The Government of the Principality, knowing that the economic future of this region goes through a decentralized global perspective, and knowledgeable about the great potential of our city, and major investments and efforts that were made, many of which was and is a participant , has decided to take that momentum demanded Avilés. So the city host a cultural center.

Furthermore, the Oscar Niemeyer Cultural Center as a place to Aviles city committed to the development and promotion of culture. The is on a direct stake in cultural tourism, culminating multiple investments made by the City in the rehabilitation of the entire old town of Avilés, works that are still performed.

The Tourist Office of the City of Aviles recorded an increase of 77 % consultations, attributable to the effect called Niemeyer in 2011. Councillor City Promotion, Ana Council, has released data on that “there is a significant increase that coincides with the opening of the Niemeyer Center and a lowered from 15 December”, when the Principality began to manage. During the past year the tourism office served 59,006 people at the 33,315 twelve months previously. During the Easter week (middle of April) the increase in tourists over the previous year was 258% and in the summer months (July and August) increased by 78%. However at Christmas a decline of 26.7% was detected. As regards the origin of tourists seen in the office 43,228 (73.2%) were nationals, 5,216 (8.8%) of international origin, 2,528 (4.3%) regional, 7,562 (12.8 %) of the region and 472 (0.8%) of unknown origin. The origin of the Spanish tourists were mostly of the Community of Madrid (26%) followed by Catalonia (11.7%), Castilla-Leon (11.4%), Basque Country (9.8%), Andalusia (7, 7%), Galicia (6.7%), Valencia (5.8%). As for foreign tourists, most were French (22.8%), German (12.6%), British (11.8%), Italian (6.52%) and Portugal (4.3%) .12 The councillor Promotion of Avilés City, Ana Cocejo confirmed that: Data for 2011 were very good, very high, driven by the opening of the Niemeyer and all the hype that was around it and the fall of this year (2012) is very important, “she considered. There are different factors influencing the decline of tourists, some of which are general and is the economic situation that exists, but there is also a significant figure in Asturias, which is beginning to show the lack of tourism promotion campaign.

Oscar Niemeyer Oscar Niemeyer was a Brazilian architect. His designs were noted for their free-flowing forms. Other projects included working on the United Nations building, and designing the Contemporary Art Museum in Niterói and major buildings in the capital city of Brasília. Niemeyer’s status as a rising star in the architectural world was confirmed when he was chosen to represent Brazil as part of the team to design the new headquarters of the United Nations in New York City. In 1956, Juscelino Kubitschek, the president of Brazil and a close friend of Niemeyer, came to the architect with a proposal, asking Niemeyer to become the new chief architect of public buildings in the country’s new capital, Brasilia, a Modernist civic metropolis being built from scratch in the interior of the country. Oscar Niemeyer’s famous works: 1. The Niterói Contemporary Art Museum, Brazil.

2. Oscar Niemeyer Museum (Novo Museu), Curitiba, Brazil.

3. Brazilian National Museum, Brasilia, Brazil.

4. Estação Cabo Branco, João Pessoa, Brazil.

5. Oscar Niemeyer International Cultural Centre, Asturias, Spain.

6. Natal City Park Tower, Natal, Brazil.

7. Oscar Niemeyer Auditorium, Ravello, Italy.

12 According to : <lavozdeaviles.es>

32

Image 19: The sky view of the Oscar Niemeye center

Image 20: Functionl diagram of the center, source: centro interpretacion costa de Austurias

33

Image 21: The Dome and the Tower

Image 22: The auditorium

34

3.3. City of Arts and Sciences by santiago calatrava in Vlencia The City of Art and science develops by Santiago Calatrava, is a large-scale urban recreation center for culture and science. The city of Art and Science set in the old dried-up bed of the Turia, between the old city of Valencia and coastline district of Nazaret, the city of Arts and Sciences covers an area of 350,000 square meters.

Following a disastrous flood in 1957, the river was diverted along a canal to the south of the city, and the dried-out riverbed planted as a 7 kilometer long promenade through the center of the city.

L’Hemisferic was the first element to be opened to the public in April 1998. The science museum Pricipe Felipe opened in 2000, L’Umbracle(parking structure) opened in 2001, the Palacio de las Artes, opened in 2003. Calatrava’s use of pure white concrete and Gaudeisque fragments of shattered tiles, an important Valencia industry, tie all the structures as a whole.

L’Hemisferic, the distinctive eye-shaped construction designed by Santaigo Calatrava, was the first element to be opened to the public in the city of Arts and Science. As the architecture site is close to the sea, and Valencia is so dry, Calatrava used water as a main element in the Architecture site.

The two Principle buildings, the L’hemisferic and the science Museum pricipe Felipe, are organized around a raised promenade running from the base of the Palacio de las Artes along the defining, longitude axis of the site, and offering view out towards the sea.

The “pupil” is the hemispherical dome of the IMAX Theater, which is transformed into globe through its reflection int he pool.

The other part of the museum is the Science Museum principe Felipe is a grand longitude building resembling a pre historic skeleton, created from the modular development sections that repeat along the length of the site. The white concrete supporting framework of the south facade is filled with glass, The north facade is a continuous glass and steel curtain along the building’s full length.

The other part of the city of Art and Science is L’Umbracle(parking structure) located on the southern facade of the complex the parking garage is built in an open arcade providing a contemporary reinvention of the winter garden. The upper part comprises a long panoramic promenade, with a tree lined garden where there is a superb view of the complex as a whole. The final element in the city of Art and Sciences complex is the Valencia opera house has been designed as a series of volumes which become unified through their enclosure within two symmetrical, cut away concrete shells.

These form are crowned by a sweeping steel sheath. The resulting structure defines the identity of the opera house, dramatically enhancing its symbolic and dynamic effect within the landscape.

The objectives of the the city of valencia which developed in the early 90s were: a) To act as an element of complementary services the existing tourism, especially tourism meetings and conferences (at a time of strong competition within the Spanish territory) and the sun and sand. b) Affect the whole of the resident population the expansion of the leisure high-level, impact on educational outreach and scientific culture The City.

The obvious advantages of the city of Valencia in terms of accessibility, can be summarized as is in the center of the Mediterranean corridor, which is one of the backbones of growth in Europe, which is equidistant from the two large metropolitan areas and economic centers Spain such as Madrid and Barcelona and it is also the connecting space between Andalusia and Europe. However, traditionally Valencia It has been a tourist destination for the purposes of tourism conventional urban. Nestled in the center city of a large coastal areas characterized by their sun and beach tourism, the few visitors to the city Valencia were outlined almost exclusively as business tourism visitors, linked to fairs, Congress and others.

35

Image 23: City of Arts and Sciences(CAC)

Image 24: The location and over land connection of Valencia, Direcci贸n General de Tr谩fico (DGT).

36

The generic model of tourist entertainment was limited to the week-long celebration of Fallas, during the month of March. However, since the late 90s, a remarkable change is looming on the characterization of the tourist profile and is beginning to speak of Valencia as a urban tourism destination in a more conventional sense. In this sense we can say that happens a phenomenon very similar to what occurred in other large Spanish cities like Barcelona in the first half of the 90s in the second and Bilbao and Malaga right now. Thus, in terms of passengers, Valencia exceeded 2003 million visitors , and the two million overnight stays, and is situated on the 5th place between provincial capitals not linked to destinations sun and beach (as they could be or Palma de Mallorca Las Palmas de Gran Canaria).

Calatrava has been heavily criticised for the cost of the City of Arts and Sciences complex and was accused of “bleeding Valencia dry” over alleged fees of €100 million for the showpiece cultural centre, despite it coming in four times over budget at over €1 billion.13 Valencia connection: By train Valencia has two train terminals, the Cabanyal Station and the North Station. To that one should add the new AVE train station Joaquin Sorolla, which links the city with Madrid and Cuenca. Also Valencia is connected to Alicante, Albacete and Barcelona by high speed trains. From Cabanyal Station and North Station, you can access to the City of Arts and Sciences by city buses. In the Cabanyal Station, bus line 1; in the North Station, the nearest route bus is 35 and the Xativa metro station (lines 3 and 5). In the new AVE train station is available a shuttle bus, free buses for AVE passengers to the North Station. Another option is the underground. The nearest station is the Joaquin Sorolla stop, line 5, which may take you to the Alameda Station, about 15 minutes far away from the complex. Plase, check Metrovalencia and the Empresa Municipal de Transportes website.

By Coach and Bus Valencia coach station is located on the bank of the former course of the River Túria. This is the stopping place for regular services arriving from all over Spain. To get to the City of Arts and Sciences from here, just cross the river and catch EMT bus nº95 The following EMT buses go the City of Arts and Sciences: 1, 13, 14,15, 19, 35, 95 and 40.

