Skip to: Content
Skip to: Site Navigation
Skip to: Search

  • Advertisements

Museum extension ... ... spirals into controversy

(Page 2 of 2)



  • Print
  • E-mail
  • Facebook
  • Twitter
  • Yahoo! Buzz
  • Digg
  • Add This

He points to two other London buildings, both museum extensions, and both "fill-ins" that are in postmodernist vein: American architect Robert Venturi's National Gallery wing on Trafalgar Square and James Stirling's addition at the Tate Gallery, housing the Turner Collection.

These "do not," he says, "imitate what's there, but they don't outrage what's there either. They fit in, but you can tell they are modern. And they are modern inside."

Intriguingly, one organization that chose not to oppose the V&A Spiral was The Victorian Society. Richard Holder, senior architectural adviser to the society, says "we found the proposal sufficiently interesting not to oppose it." (Though they did question some details.)

He points out that museums today "have moved slightly from the scholastic to entertainment" (which this striking new building clearly represents).

So what do the architect and his client have to say in defense of their project?

Gwyn Miles, the V&A's head of major projects, says: "Daniel actually filled the brief better than any other architect. The British architects [in the competition] were all quite obviously thinking, 'We'll not be allowed to do anything too major.' "

This is a measure of the climate for architecture in Britain. Architects have almost come to accept that the country is like an old museum, unwilling to be disturbed.

"But," says Ms. Miles, "we actually wanted a very visible building that was saying: 'We're interesting, come in and look at us.' "

Libeskind calls his building "unashamedly contemporary. I'm not trying to pretend it's another time, another era," he says. "The Spiral is not monocentric. It opens along different trajectories. It opens the museum to different views, and to different spaces. These are not just gallery spaces, but cafes, restaurants, and public spaces for gathering and education. The public has access to the entire building."

The building is not a conventional spiral, he says. "It unfolds because of a geometry that is virtually endless. You could continue it on and on. 'Spiral' is more an emblematic word."

But it is definitely not like the spiral of the Guggenheim Museum in New York, widening at the bottom. If anything, this new Spiral seems to grow as it climbs and arches over, giving views of the museum complex below. This fulfills one objective: to orient visitors, giving them some overall concept of the V&A's layout.

He insists his building forges "a connection between the dynamic and the meditative. Actually the internal spaces are very calm. I didn't form these shapes arbitrarily. They were molded to make connections between static objects that are monuments of history and art, and interactive spaces where people can watch videos, laser shows, movies...."

One thing is sure. Whatever the opposition, the spiral is hardly a building people will refuse to visit. It is bound to stimulate great curiosity.

Page: Previous Page 1 | 2

  • Print
  • E-mail
  • Facebook
  • Twitter
  • Yahoo! Buzz
  • Digg
  • Add This