Frank Gehry\u2019s recent passing has sparked a wave of tributes across the architecture world, and for good reason. Few architects have shaped contemporary culture quite the way he did (and even fewer have sparked as many arguments along the way).<\/p>\n
Born in Toronto and based in Los Angeles, Gehry went from experimenting with plywood and chain-link fencing in his Santa Monica home to designing the very buildings that cities now use to brand themselves. Whether you loved his work, hated it or simply didn\u2019t know what to do with it, you probably had an opinion. And that is precisely why he loomed so large.<\/p>\n
Frank Gehry was many things, but he was never a neutral figure. His work had a gravitational pull that cities felt long before critics agreed on what to call it. Bilbao\u2019s titanium wings, Disney Hall\u2019s sculptural steel and the drifting glass forms of Fondation Louis Vuitton were all part of the same instinct: architecture that insisted on being noticed. Even his smaller projects carried that conviction that buildings don\u2019t need to apologize for taking up space.<\/p>\n
And Gehry himself was never shy about articulating his views<\/a> either. Across interviews, documentaries and the occasional press-conference outburst, he gave us a surprisingly candid record of how he thought, worked and saw the world. And in a moment when the profession is trying to understand (or define) what his legacy really means, returning to those words feels like a fairly honest place to start.<\/p>\n \u201cI stood in front of a Greek statue called the Charioteer\u2026 it made me cry. And I thought: that\u2019s what an architect should do \u2014 be able to create an emotional response with their work that lasts through the centuries. That\u2019s what I try to do. I know that sounds pompous, but it\u2019s a wish. It\u2019s a hope.\u201d<\/strong><\/p>\n Vue du b\u00e2timent de la Fondation Louis Vuitton (fa\u00e7ade sud) et de l\u2019entr\u00e9e Bois de Boulogne; \u00a9 Gehry Partners, LLP and Frank O. Gehry; photo by Iwan Baan, 2014<\/em><\/p>\n<\/div>\n Gehry made this statement<\/a> late in life, but it\u2019s hard not to see reflections of it throughout his career. While many people in the industry (and outside of it) often reduced his work to pure spectacle, statements like this one shift the narrative a little. It\u2019s clear that Gehry\u2019s buildings weren\u2019t created for the shock factor alone, as there were always attempts to tap into something that\u2019s beyond surface impact.<\/p>\n Speaking with Architizer about Fondation Louis Vuitton (which was the venue of the 2023 A+Awards gala), Gehry described his first encounter with the site<\/a> in a way that hinted at how seriously he took these moments. Beneath the spectacle, there was always a sensitivity to context and memory that guided him, even if that side of the story was rarely the headline.<\/p>\n \u201cI respond to every fucking detail of the time we\u2019re in with the people we live with, in this place. So it\u2019s all taken into account as best I can. <\/strong>You know, I believe that\u2019s the most important thing to do \u2014 to live in the place and time you are in and what the issue is.\u201d<\/strong><\/p>\n Luma Arles by Gehry Partners, Arles, France; Photo by Sharon Tzarfati Photography<\/a><\/em><\/p>\n<\/div>\n Gehry said this in a Dezeen interview<\/a> about the Luma Arles tower, a project that immediately drew questions about scale, visibility and environmental responsibility. Many felt the building stood apart from its surroundings in a way that bordered on interruption. Gehry, however, described his choices as a response to the conditions of the moment, which suggests that his idea of context might have been broader and more fluid than what people expected.<\/p>\n IK\u2019s World Trip<\/a>, Gehry House – Image01<\/a>, CC BY 2.0<\/a><\/em><\/p>\n<\/div>\n Such a tension was visible in his Santa Monica house, too, the first project that truly announced him to the world (and launched his reputation for disruption). While his neighbors saw an intrusion, Gehry saw a reaction to the textures, rhythms and small collisions of the street. What appeared provocative to others seemed, in his view, like a straightforward engagement with what was already there.<\/p>\n These examples point to something that often gets missed when people critique his work. Gehry doesn\u2019t respond to context in the traditional sense of matching forms or materials, yet he was responding to something. His buildings often register the mood of a place, the cultural noise around a project or the urgency of the moment in which it was made. It is not context in the textbook sense, but it is a kind of contextual reading all the same, one that explains why his work can feel disruptive to some and strangely truthful to others.