While The Guggenheim in Bibao seems to be Gehry's ban (He is "stuck" with this style, as clients wants "the same"...), it is also a great building.
Not so because of it's outside looks, but mostly because of it's interior space and light that serves well the different expositions...

I like also his wooden ceiling ( that changes form in function of acoustics wanted) in the Disney music center...

But... I do wonder why he sticks to old techniques (I beams and such) when he could play with shells structures ?

Of course the ex American center in Paris was a failure... And is now rehabilitated in a center for cinema...
As that sort of free play with form needs always a perfect building technique and very good materials (expensive usually), as it doesn't support mediocrity or else, the building will get ruined in time !

I don't know well the Kiasma... But the building seems sounder :-)
I regret that it was not a Finnish architect that was chosen, as they usually have the "knack" to play with mixing natural materials on site with more contemporary ones... I must go there one of these days :-)

It's difficult for me to critique that sort of "free sculpture" architecture, as I feel it's searching form for form !
While it can be a success for some buildings generating their own site (as Bilbao), I feel it "ages" quite quickly as a "style". And my belief is that Architecture should not wan through time, even if it's functions changes...!

Peter Cook's Kuntshaus in Graz is a good example of dichotomy between the original idea and the construction technique (wether you like the "Ocarina" or not :-) ). It's a "Star war" form, built like a movie prop, making it very complicated in it's details...

The old saying goes as: To have a good architecture, you need a good client and a good architect... I would add: and also a good engineer that can discuss freely with the architect- before - the first drawings !
:-) :-) :-)


"What can I do, What can I write, Against the fall of Night". A.E. Housman