Frank Gehry

Frank Gehry AKA Ephraim Goldberg AKA Frankie Toronto is probably the most famous architect in the world. He is the first modern “starchitect.” A starchitect is an architect who is commissioned to do high profile projects, such as art museums, and who has a flamboyant style usually involving many curves which he recycles on all his other high profile projects. Because that’s what people want! That’s what is going to put Wichita on the map!
Starchitects and the resulting starchitecture are a uniquely Los Angeles phenomenon, and two of the most high profile starchitectects are based in Los Angeles: Gehry and Thom Mayne (the subject of another post!) This is not merely because of the Los Angeles cliché of being a star-crazed materialistic culture; starchitecture is a uniquely Los Angeles form due to the unique typology of Los Angeles. Bold forms such as the titanium swoops of the Gehry concert hall or the binoculars of the Chiat/Day buildings are not meant to be seen from the vantage of a pedestrian on a sidewalk but from a distance, probably from a passing automobile. Gehry is famous for his exteriors and his buildings are almost never photographed from the inside, which is where architecture actually happens. This would lead one to assume that Gehry’s is architecture of superficiality opting for the bold exterior gesture instead of the subtle manipulations of interior space. I guess if I was a big east coast jerko I could attribute both of these things to Los Angeles being a superficial city where everyone drives, which I do not agree with at all. Or I could say that Frank Gehry is a shitty architect. I am not going to go that far!
The reasons for why these forms are uniquely Los Angeles is because LA does not have a dense grid iron which mandates architectural form like what Koolhass (did you mean to spell this wrong?) documented in Delirious New York. There are many large, sparsely developed lots in LA that can be occupied by an entire building, which gives the architect the freedom to pioneer unconventional forms. In a place like New York or other major cities the most you could hope for would be an oddly shaped lot on a dense block which gives the architect nowhere to go but up, severely limiting the form of the building to anything other then a variation on a rectangle.
Would the Disney Concert Hall have anywhere near the effect it has if it where placed in midtown Manhattan, where the glimmering, sun soaked titanium panels would be made dull due to shadows of surrounding buildings and where the sandstone walls would be covered in the drying schmatas of tenement dwellers? The only thing that comes close in New York is Frank Lloyd Wright’s Guggenheim Museum which has the advantage of not being obscured by other buildings due to its location on Central Park. Really the only thing that Wright did was make the building circular giving it a striking contrasts to the relentless wall of 5th avenue. The Guggenheim is a superior building to the Disney Concert hall, however, because it is able to match the drama on its outside with an equally stunning interior, whereas the Concert hall’s confusing hodgepodge interior leaves you disappointed after going inside. The Disney Hall is also a failure because it does not take advantage of its location. It does not take advantage of every side, but rather acts as if it were surrounded by tall buildings and is only oriented to one intersection. The other sides of the building are nothing more then sandstone walls.
I don’t really know how to conclude this. I just want to say that LA is going to overtake New York as the preeminent city in the US and the rise of Gehry is a result of this. America is moving away from the skyscraper to a new architectural symbol, a uniquely Los Angeles one!
Love + Magic,
Toni