<\/p>\n \u201cOur process starts with a very detailed deep-dive into the client\u2019s space needs, their budget and the zoning constraints of the site. We build a lot of basic block models exploring the three-dimensional functional diagram of the building. This makes it easy for the client to engage with the project and to give feedback to help drive design decisions. My sketches don\u2019t come out of thin air. They come after we have decided on a general massing, and after a lot of conversation with the client about their aspirations.\u201d<\/strong><\/p>\n Vue g\u00e9n\u00e9rale du b\u00e2timent de la Fondation Louis Vuitton (fa\u00e7ade nord) depuis le Jardin d\u2019Acclimatation; \u00a9 Gehry Partners, LLP and Frank O. Gehry; photo by Iwan Baan, 2014<\/em><\/p>\n<\/div>\n Early conceptual sketch by Gehry, 2006 \u00a9 Frank O. Gehry<\/em><\/p>\n<\/div>\n Even before the Simpsons episode<\/a>, the public loved the idea that Gehry simply scribbled something wild on a napkin (or rather, crumpled the whole napkin) and let the software team turn it into a building.<\/p>\n What he described here, however, paints a different picture. The sketches come after the diagrams, after the zoning studies, after the conversations about what the building needed to do. His spontaneity was real, but it arrived late in the process rather than at the beginning, often as the final expression of a structure that was already deeply defined, at least in terms of function<\/p>\n This is perhaps one of the biggest ironies of Gehry\u2019s career. The parts that looked the most chaotic were often the parts supported by the most groundwork. His gestures that were perceived as if done on a whim were simply the last layer of a process that was far more deliberate than his reputation suggested.<\/p>\n \u201cFirst of all, if you\u2019re going to be an architect, you have to learn the craft. You have to learn how to build, you have to learn engineering, you have to learn how to be responsible to build something that doesn\u2019t leak, that stands up, that doesn\u2019t kill people. There\u2019s a discipline you have to learn, for sure. Your personal spirit has to evolve into a language you create.\u201d<\/strong><\/p>\n Carol M. Highsmith,<\/a> creator QS:P170,Q5044454, Image-Disney Concert Hall by Carol Highsmith edit<\/a>, marked as public domain, more details on Wikimedia Commons<\/a><\/em><\/p>\n<\/div>\n For all the attention on the curves and the steel, Gehry\u2019s buildings depend on an extremely rigorous understanding of construction, engineering and risk. The Guggenheim Bilbao has stood through harsh weather and heavy footfall for more than twenty-five years. Walt Disney Concert Hall is still praised for its acoustic precision. Even his Santa Monica house has held up structurally despite its experimental materials.<\/p>\n The discipline he describes here is easy to overlook because the narrative around him often focuses on the gesture rather than the groundwork. Yet the longevity and performance of his buildings make it clear that the expressive language he developed was grounded in a technical foundation he took very seriously.<\/p>\n \u201cWhen Bilbao was presented publicly, there was a candlelight vigil against me\u2026 and there was a thing in a Spanish paper saying, \u2018Kill the American Architect.\u2019 \u2026 Once the building was built, I could live there for free. The same thing with Disney Hall \u2014 when it was first shown, they called it broken crockery, and now everybody thinks it\u2019s great. So it takes a while.\u201d<\/strong><\/p>\n
\nOn the emotional impact of architecture:<\/h3>\n
![\"\"](\"https:\/\/blog.architizer.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/19204_facade_sud_du_batimentdelafondationlouisvuitton_high-1-1536x1024-1.jpeg\")
<\/p>\n
\nOn standing out and fitting in (depending on who you ask):<\/h3>\n
![\"\"](\"https:\/\/blog.architizer.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/1653932035850Luma_Arles_15-scaled.jpg\")
<\/p>\n![\"\"](\"https:\/\/blog.architizer.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/Gehry_House_-_Image01.jpg\")
<\/p>\n
\nOn his process:<\/h3>\n
![\"\"](\"https:\/\/blog.architizer.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/19048_facade_nord_du_batimentdelafondationlouisvuitton_high-1-1536x1024-1.jpeg\")
<\/p>\n![\"\"](\"https:\/\/blog.architizer.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/FLV_Gehry-Sketch-2006-1-e1696263932568-1.jpg\")
<\/p>\n
\nOn the discipline behind the gesture:<\/h3>\n
![\"\"](\"https:\/\/blog.architizer.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/Image-Disney_Concert_Hall_by_Carol_Highsmith_edit-scaled.jpg\")
<\/p>\n
\nOn wearing the criticism (literally):<\/h3>\n
![Gehry House – Image01<\/a>,](\"https:\/\/commons.wikimedia.org\/wiki\/File:Gehry_House_-_Image01.jpg\"){kind=link}
![Image-Disney Concert Hall by Carol Highsmith edit<\/a>, marked as public domain, more details on](\"https:\/\/commons.wikimedia.org\/wiki\/File:Image-Disney_Concert_Hall_by_Carol_Highsmith_edit.jpg\"){kind=link}