By boat Valencia has an international airport with regular flights to Balearic Islands and Italy and a growing cruise traffic in the Mediterranean.

From the port, bus line 19: by Metro, Neptuno Station, line 5, which may take you to the Alameda Station, about 15 minutes away.

Further information: Valencia port.

By plane Manises International Airport is just a few minutes from Valencia, 8 km from downtown. The expansion of runways and terminal, together with increased operating airlines, places this airport among the first in Spain in number of passengers and flights. Undergpround line 5, which may take you to the Alameda Station, about 15 minutes far away from the complex City of Arts and Sciencies.

By metro The metro lines closest to the City of Arts and Sciences are lines nº 3 and nº 5 . We recommend using the Alameda stop, approximately 15 minutes from the complex.

On foot and by bike The visitor can get to the City of Arts and Sciences getting a ride on foot or by bicycle crossing the bed of the River Turia, the green lung of Valencia, at East Way. A bicycling parking at the City of Arts and Sciences is also available. Visitors can move around Valencia city with Valenbisi.

13 According to Dezzen magazine: < http://www.dezeen.com/2014/01/02/santiago-calatrava-city-of-arts-and-sciences/>

37

Image 25: City od Arts and Sciences equipment buildings (CAC)

IMage 26: Accessibility of the city of Art and

38

Touristic statistic of the city of arts and sciences The flagship of the sector, the City of Arts and Sciences (CAC), loses steam. In the last two years has gone from 3.7 million visits (2011) to 2.7 last year, according to confirmed sources THE PROVINCES de la Generalitat. Meanwhile, the data handled by the Ministry of Culture said that Valencian is the Peninsula region since 2008 has suffered the biggest percentage decline in Spanish visitors who traveled for cultural reasons. The budget reduction has conditioned the cultural policy of both the Government and the municipalities, since the start of the crisis, especially in recent years. It had to bet on use own resources and publicize the Valencian heritage. Equity that can maintain quality over previous assemblies are used but, according to the data, are not attractive candidates for visitors nationally. The City of Arts and Sciences (CAC) exemplifies this situation. The last year before it started to manifest the global financial disaster, 2007, with the Americaâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s Cup in Valencia, and entertainment complex designed by Santiago Calatrava culture he welcomed 4,277,000 visitors. One in three of those tourists have stopped coming to the CAC. The year opened the Oceanographic 2003, official data from the CAC cifraban the number of attendees at 5.9 million. Between 2008 and 2011, the facilities have been between 3.4 and 3.8 million people. In 2011, 3.7 million visits were reached.

Until 2012, when 2.8 million were received. The CAC that year recorded its worst data of the last decade, up nearly 24% decline. During 2013, 2,772,537 visits were received, according to sources from the Government, about 80,000 fewer than during the previous year and almost one million less compared to 2011 The downward trend therefore is consolidated, although the last year over the previous hardly a drop of 2.7%. Sources in the City of Arts and Sciences stated that 2013 data regarding 2012 â&#x20AC;&#x2DC;are similar to those of other major cultural complexes in the country.

The CAC has just been organized in the past two years major exhibitions, like the dinosaurs, which in 2011 allowed him to maintain the level of visits. While domestic consumption, and in this respect tourism is also included. Spain ended 2013 with their best ever record spending by international tourists. The 60.6 million visitors that the country received used to finance their trips 59,082,000 euros, 9.6% more than in 2012, according to an annual review of the sector released last week by the Ministry of Industry. The Valencia posted a strong increase (13%) and caught 5,203,000.

The data published by the Central Government in their annual reports of Statistics show that in 2008 more than 625,000 residents in Spain visited the Region for cultural reasons. However, in 2012, computed last year, the number of domestic tourists who traveled to Valencia region for the same reason fell to 438,000, down 30%. The percentage decrease is the largest of the Peninsula.

The Consell has informed of the Promotion Plan of the City of Arts and Sciences, which aims to promote the resort as a tourist attraction, increasing the number of visitors forty percent until 2019, optimizing profitability complex economic and overall management of the same in order to generate sustainable employment. The Generalitat announced that the visits will be increase by twenty percent in 2016 and up to forty percent until 2019. Since opening in 1998, the City of Arts and Sciences received fifty million visits. Its revenue amounted to 478 million euros and the indirect impact, according to calculations of the Valencian Government, has more than 2,000 million euros. In 2012, the public company made a loss in 2012 of 43.9 million euros, 11.6 million less than the previous year.14

14 According to las provincias: <http://www.lasprovincias.es/v/20140205/culturas/ciudad-ciencias-pierde-millon-20140205.html>

39

Number of visitors of the city of Valencia, (1999-2003), Source:INE, EOH

The visitors of the CAC equipments:

Equipments LʼHemisferic

Museo de las sciencias

1998

408858

1999

2000

2001

2002

2003

414254

462357

517690

512259

not available

186662

777559

587938

not available

1532000

Oceanografico

The blue color is the year of the their function, source: OTE Anuario Municipal. Para Oceanógrafico. Memoria Parques Reuníaos líalos hasta Septiembre 20031

40

Santiago Calatrava Santiago Calatrava, a Spaniard born in 1951 who is the spiritual heir to Gaudí, has is skyrocketed into the ranks of the “starchitects” (Gehry, Hadid, Koolhaas, Libeskind, etc).

He insists that his projects are inspired by and founded in nature’s underlying geometric structures, both simple and complex, and in its visible forms. Calatrava, also like Gaudí, and like some of his celebrated colleagues, makes architecture distinguished by its aggressive, photogenic iconic city.

His buildings project striking images, and they make good logos. He trained as both an architect and an engineer, with a doctorate in technical science from the ETH Zurich, the Swiss Federal Institute of Technology. Before this recent catapult to international fame, Calatrava enjoyed professional recognition as the wunderkind of bridges. His most famous is also one of his earliest, the Alamillo Bridge and La Cartuja Viaduct in Seville, completed in 1992. In Calatrava’s projects using infrastructural projects to create civic icons is a mission fueled by his ethically grounded (and altogether correct) view that any intervention in the built landscape, and especially a large-scale one, is an intrinsically social and political act. Here is the list of Santiago Calatrva’s well known projects: 1. Atrium of Brookfield Place, Toronto, Canada (1992) 2. Ciutat de les Arts i les Ciències, Valencia, Spain (1996) 3. Milwaukee Art Museum in Milwaukee, Wisconsin, USA (2001) 4. Gare do Oriente, Lisbon, Portugal (1998) 5. Calatrava bridge in Petah Tikva, Israel 6. Medio Padana TAV Station, Reggio Emilia, Italy 7. Turning Torso in Malmö, Sweden (2005) 8. Chords Bridge for pedestrians and train in Jerusalem, Israel (2008)

41

The tables below indicates the presence of Guggneheim Museum, City of art and science and Niemeyer center in social media and online data. According to the tables we can see Guggenheim has the highest number of online search and uploaded photos on instagram, also the two other projects has a bigger scale and they are more multifunctional projects in compare to the Guggenheim Bilbao.

42

4

Guggenheim Bilbao analysis

In 1997, virtually overnight, “Bilbao” appeared on the map. Frank Gehry’s dazzling design for a farflung branch of the Guggenheim Museum was not just an extraordinarily audacious architectural achievement, nor was it merely another new destination for the art-world jet set and a global ego trip on the part of its ambitious New York director. The museum immediately became synonymous with an entire city and a symbol of regeneration for a troubled region of Spain. That a single building in a provincial locale could so capture the popular imagination globally and locally, was one of the stunning architectural surprises of the fin de siecle. Precisely two decades earlier, in 1977, the Centre Pompidou in Paris opened to a comparable hailstorm of public opinion.

43

4.1. Guggenheim Bilbao and Global imagination The Guggenheim Bilbao is an important phenomena that attracts analyses from different point of view: Museum, art, city renewal, and economic development. Precisely two decades earlier, in 1977, the center Pompidou in Paris opened to a comparable hailstorm of public opinion. Like Bilbao, ‘Beaubourg’ designed by the italian-British team of Renzo Piano and Richard Roger, represented a spectacular new redevelopment strategy for an obsolescent urban district. As at Bilbao, the architecture of the art museum was literally an act of exhibitionism.

To begin with, The Bilbao museum is centrifugal, not centripetal. The city of Bilbao, located in northeast corner of Spain at the mouth of the Nervion River, is remote from main pilgrimage route of contemporary tourism.

