I definitely don’t think it is and I’ll tell you why.

I visited the Guggenheim when I was still a student of Architecture; and like many architect students I was dazzled by the building. Its form may seem straight out of a two years old sketch. But what is truly amazing is the fact that the team behind it had the guts to build it.

These days this is no longer the sort of architecture I try to emulate as most of the #onyourface effect has faded away and I tend to appreciate designs that endure well with time and are designed for a low maintenance budget… but let’s try not to divert from the main question, is the Guggenheim a good place to display art?

Personal experience tells me no.

The building provided the city of Bilbao with a world class exhibition centre, but who remembers the art displayed in there?

The Guggenheim was running a show of Richard Serra at the time of my visit. His colossal-bended-metal-sheets worked well with the Architecture, but I think if the room had been a little squarer, the artist would have looked more interesting.

My impression was that visitors were more interested in the funky ceilings than what the artist had to say. Rather than uplifting the artist’s work, as an exposition centre should do, I personally think Richard Serra’s work was asphyxiated by the Architecture.

Unless, and I may have missed the point here, the Guggenheim is a piece of art in itself and whoever display at the centre only acts as mere décor to the magnitude of the building.