A mercantile and industrial town, originally chartered in 1300, it reached the peak of its influence as an international port and center of ship-building and iron and steel production in the 1920s. By the mid-1970s, however, the forth largest city in Spain had fallen victim to postindustrial economics and had little of tourist cachet to offer. The opening of the Guggenheim reserved this. Within the first year. of operation, the museum attracted some 1,360,000 visitors, exceeding all expectations and infusing $160 million into the local economy. It continued to draw an average of 100,000 tourist a month to the city through the summer of 2001, over half from outside the region and the vast majority naming the museum their primary destination. Even before Gehry’s museum became the jewel in Bilbao’s crown, however, the city fathers seemed to gasp the potential of a new form of tourism constructed around architecture. Starting in the late 1980s, they embarked upon an ambitious $1.5 billion revitalization program, including the refurbishment of historic older buildings as well as the planning of new culture and leisure facilities, public works and environmental infrastructure, commissioning many of these projects from international architects with “signature” reputations.

The singularity and difference that up to now have given Gehry’s building its extraordinary impact may end up being eroded by the museum’s absorption into the wider urban development it was intended to trigger.

This potential paradox of success aside, however, the existence of such a development in Bilbao is all the more remarkable in as much as it has occurred in a city that is also the capital of basque country. The region has long asserted its independence from the rest of Spain, aggressively insisting on the prerogatives its own culture and language. Since the repression of franco era, Basque separatism has taken the form of a deadly terrorist campaign by the ETA movement. In 2000 with a new escalation of violence, an unprecedented climate of optimism is galvanizing the region as it becomes associated with art and commerce rather than bombs. The museum triumph had led to a revised judgement. Possibly a building in a provincial locale can have a radical cultural effect only when it is cosmopolitan enough to enter into a wider conversation.

Meanwhile, from the stand point of architect, Frank Gehry’s claims during the design process to have felt an affinity with Bilbao’s tough urban scape cannot be written off as entirely disingenuous. The Guggenheim Bilbao is an extraordinary example of how the Solomon R.Guggenheim foundation is pursuing its own strategy. It has become an authentic multiple phenomenon of culture, communication and regional economic development. The museum has taken some Initiatives activities, on the 15th anniversary, the museum launches a special campaign in addition to its usual programs. Comprising numerous discipline, such as art, music, ballet, photography and architecture, gastronomy, fashion, audiovisuals, or the social media, the campaign encompassed 50 activities and reached nearly 85,000 participants in an effort to share the celebration with all citizens of Bilbao.

In the context of the anniversary, the museum completely revamped its website, guggenheim-bilbao. es. A completely new graphic design, new functions, and more user-friendly access. The new website was granted the Buber Award to the best corporate website of 2012.

44

Solomon R.Guggenheim foundation, founded in 1937, is dedicated to promoting the understanding and appreciation of art, architecture, and other manifestations of modern and contemporary visual culture: collecting, preserving and researching art objects; and making them accessible to scholars and an increasingly diverse audience through its network of museums, programs, educational initiatives and publications. Frank Gahry’s shiny cultural citadel has shown the world what a museum can do for a regional economy. According to GMB’s ( Guggenheim museum Bilbao) official report in 2004, the initial investment of $183.8 million was recovered within the first six years of the museum’s operation.

Number of Visitors to Guggenheim Museum Bilbao (Annual data from 1997 to 2010) Source: Basque Government: Department of Industry, Commerce and Tourism.

45

The four-part strategy Bilbao is the heart of the Basque nation. Since its foundation, this city has directed to history of a vigorous industrial community that came to find itself in a period of chaos. This was due to a series of reasons: permanent identity crises as a result of belonging to various political-administrative areas (several kingdoms throughout history, and today Spain and France). In the end of Franco’s dictatorship, together with the beginning of a process of recovering self-government, there emerged innovative proposals and new structure of government and administration and economic management, accompanied by the integration of new intellectual a new philosophies of administration, economic and education.

The four convergent elements coincided on the basis of common factors: The search for cultural leadership, effort at economic revitalization, internationalization and the active cultural presence in Bilbao of the avant-garde.

4.2. Focusing on a city The analyses shows that in global cities, In contrast to the historic cities, capitals, port cities or the industrial metropolises that proceeded them will not be determined by their geographical location or geographical consideration, it depends on their capacity to adapt to change and their ability to offer continuity and order in turbulent environment. Many cities have the potential to transform to global cities but only some of them are successful and the process is one of self selection of mission and of local initiatives. Revitalizing of Bilbao and it’s metropolis is consist of different is based on several steps: • From an industrial to a services city • Within a new physical framework, transforming its port, regenerating its estuary, dismantling its obsolete industry, and reinventing its accessibility • With a “natural” marketing effort: a living architectonic museum that sells Its own image • Attracting external flows: intellectual capital, investment, companies • A leader in amenities and infrastructure • Promoting cultural assets • Recovering the self-respect of the population • Exercising its real role as a capital

A total of 931,015 people visited the Museum in 2013, a figure that matches the initial prediction and considered as very positive considering the adverse economic climate.

With regard to place of origin, it is interesting to note that the percentage of foreign visitors was slightly higher than in 2012: 65% of all visitors came from abroad, primary France, the UK,Germany, the USA, and Italy. The proportion of visitors from the Basque Country was similar to that of the previous year (12%), while visitors from the rest of Spain accounted for 23%.

Finally, each visitor who came to Museum on it’s 16th Anniversary in October was given a souvenir to take home: One of the winter plants used to replant Jeff Koons’s sculpture Puppy.

Table of national and internatinal tourists visiting Bilbao, 2011 to 2012, source: Annual report 2013, Guggenheim Bilbao

46

The work of Frank O.Gehry represents the mixture of individual creativity with the functional direction of its use. The project also demonstrates a unique experience in the comanagement, co-ownership and cofinancing of the building itself. Culture is source of wealth and employment. In many ways, the case of the Guggenheim Bilbao and the role it played in revitalizing the city and the Basque Country is unique. Nevertheless, paying attention to the lessons of the Guggenheim Bilbao, some general considerations can be drawn. First, museums aren’t what they used to be. The new century suggests the need for new thinking and new strategies. The Guggenheim and Bilbao have defined and achieved a successful model. It shows that culture, beyond its intrinsic value, is can be a motor of economic development.

Cities and regions need to introduce culture into their overall development strategies. Next, art has to be shown. New spaces, new regions, and new people have the right to see it, to learn to understand it, to work with it, and to have the opportunity to create and enjoy it. In this respect, too, the Guggenheim Bilbao presents a successful model the museum need to be see in a new context: the nexus formed by art, culture, and the economy. Rethinking the future In this way will lead to new ideas, new principles and new alliances. The first point to emphasize is the extensive debate aimed at Rethinking principles making sense of uncertainty (Charles Handy) and restoring principles at the source of everything (Stephen Coney). We also need to rethink what is involved in creating the advantages of tomorrow, designing growth strategies (C. K. Prahalad), and reinventing the bases to compete (Gary Hamel). Rethinking the complexity of society and its structures and establishing new methods of control can lead us to (and across) new frontiers with respect to management and desired final objectives (Michael Hanuner) by concentrating on restrictions, not on costs in terms of excellence (Eli Goldratt), through new forms of thinking (peter Senge) Rethinking leaders can involve converting oneself into the leader of leaders (Warren Bennis), establishing new “coalitions” between cultures and communities (Tohn Kotter), dealing with an ever more confused world (Al Ríes and Jack Trout). FinalIy, rethinking the world and its new spaces, from the nation-states to the configuration of networks (Tohn Naisbitt), may lead to changing the nature of capitalism (Lester Thurow) and the invention of a new biology for economics and business (Kevin Kelly).

These new ideas and principles-to mention but a few-summarize the values of our culture and inspire the change that we are living through on the threshold of a new era, a process of crisis and adjustment that requires us to overcome increasing uncertainty with the aim of bringing forth a desired future, with the understanding that our times require new organizations, because the future will not be a mere continuous projection of the past, but rather a broad discontinuous series. In a nonlinear world, linear or unidirectional thought makes no sense. Change requires creative organizations and shared leadership.

Museums that now have nothing to do with the white box of modernity or its denial by postmodernity have lost their Eurocentric nature and, in a way similar to global exhibitions (Kassel, Venice, peripheral biennial exhibitions) have been consumed by “geopolitical vanxiety” That is, they have been consumed by a nervousness provoked by contemplating both regional and identity values, as well as the emergence of local, particular, and smallervhistories or micronarratives. Here, the “Guggenheim model” fits in, The “Guggenheim model” breaks a long tradition of “museums of modernity” eager to demonstrate the best “international work”. With the Bilbao Guggenheim, the “white box” museum as a container came to an end, yet so, too, did the idea of museums linked to great centers of power or major art capitals: New York (MoMA), Paris (the Pompidou) and London (the Tate), alI museums dominated by “international” mainstream languages, a highly hierarchical and elitist vision, and a monoculture centered around an ethnocentric Western Axis. As early as 1976.

47

The Basque arts community has launched numerous campaigns against the Guggenheim, but to pay special attention to one that took the form of an exhibition entitled Prometeo encadenado (prometheus bound). A few days before the official opening of the Guggenheim in October 1997, the show opened with works by 123 artists at the Arsenal gallery, an alternative space only a few yards away from the museum. The exhibition contained 155 works in different media-paintings, digital prints, postcards, collages, and assorted objects (music boxes, a Basque beret, doodles on napkins, Havana cigars, and so on)-but what really stood out was its festive, incisive, and ironic tone.

Berlanga used his fine irony to talk about the isolation that for the last two hundred years had defined Spain’s international standing, only emphasized by Franco’s dictatorship. Looking at the building by itself as a none site, that is, the building itself, which is undoubtedly one of the most beautiful, spectacular or masterly to come out of Frank Gehry. Frank Gehry himself has recognized that the Guggenheim in Bilbao and its “idea of heaven” changed his life. The shape of the building resembling Gaudi’s modernism. Architecture operated as a pure and abstract form of experimentation.

This is architecture that in its maximum state of sophistication and paroxysm reveals more about the architecture itself the material, shape, and design than about perception in other words, about where it is located, what space it occupies, from where it is viewed and who looks at.

Quite apart from being an avant guard museum that gives Basque society in particular and European society in general the opportunity of seeing one of the largest and richest collection of modern and contemporary art in the world, Guggenheim also offers a unique opportunity for integration different cultures above all represents a jewel in the crown of world architecture, one that cannot be repeats and that marks the frontier between twenties and twenty first century. The work of art of Frank O.Gahry represents the mixture of individual creativity with the function direction of its use a museum to exhibit the art of time on a large scale and in a free and open manner. The project also demonstrate a unique experience in the comanagement, co-ownership and cofinanacing of the building itself, of the foundation and of artistic collection. In this way private initiatives share responsibilities with public Basque institution, it has achieved what few mega projects have succeed in doing, gaining the support and adherence of almost everyone. It is sufficient to note the different new activities and lines of business associated with a cultural project of this type which can be integrated into the economic strategy of the country, thereby strengthening it.

Beyond a physical building Country building in the Basque country, revitalization to transform the city, innovation in the search for new way to create and develop the museum and culture industry, and an entrepreneurial approach to creating a new type of museum that exploited the role of the avant-garde in Bilbao’s culture life. The overall strategy in which these four elements coverage rested on the interaction not only of Guggenheim and Bilbao, but other agent both public and private agents, four strategies located, moreover in a specific dynamic context: Bilbao, as an active container for different visions aligned to coverage in a unique new project. To understand country building in the Basque country, one must go back at least 1980, when Basques recovered a considerable part of their decision-making capacity and self-government, following a brief pre autonomous period at the end of the Franco dictatorship, when democracy began to be regained in Spain (1975-79). The first was the need to remake the image of Bilbao and the Basque Country. A negative image resulting from economic recession, the existence of violence ravaging the country, and the general opinion or impression that nationalism was synonymous with negative isolation and confrontation, became both a cause and consequence in a vicious cycle generating discouragement, unwillingness to make forward-Iooking decisions, inability to attract foreign investment, and justifications for policies having an adverse effect on development of the country. In order to modernize and internationalize the Basque Country, they had to reinvent of the economy. A regional economy based on outmoded heavy industry overly concentrated in just a few sectors (steel and shipbuilding, for example) made it necessary to marshal our real and historical competence and build a new entrepreneurial culture, incorporating new promising industries, creating new industrial relations frameworks, and preparing the human resources that the new economy would need.

48

The infrastructure was also needed, the infrastructure gap where both physical and intelligent ones.

It meant they had to multiply the effort to provide enormous sums, projects, and regenerative, imaginative programs. It should be noted that by the time the Guggenheim project started, with the exception of cultural infrastructures, all other indicators placed the Basque Country (in relative terms) above the Spanish average. So, within this overall effort, the Basque Country and the city of Bilbao used culture as a key engine or strategic goal, providing not only a major physical renewal, but also a new injection of self-esteem on the part of the people. Culture played a dual role, as something intrinsic to humankind and above all to society in the special process of regaining self-esteem and values, provided a sense of identity and sense that the region is capable of lending strength to all forward looking projects. Paired with economic development culture has became the key factor in financial system and development of the country.

Guggenheim Bilbao â&#x20AC;&#x153;coopetitiveâ&#x20AC;? strategies for the new culture-economy spaces, source: learning from Guggenheim Bilbao.

49

The Guggenehim Bilbao symbolising: - Universality, internationalization - Local know-how - The support of first class economic-cultural forums - Avant-garde management of culture and particularly, of museum - The strengthening of one’s own cultural sources - Attracting and training professional in the educational and cultural communities - The driving force behind the Basque country firms.

In many ways, the case of the Guggenheim Bilbao and the role it played in revitalizing the city and Basque country is unique. Nevertheless, paying attention to the lesson of the Guggenheim Bilbao, some general consideration can be drawn. First museums aren’t what they used to be. The Guggenheim Bilbao have defined and achieved a successful model. It shows that culture beyond its intrinsic value, can be a motor of economic development. Cities and regions need to introduce culture into their overall development strategies. We need to see museums in new context: the nexus formed by art, culture, and economy. Rethinking the future in this way will lead to new ideas, new principles and new alliances.

The Guggenheim Bilbao effects is a result of a unique coverage of ground breaking strategies: The Solomon R. Guggeneheim Foundation’s vision in attempting both the New York art world and the whole ongoing international art and museum world, the Basque country strategy of modernizing and internationalizing the country, it’s people, and their economy, effort to renew Bilbao for new challenges, and the Guggenheim Bilbao Museum’s own concept of a new museum, driving the communities development through a new liaison between culture and economy.

Result of Guggenheim Bilbao’s Impact -Impact of the building GDP generation 10,056 millions pesetas Employment sustained 1,452 jobs -Impact of Building the Museum on Taxes Revenue generation 20.1 % of the investment made (For Basque authorities) (2,300 million pesetas)

PayBack

n=3

- Putting Bilbao on the map: Image as a modern city - Promoting tourism: 60% of visitors from outside Spain - Improvement of residents' quality of life - Creation of new business activities - An attractive venue for conferences, seminars, courses - Neighboring provinces benefit from the museum's presence - Other museums and cultural institutions benefit from this impact: collections, management, budgets, visitors, friends, trustees, collaborative companies, sponsorship - Art learning and related activities: galleries, artists, art schools - The Solomon R. Guggenheim Foundation's strategy and international presence - The psychological effect - Lessons for the city, culture, strategies

Source: learning from Guggenheim Bilbao

50

5

INTERVIEWS

-Josep Maria Llop -Mauro Bianucci -Richard Pie Ninot -Kamran Heirati -Mehdi Bakhshizade -Kiarash Milaninia

51

Name: Josep Maria Llop Description: Josep Mª Llop Torné, Arquitecto - Urbanista Director Programa Internacional UIA-CIMES Ciudades intermedias+urbanización mundial 1. Have you done or participated in a touristic-architectonic project ?

Director del Plan General de Urbanismo de Lleida 1995-2015 el Primer Premio de Urbanismo de Cataluña, otorgado por la SCOT y patrocinado por la Generalitat de Catalunya. También ha recibido en 2010 la Medalla del COAC o Colegio oficial de Arquitectos de Cataluña al merito por la promoción del urbanismo.

2. Do you think that Architects pays enough attention to the tourism in process of design locally and globally?

Architects they pay little attention to the to the tourism industries but they pay attention to the tourist as individuals. The main attention of the architects is in details and in small scale but they do not consider the architectonic projects in the bigger scale in the urban contexts and this is the biggest defect of architecture that architects they consider touristic building as a separate object in relation to it’s context.

3. In your opinion how important is the reciprocal effect of tourism and architecture on each other?

The effect is undoubtedly very important, because both architecture and tourism creates touristic spaces and it’s not possible to separate this two phenomenon.

4. What do you think about Guggenheim Bilbao as a touristic and Architectural project?

(Spectacular) One of the biggest success of the century as an architectonic and touristic building. Guggenheim Bilbao is not only a Beautiful building it’s an urban project. The key success of the Guggenheim is it’s location in the city. This spectacular is located in the heart of city next to the old town of Bilbao where tourist can take a turn and walk around the old town where is full of bars and restaurants and also its proximity to the touristic services such as travel agencies and hotels and surrounding by cultural activities like Teatro Arriaga.

So Guggenheim Bilbao is a successful project because of it’s establishment which is the good combination of the iconic building and touristic structure.

5. Which architectonic project you consider as a good example in terms of tourism and Architecture?

The concentration of touristic buildings in the center of Barcelona. Such as Picasso museum, of contemporary art and many other examples beside it’s architectural values has created a touristic area which attracts a lot of tourist.

In my opinion a building doesn’t necessary need to be extraordinary to function as an icon but it’s values makes it iconic and the most important one is it’s touristic synergy it means, its relation to the city and it’s synergy to the whole system.

6.What is your opinion about the future of tourism and architecture?

I think the relation between tourism and architecture will get much more stronger than today. The location of a building should be in relation to the whole city. In other words the relation between urbanism, architecture and tourism should be more strong.

52

Name: Mauro Bianucci Description: Architect web: http://bianucci.net/index.php/project/barcelona-modernista/ 1. Have you done or participated in a touristic-architectonic project ?

Barcelona Modernista/ fold out map guide 2. Do you think that Architects pays enough attention to the tourism in process of design locally and globally?

Architects in the small towns do not pay enough attention to the tourism but in big cities like Barcelona, London and the cities with similar profile they pay more attention to the tourism of the city unless that the project is directly related to the tourism but in general they do not pay much attention to the tourist industry.

3. In your opinion how important is the reciprocal effect of tourism and architecture on each other?

In touristic cities or in urban scale this reciprocal effect is very important but in some other cities the effect is very minor in general the effect of tourism in urban scale is more important.

4. What do you think about Guggenheim Bilbao as a touristic and Architectural project?

(Spectacular) In my opinion Guggenheim Bilbao is a wonderful building and has helped the city to grow in international level which it was an unknown city before the appearance of the Guggenheim Bilbao. This project introduced the city to whole world not only to the people interested in art but to all type of people. Itâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s the ultimate example of architecture and the most successful example of architecture and tourism.

5. Which architectonic project you consider as a good example in terms of tourism and Architecture?

I cannot think of one specific example but Eiffel tower is a building that attracts a lot of tourist which before was suppose to be only a temporary structure for the exhibition and get remove by then, by the time passes it become the icon of Paris which attracts a lot of people from the whole world same thing happened with la Pedrera which was not considered as a nice building back in time but now its one of the most touristic buildings of Barcelona. In my opinion the beauty of the building will not necessary make it an attractive building but a unique building can make that effect. So time can change the function of buildings and make it Iconic.

6. What is your opinion about the future of tourism and architecture?

In my opinion tourism and architecture have been linked more than before because more people knows about design and urbanism and people can travel more than before for example we can talk about Tokyo as a tourist destination which not many people could travel to, I think Tourism and Architecture are growing together by the time passes and more people will be aware of it. One example that come to my mind about this subject is transforming Torre Agbar to Hotel, which is one of the well known iconic buildings of Barcelona.

53

Name: Richard Pie Ninot Discription: Architect PHD from the School of Architecture of Barcelona 1. Have you done or participated in a touristic-architectonic project ?

I have worked in number of urbanization plans of various Spanish tourist towns (Torroella de Montgrí, Tossa, Platja d’Aro, Sant Feliu de Guixols, Soller, ...) in several urban reports for various Spanish towns (San Bartolome de Tirajana, the island of Fuerteventura, Majorca, ...) studies on the organization of the Catalan coast on architectural projects such as the Marina Calvia.

2. Do you think that Architects pays enough attention to the tourism in process of design locally and globally?

No, in the catalogue of the exhibition on “Architecture of the Sun” I published an article entitled “The shameful architecture” in commenting on this situation, the lack of interest of architects in the tourism architecture.

3. In your opinion how important is the reciprocal effect of tourism and architecture on each other?

It is very important. As director of the Instituto interuniversitario “Habitat, Tourism and Territory” (UPC-UMA) we are working on this issue. Coming soon publish a book called “liquid Tourism” in which we present several studies on this relationship.

4. What do you think about Guggenheim Bilbao as a touristic and Architectural project?

I think it’s spectacular architecture that helped Bilbao to be presented as a touristic city. However, I have many doubts about the tourism model that assumes.

5. Which architectonic project you consider as a good example in terms of tourism and Architecture?

In the early sixties there are some projects of special interest: the organization of LanguedocRoussillon in the South of France developed by the standards of modern architecture and TEAM X; Maspalomas contest with a pasiajístico project ahead of its time; later, as a preliminary step to postmodern architecture worth noting Grimau Port, on the French Riviera; popular architecture, the development of towns like Cadaqués; found in building large Vichy thermal spas, Bath, Spa, Baden-Baden or Mariembad: Italian colonies Dopolaboro modern wars; various hotels; projects like Coderch in Calonge, etc ...

If I had to choose between all, the Private Punta Ballena in Uruguay architect Bonet Castellana 6. What is your opinion about the future of tourism and architecture?

Tourism is an activity that will keep future and evolve in various directions. The role of architecture in relation to tourism depend on the ability of that in reflecting on the tourism and intervening in it. The Institute “Habitat, Tourism, Territory” aims to reflect on it and develop a line of own research around this topic.

54

Name: Kamran Heirati Discription: Architect graduated from Azad university in Tehran, 15 years of experience in architecture.

1. Have you done or participated in a touristic-architectonic project ?

2. Do you think that Architects pays enough attention to the tourism in process of design locally and globally? I have to separate this question in two aspect, either the project was designed to attract tourist or because of its design and form it become a tourist attraction overtime.

According to the second aspect we must know that every architect that would like to be known would pay attention to the tourism and how his work would effect the city image and how people preserve his building. for instance in Iran architects pay attention how much their building would attract the attention of the people. If i want to talk about Spanish architects we should know they are more progressive and alternative in this sense, specially in Spain and Portugal and China, they do not design the building only with the purpose of creating an icon, they look at the architecture with a wider view which that makes their building iconic, in other words they do not specifically think about their building as an icon. The name of the architect is an important thing is this aspect, if they are more known they are more influential, for instance Peter Zumthor was not so known at the beginning but nowadays his designs for baths are now well known in Switzerland and brings lots of visitors and his designs are nor essentially eye catching but they have become an icon 3. In your opinion how important is the reciprocal effect of tourism and architecture on each other?

In my opinion architecture plays an important role in tourism and it can change the image of a country and create new image. If there is good architecture then there will be tourist facilities around them or vise versa there are some unknown place which the tourists discover and after a while the investors come and create facilities around them.

4. What do you think about Guggenheim Bilbao by Frank Gehry, Oscar Niemeyer international and cultural center in Aviles and the city of art and science in Valencia by Calatrava in terms of tourism and Architectural project?

Guggenheim Bilbao is a very iconic building with the purpose of making alive the whole city and most of the people can make a connection with this masterpiece. Bilbao is a building with new features in this sense it is very similar to George Pompido in Paris so because of this reason it attracts the attention.

In reality architecture have made everyone amazed so people they come and see the building itself more and more than its museums. Creating an Icon in a city is so related to the architect and how the architect would pay attention to the needs of the city. Buildings are like any other products, they need media and advertisement. Frank Gehry created a brand with his new design and this building brings so much tourist from outside of Spain in compare to native tourists.

I donâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;t have much information about the two other buildings which is mentioned above but i must add that only some of the architects are able to design icons not all the architects are able to this.

55

5. Which architectonic project you consider as a good example in terms of tourism and Architecture?

Gaudiâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s designs are the best example in this field because it gave a world known position to the city of Barcelona. I cannot think of a better example than this. People around the world travel to Spain to see the work of Gaudi and all the people they are impressed by his designs.

6. What is your opinion about the future of tourism and architecture?

They have a very important effect on each other in this world of supply and demand. It is very important how we introduce our heritage to the world for instance in Iran there are so many cities which needs to be emphasized on and introduced to the world. We have a lot of great architectural building in Iran which are unknown and we do not need to create new icon to that but in some countries there are no Icons so there is a need to create one. In Iran the it is very important to advertise these icons and show them to the whole world.

56

Name: Mehdi Bakhshizade Discription: Graduate of architecture in Tehran, 17 years of experience in architecture 1. Have you done or participated in a touristic-architectonic project ?

Garden hotel in marivan, Iran 2. Do you think that Architects pays enough attention to the tourism in process of design locally and globally? Architecture is valued because of the people, so architect should always pay attention to the tourism and people. It depends on more on the subject of the project, if the project aims to attract tourists so it is hundred percent an important fact.

3. In your opinion how important is the reciprocal effect of tourism and architecture on each other?

Tourism has very important effect in architecture, for example the Guggenheim museum in New York which is done by frank Lloyd Wright has 250,000 visitors daily, The design of the project was based on an important factor which are the visitors and the people, the simplicity and experience of the museum makes it an unique project. The Guggenheim in New York is has taken more advantage of the space that the Guggenheim Bilbao. In Guggenheim Bilbao you can only visit 1/3 of the building and the rest is the building as a sculpture. Which in Guggenheim in New York the most important thing are the people who visit and it is designed according to the people I think , Wright has combined these two together and that make the project functional in its best way.

4. What do you think about Guggenheim Bilbao by Frank Gehry, Oscar Niemeyer international and cultural center in Aviles and the city of art and science in Valencia by Calatrava in terms of tourism and Architectural project?

I think the projects of the Niemeyer and Calatrava only attracts a specific kind of tourists, on the other hand the project of Frank Gehry is so new that even if you are not a fan of his work you would be amazed by it. It is very important in architecture to be further that its time in this way the project will attract all type of people not only specific kind of people.

Even though that there has been a lot of people who visited the Guggenheim Bilbao but they didnâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;t like the building but any ways they have visited the building cause it is different and they would like to have a different experience in their visit.

Guggenheim is because of its technique which is so uncommon. This building is like a sculpture that if you even look at in small scale would be still interesting but I am not sure if Bilbao will stay as interesting as it is now in 100 years. Sometimes some projects belong to a specific period of time but after 100 years they wont be one of the top ten destinations cause this project is so famous because of its form not like the one in New York which is well known because of its function. In Guggenheim Bilbao the function is not the important part of it but the from of the project is the most important feature of the project.

57

5. Which architectonic project you consider as a good example in terms of tourism and Architecture?

Holocaust in Berlin is great project in tourist point of view and the visitors. A series of cubes in different heights which are like a symbol from outside. All these cubes are the symbol of a historical event and also they change according to the size of the human which makes it interesting for the visitors and much more integrated with the space.

6. What is your opinion about the future of tourism and architecture?

They have been always in relation with each other and they will be like this in future. Any how any masterpiece which wants to be remembered it will be with the help of architecture either its a museum or a sculpture even when a country wants to create an image of itself it will be trough its architecture all of these will be done by an architect to attract visitors. Architecture is an interface between anything valuable and its outside world and tourism is the same.

7. What is your opinion about architectural mega projects in Spain and in the world?

(Could they boost the tourism) The size of the project is not necessarily an important factor it can be door handle or a city if itâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s something new it can attract a lot of tourist. The size of the project is not the important part in this matter the idea behind it and how we relate to it its an important thing.

58

Name: Kiarash Milaninia Brief Information: Architect, Master in architecture and landscape design 1. Have you done or participated in a touristic-architectonic project ? If yes which one..

Qatar touristic and architectonic project (similar to Dubai) 2. Do you think that Architects pays enough attention to the tourism in process of design locally and globally? Architecture is like a trend, new architecture and new ideas of design attracts tourists which you can see a lot of example of that, But the architect alone himself cannot create a masterpiece which attracts tourist there is a whole group of experts behind the physical project to make that happen, the architect alone himself cannot attract tourists, it’s just a part of it. They can create a beautiful design but maybe it wont be demand of tourists in that specific area but with the help of tourism experts and planners architects can achieve this goal. In global level architecture can help the tourism industry.

3. In your opinion how important is the reciprocal effect of tourism and architecture on each other? Architecture helps tourism industry and tourists as financial source create opportunities for better architectural works, like Las Vegas, the money that tourists bring there makes opportunities to create the best hotels.

4. What do you think about Guggenheim Bilbao by Frank Gahry, Oscar Niemeyer interntional and cultural center in Aviles and the city of art and science in Valencia by Calatrava in terms of tourism and Architectural project?

I speak as an expert in this field I’m interested in all of these projects but for a normal tourist Bilbao has more attraction. The other two projects are not in the priorities of the tourist destination but Bilbao is like that. I never heard of Oscar Niemeyer project in Spain, i only know his projects in Brazil and the Calatrava’s work in Las Palmas has more fame than the one in Aviles.

5. Which architectonic project you consider as a good example in terms of tourism and Architecture?

Guggenheim Bilbao, because of its function and the media also has became world known, the type of architecture and it’s relation to it’s context is very important.

6. What is your opinion about the future of tourism and architecture?

For sure the demand of architecture market as a tourist destination will be more, because the international tourism is growing and this market is growing also like China they used architecture to attract tourists. In the recent projects of Zaha Hadid as an starchitect, they are done in the countries like Azerbeijan, Dubai, China, they are new destinations for tourists, a good architecture should have a new design and ideas.

7. What is your opinion about architectural mega projects in Spain and in the world? (could they boost the tourism) Personally i’m not the fan of Mega projects i think micro projects have better future in this sense.

Mega projects may not be the demand of the tourists and they lost a lot of money.

Mega projects are too risky and they need a lot of investment and they have a lot of costs such as: water, electricity,...and normally are not serving the local tourists and not so attractive in global level.

Experience shows they don’t have a lot of profits they have high costs but on the other side micro projects are more democratic and nearer to the taste of the people and make the people more involved, mega projects normally face an unmeaningful phase after a while.

59

Interview Questions: 1. Have you done or participated in a touristic-architectonic project ?

2. Do you think that Architects pays enough attention to the tourism in process of design locally and globally?

3. In your opinion how important is the reciprocal effect of tourism and architecture on each other?

4. What do you think about Guggenheim Bilbao by Frank Gahry, Oscar Niemeyer interntional and cultural center in Aviles and the city of art and science in Valencia by Calatrava in terms of tourism and Architectural project?

5. Which architectonic project you consider as a good example in terms of tourism and Architecture?

6.What is your opinion about the future of tourism and architecture?

7. what is your opinion about architectural mega projects in Spain and in the world? (could they boost the tourism)?

Review of the interviews All of these experts believe that architecture and tourism definitely have an important influence on each other which is inevitable where is good architecture there are tourists. They believe Guggenheim Bilbao has an strong effect on the regeneration of the city and its a fine example of architecture and tourism although some of them have doubt about the building if in the future will still be one of the tourist attractions. About Aviles and Valencia they do not have much information although they are very familiar with the architects of the both projects. In their opinion media plays and important role in the success of the Bilbao. The future of tourism and architecture is undoubtedly very much connected even more than today.

60

Overview of the interviews:

Name

Question 1

Josep Maria Llop

Yes

They pay little attention

Mauro Bianucci

Yes

Richard Pie Ninot

Question 2

Question 3

Question 4

Question 5

Question 6

Very important

the biggest success of the century as an architectonic and touristic building

touristic buildings in the center of Barcelona

The relation will get much stronger

In general they donâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;t pay enough attention

Important

the most successful example of architecture and tourism.

Eiffel tower, La Pedrera

They will be more linked than before

Yes

They pay little attention

Very important

spectacular architecture

the Private Punta Ballena in Uruguay

Tourism is an activity that will keep future and evolve in various directions

Kamran Heirati

No

Depends on the type project

Very important

Frank Gehry created a brand with his new design

Gaudiâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s design

They will always have important effect on each other

Mehdi Bakhshizade

Yes

Depends on the type project

Very important

Bilbao attracts all type of tourists because its new design

Holocaust in Berlin

They will always be bonded together

Question 7

The size of the project is not necessarily an important factor

Kiarash Milaninia

Yes

Architects alone cannot attract tourist

Very important

Bilbao attracts all type of tourists because of its new design

61

Guggenh eim Bilbao

the demand of architecture market as a tourist destination will be more

Micro projects work better than mega projects

6

CONCLUSION

62

Architecture undoubtedly is a grand phenomenon in tourism where there is good architecture there will be tourist facilities around them. The majority of the 20th century icons are located in Europe, US and some in United Arab Emirates. The movement started from Europe and US and then moved to other parts of the world. Looking at these iconic buildings we can see the size or the function of the project is not necessarily an issue to create an icon. All these icons are in all different sizes but one thing that is clear in all of them, they all represent a new idea of their own kind. Contemporary architecture are now non places, they do not have much link to their environment, although that these buildings are non places they still must be built according to the need of the city, people and how it want to be represented, without consideration of the city needs and society, the outcome might be beautiful and eye-catching but in long term will not function.

In the case of Bilbao they did not construct the museum only to create an icon but to fight the serious problems of the city of Bilbao like, its unemployment and bad image of the city. Although before the construction of the building there was a big regeneration plan of the city like the subway line, airport and the Guggenheim Bilbao was the final touch of the plan. Function of an icon is a key role for an iconic building, apart from how it looks the function which is suitable and needed in the city like the case of Bilbao was the museum which faded away the ugly image of the city and recreated a cultural city that people hardly remember the image of the past.

Another important factor is the media, the campaigns and advertisement are important factors in todays world that how we sell our product to the people before they see it, because in this century all the products are sold to people before even seen, the advertisement drag the tourist to the destination is undoubtedly an important fact.

The trend of iconic architecture in Spain took its leap after the success of Guggenheim Bilbao. Which it was followed by Valencia and Aviles. Valenciaâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s new project, the city of Art and science came with a really heft price which was more than what was estimated for the project and every year it is loosing its tourists. Aviles has not been successfull in catching the eye of the international tourists.

The Guggenheim foundation was one of the key factors of success of Guggenheim Bilbao. Being linked to one of the world most famous art foundation has confirmed the success of Bilbao. Holding the exhibition of the world famous artists around the world which calls the attention of the people from all over the world. Guggenheim is worlds know foundation which its name since 1937.

Starchitects are the designers of the most known contemporary designs, starchitects are not known for their name they are known for their design and initiating new ideas, They always bring new to the world and thats why it fascinates everyone. The majority of the tourists are not familiar with the name of the architects of the buildings only specific type of tourists are interested in art, history and architecture. The majority of the tourists are following what is introduces to them by media, but still we cannot deny the fact that starchitects, they are important in creating an icon because not all architects are able to make an icon in the city which brings hordes of tourists, they are superstars because of their new ideas although not all starchitecs or better say the named architects are successful to create a an icon which is beautiful and also functional. These spectaculars are often criticized because they are an amazing design in tourist pictures but they have little to do with the context, they are disassociated from the place, culture and the needs of the society.

Looking at the iconic buildings in a bigger scale than the city itself, having too many icons in a country may be a danger like in the case of Spain. Using the same formula like Bilbao Effect can cause a market saturation. Also what worked in Bilbao is not guaranteed to work in other places. Each city should approach their own individual approach to create a global image. Many cities in the world are aware of the economic effect of the architecture, so they want to create an icon to grab the world attention but the rush of the cities in creating new icon without considering the context leads to failure according to my interviews, architects normally pay little attention to the city context.

63

Another aspect is the city itself, the question of, if the city needs an icon or if the city can adapt itself to the created icon. In some places there are already contemporary architecture which are unknown and creating a new one will just affect the existing potential buildings. Specially in big cities that they are saturated by the contemporary architecture such as Tehran, London, Barcelona and etc, the work of an architect which is not known could act as an icon. So the cities must analyse if they would need a new icon or they can use their existing building by simply creating necessary infrastructures to get the same result. (See the graphic below).

Creating an Icon

Proving infrastructures around a building to create an icon

One of the example that can be mentioned here is the Torre Agbar, which is one of the most iconic buildings in Barcelona. This iconic building use to be the headquarter of the water company which was recently sold to be converted to a luxury hotel which can act as an economic source for the city.

This initiative act of the city of Barcelona is another way of using a potential icon to the benefit of the city economy. I think architecture is an underestimated success factor, too many buildings around the world are not open to the public. This fine example can be a role model to other contemporary buildings to interact with the public.

Changing the function of an existing Icon

An Architect alone himself is not able to create a masterpiece with the intention of attracting tourist, it requires a thorough studies by the help of other experts to make this happen. Architect alone can make an elegant design that may not work in its context for the purpose of tourist attraction. Iconic buildings and their construction technics have been affordable only by the wealthiest of states or those cities with access to that wealth, even those cities have started to think about it. The iconic buildings has been very effective in tourism, the contemporary architecture can be much more than just a pretty picture. It give the cities identity, which is extremely important fact, identity gives an idea of who we are and how we relate to others and the world. As architecture looks to new directions away from the iconic, so too are communities looking at the role of tourism and architecture. In fact the June 2009 the Royal institute of British Architects journal devotes a section to exploring shifts in principles and paradigms with architecture, which covers â&#x20AC;&#x153;Return to core valuesâ&#x20AC;? help people to live and work better, An instrument for social change and design to make a difference. However, with the

64

vast sums of money no longer readily available to procure these buildings, different strategies for regeneration will need to be taken up.

In tourism culture and regeneration a multidisciplinary exploration of strategies are turn into realities: - Applying creative strategies to move away from homogenization.

- Mix use development where visitors and locals share a common experience.

- Less formulatic approaches.

- Real or authentic experiences through organic growth rather than over planning.

There are moves away from globalization and standardization, moves that consider local culture and exploit difference without the need for expensive or star architecture to capture an audience.

Creative use of architecture in small budget micro-regeneration projects is a key to future iconic of buildings. Considering all the cities that they want to have their own type of Bilbao effect with not being able to afford the price of such a beautiful piece of art done by the world known architects, They must apply their own alternative approach and proper advertisement by the help of media which is undoubtedly an important issue to put a pin on their cities.

Over planning

Alternative approach

“ Creating a contemporary architecture is not enough to attract tourist the quality of architecture is a crucial fact.”

One of the main concerns of the use of iconic buildings to revive the city as a tourist destination is if they will function as a long term cure or after 100 years, will they remain as the wonder of the world like the colosseum in Rome or they will fade away?

The Bilbao Effect” refers to the trend of cities and developers employing landmark architecture to help attract tourism and the economic development that comes with it. However when the desire to improve the skyline trumps the desire to improve the city itself, this phenomenon can prove detrimental.

Author Witold Rybczynski has been an outspoken critic of this phenomenon, noting that “the charged atmosphere promotes flamboyance rather than careful thought, and favours the glib and obvious over the subtle and nuanced”.

According to Witold Rybczynski Despite the success of the Guggenheim Bilbao, the Bilbao effect has not proved easy to replicate, not even for Frank Gehry. His Experience Music Project for Paul Allen, the Microsoft billionaire, was supposed to put Seattle on the architectural map. Despite its unusual architecture, consisting of colourful, rounded forms said to be inspired by electric guitars, the museum of rock music and Jimi Hendrix memorabilia has not proven to be a success. Iconic building will always be the magnet for the tourists as it always have been but the question which rises here is what is the tendency of the new architourists, will they still be attracted to the spectacular architecture if there will be so many of them?

65

7

BIBLIOGRAPHY

66

6. BIBLIOGRAPHY Books 1. Joan Ockman, Salomon Frausto.(2007) ‘Architourism: Authentic, Escapist, Exotic, Spectacular’.

2. Medina Lasansky, Brian Mc Lauren.(2005) ‘Oxford/Newyork’, Architecture and tourism: Perception, Performance and Places.

3. Ana María Guasch, Joseba Zulaika.(2005) ‘Learning from the Bilbao Guggenheim’, Center for Basque Studies, University of Nevada, Reno, 4. Alexander Tzonis. (2007) ‘Santiago Calatrava: Complete Works’.

5. Alan Hess. (2009) ‘Oscar Niemeyer Buildings’.

6. John Urry. (1990) ‘The Tourist Gaze: Leisure and Travel in Contemporary Societies’.

7. Davydd J. Greenwood.(1972) ‘Tourism as an Agent of Change: A Spanish Basque Case’.

8. Gomez, M.V. (1998) Reflective Images: The Case of Urban Regeneration in Glasgow and Bilbao’, International Journal of Urban and Regional Research, Vol. 22.

9. Debord, Guy. (1995), Newyork, ‘The society of spactacle’.

10. Dennis R. Judd , Susan S. Fainstein, (1999),’ The Tourist City’.

11. Aldo Rossie. (1984), ‘The Architecture of the City’.

Electronic Biblography (Online): 1. Beatriz Plaza. (2011) ‘The Bilbao effect (Guggenheim Museum Bilbao)’, faculty of Economics.

University of the Basque Country. < www.scholars-on-bilbao.info/.../BPlaza_ROI_Guggenheim_IJURR_2006.pdf> 2. Matt Ludbrook. ‘How influential is iconic architecture to the increase of business and tourist in Dubai?’ < www.mattludbrook.co.uk/.../320ResearchProject_MattLudbrook.pdf> 3. Lan Ekintza, ‘Bilbao a city for investment’, Bilbao city counsil.<www.bilbao.net/ingles/bilbaonegocios/invertir/pdf/cityforinvestment.pdf> 4. Andria N. Godfrey and Ulrike Gretzel, ‘The Use of Modern Architecture in City Marketing, Park and Tourism Sciences’, Texas A&M University.<www. assets.conferencespot.org/fileserver/file/991/ filename/73.pdf>.

5. City of Art and Science, <http://www.cac.es> 5. V.Ryan.(2010), ‘what is an iconic design,<http://www.technologystudent.com/prddes1/icon1. html>.

6. www.guggenheim-bilbao.es

67

12. Robert Adam, Architecture and Globalization, <www.adamarchitecture.com/images/PDFs/RAGlobalisation.pdf13. Number of visitors in Guggenheim Bilbao, http://www.eitb.com/en/news/entertainment/detail/805625/number-visitors-guggenheim-bilbao-6000-visitors-2011/> 14. By David S. Hirschman. (2008) ‘Marvel at modern architecture’, < www.china.org.cn/travel/2014-05/06/content_32300935.htm>.

15. Llàtzer Moix. (Diary 2010, IV), Barcelona, La Vanguardia, Dietari 2010, IV. < llull.cat/IMAGES_175/transfer07-foc01.pdf>.

16. Witold Rybczynski. (2008), ‘When Buildings Try Too Hard’,The wall street journal’.

17. Patrik Lim. (2012) Bali, ‘Modernism challenge in the city and urban area’. < http://patricklim. phlarchitects.com/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=56:architecture-in-the-society-of-spectacle-modernism-challenge-in-the-city-and-urban-area&catid=36:on-public-space&Itemid=58> 18. City of Art and Science. (2013), < http://www.abc.es/local-comunidad-valenciana/20130913/abciprivatizacion-cacsa-201309131243.html>.

Annex - Timeline of Guggenheim Bilbao 1991 Formalities for materializing the idea of the Guggenheim Museum Bilbao were launched in February 1991, When the Basque government contacted the Solomon R.Guggenheim Foundation to propose that it participate in part of its plan to revamp Bilbao and the Basque country as a whole. The Solomon.R Guggenheim Foundation received the proposal warmly, due to their recent approval of a long-term development. Plan for the Foundation involving a network of different centers distributed throughout the world. Following months of hard negotiation, in december of the same year, the Basque government and the Solomon R. Guggenheim Foundation signed the Development and Programing Services Agreement for the Guggenheim Museum Bilbao at the Provincial council’s headquarters in Bilbao.

1992-93 After selecting the site and architect, who would design an iconic building, in july 1992 the Basque Government and Provincial Council of Biscay constituted the Consorcio del Proyecto Guggenheim Bilbao. Its primary objective was to supervise all aspects related to the construction of the Museum. In 1993 the First schematic model of the Museum designed by Frank O.Gehry was presented.

1994 In october, work began on the structure of what was to become the Guggenheim Museum Bilbaoand the Management Agreement between the Solomon R. Guggenheim Foundation and the Basque authorities establishing the terms of collaboration between the parties with regard to the Guggeheim Museum Bilbao was signed before the year was out.

1996 In November, The Solomon R. Guggenheim Foundation presented the Basque Administration with a draft Strategic management plan 1997-2000 for the Guggenheim museum Bilbao. The presentation of this proposal marked the beginning of a process of analysis and debate culminating in approval by the 68

Executive Committee of the Guggenheim Museum Bilbao Foundation of the Operating Plan defining the working guidelines governing the Museum’s first four years in operation.

1997 After the inauguration of the building, equipment was installed and staff was appointed, on october 19th with the opening of the museum to the public. Less than a year later more than 1,300,000 people had already visited the Museum. The opening exhibition The Guggenheim Museum and the Art this century creates enormous expectation, as the Museum’s first exhibition is dedicated to one of the most important modern and contemporary modern art collection in the world. One of the initiative features of the museum is the library with its recently created specialized bibliography collection, opens to staff and outside researchers. In response to the demands of society companies, institution and individuals to participate in the project, the corporate Members program are created. They are to become an essential part of the Museum activity.

1998 The exhibition china: 5000 years explores innovation and transformation in chinese art over five millennia, from the exquisite jades of the Neolithic period to the present day for that reason the museum is transformed according to Arata Isozaki’s installation design. In the museum there has been educational programs objective of giving schoolchildren, educators, museum members, and the general public a better understanding of art the exhibited.

1999 This year major exhibition was Robert Rauschenberg: A Retrospective, dedicated to teh entire career of one the most prolific and innovating artist of the second half of the 20th century who captured critical and public attention with his zeal for artistic research and sprit of invention. The museum also collaborates with UNICEF in organizing programs and activities to celebrate the Tenth Anniversary of the Convention on the Rights of the Child. he Museum web site is launched as a tool for disseminating the Museum’s activities and art program.

2000 The exhibition The Art of the Motorcycle causes an impact on the museum scene with its presentation of the motorcycle as a metaphor of the 20th century. Invented in the early century, this industrial object was used by the exhibition to approach questions of technology, design, speed, rebelliousness, desire, freedom, sex, death… modernity in all its essence, in a presentation designed by Frank Gehry.

2001 Fashion comes in the Museum with Marvel of the Modern World Award, a retrospective exhibition featuring the Italian designer’s cutting-edge creations, remarkable for their adaptation to social changes, in a spectacular setting designed by visual artist Robert Wilson. The Bilbao Collection continues to grow, and the storage area is remodeled and optimized to suit new needs. Techniques and systems for moving large artworks are adopted, bringing a major improvement to the Museum equipment.

2002 Paris: Capital of the Arts, 1900–1968 takes a different look at the art of the historical avant-gardes.

The exhibition encompasses over half a century of artistic movements, historical events, and artists who fashioned the Paris of the first half of the 20th century. The elderly have become a very important visitor group for the Museum. By way of a contribution to the sponsoring of cultural activities for the elderly of Bilbao, an agreement is signed with the Provincial Council of Biscay which turns out to be a huge success.

69

2003 The exhibition Calder. Gravity and Grace has an underlying playful aspect reflecting the jovial personality of American artist Alexander Calder. His love of games, drawings thrown into the air, and the simplicity and lightness of his works encompass an anything but spontaneous “naïveté” taking on a special quality in the unique Museum spaces. Over 5,000 youngsters play the leading part in Motion Graphics, a series of activities and workshops designed to show them some of the most avant-garde audiovisual practices. This activity also marks the presentation from the Permanent Collection entitled Moving Pictures.

2004 Over 150 works, including some of colossal scale, make up James Rosenquist: A Retrospective, a fine tribute to the remarkable American Pop artists. Turning his eyes towards the consumer culture, advertising, and popular imagery, Rosenquist develops a personal style committed to his time and his context. American sculptor Richard Serra receives from the Guggenheim Museum Bilbao the most important commission ever assigned to an artist in the modern history of art: seven new large-format sculptures for the Collection.

2005 The Matter of Time, the culmination of Richard Serra’s visual language, is inaugurated. In this installation, the artist develops the potential of abstraction and movement, the result of 25 years of research.

Thanks to this commission, specifically created for the Bilbao Collection, the Museum becomes an international reference for those wishing to discover the work of Serra, one of the most important sculptors of our time.

2006 The exhibition Russia! goes beyond the temporary borders of modern art and the limits of Western geography. From 13th century icons until the present day, over 300 works illustrate nine centuries of art reflecting spirituality, social and political revolutions, realist pictorial traditions, the discovery of abstraction, and the experimentation of modernity.

2007 A special Art Program is designed to mark the celebration of the Museum’s Tenth Anniversary. Highlights include the exhibition dedicated to Anselm Kiefer, running in spring and summer, and Art in the USA: 300 Years of Innovation, taking a look at the keys to history in the USA through 200 artworks. The most important exhibition of North American art organized in Europe to that date.

2008 Surreal Things plunges the spectator into the dreamlike worlds of art, theater, fashion, design, architecture, and advertising, on a journey guided by the most playful artists of the Parisian avant-garde.

Juan Muñoz: A Retrospective offers the most important exhibition of this artist’s sculptural work to date.

2009 In a surprising shift, the Museum turns its attention to Asian art with two different shows: the explosion of color in ©Murakami—the largest retrospective dedicated to one of the most influential Japanese artists of recent decades—and Cai Guo-Qiang: I Want to Believe, an overview of the visual vocabulary and conceptual complexity of the Chinese artist, famed for his gunpowder drawings and explosion projects.

70

2010 Anish Kapoor, one of the most influential sculptors on the international art scene, brings some of his most remarkable sculptures and installations to the Museum, pieces which have expanded the language of post-Minimalist art. Visitors have a chance to experience pieces created from pigment, studies of the void, works in polished stainless steel and entropic cement shapes installed on a massive scale. At the end of the year, we are taken back to the 17th-century Golden Age as Dutch and Flemish paintings from the Städel Museum flood the galleries with works by some of the great masters of this era, including most notably Jan Vermeer’s The Geographer.

2011 The Guggenheim Museum Bilbao Collection gains depth with the acquisition of new works: Mona Hatoum’s Home (1999); Doris Salcedo’s Untitled (2008); and eleven portraits of smiling women from Alex Katz’s series Smiles (1994). The Museum also received the gifts of Liam Gillick’s How are you going to behave? A kitchen cat speaks (2009) and three photographs by José Manuel Ballester from his series Hidden Spaces (Espacios ocultos): May 3 (3 de mayo, 2008), The Royal Palace (Palacio Real, 2009), and The Raft of the Medusa (La balsa de la Medusa, 2010).

2012 The Museum’s Art Program features some important figures of contemporary art, such as David Hockney, whose exhibition is considered by the critics as one of the best in the year; Claes Oldenburg; or Egon Schiele. Also, within the context of the show Selections from the Guggenheim Museum Bilbao Collection, Bilbao visitors can see for the first time one of the latest acquisitions for the Collection: Alex Katz’s series of eleven paintings entitled Smiles.

71