U2 in ‘favourites’Â’ row over studio

March 02, 2003
U2 in ‘favourites’ row over studio
Scott Millar

A COMPETITION to design a studio for U2 in Dublin’s docklands has caused an international row after a British candidate claimed the band was showing favouritism.

More than 500 bids to design the building, likely to be Dublin’s highest, were received by the Dublin Docklands Development Authority (DDDA) by last Friday’s deadline. They are believed to include a proposal from Frank Gehry, one of the world’s best-known architects and the designer of the Bilbao Guggenheim museum.

An English architect has lodged a formal complaint with the DDDA, claiming that members of U2 recently visited Gehry’s studio in Santa Monica, California. The judging panel for the architectural competition includes Adam Clayton, a member of the band.

According to the rules of the competition, entrants are to be disqualified if a “participant discloses his or her identity or attempts to influence in any way the decision of the jury”.

The complainant said that contact between members of the band and a competitor, which he alleged included discussions about the project, left other entrants with only two options. “One is to boycott the event, something which people who have spent months on their designs will not do,” he said. “Or else create something that would exactly resemble a Frank Gehry building.”

A spokesman for U2 accepted that Bono and Gehry had a “long-standing friendship which predates the Dublin Docklands competition. Neither Bono or nor Edge has any involvement with the competition. Adam Clayton is due to be one of the panellists who will judge the anonymously submitted entries and I’m sure you can appreciate members of U2 operate as individuals”.

Organisers have attempted to play down the row. A spokesman for the DDDA said: “We have received a complaint and are having a look into it, but as the complaint is anonymous, the authority is not unduly concerned.”

A spokesman for Gehry confirmed that members of U2 have visited the architect’s studio several times over the last few years, including a few months ago. “We never once discussed the Dublin Docklands competition with any members and we are absolutely certain the outcome of the competition will not be influenced on our behalf,” he added.

Other participants are unhappy that the competition was not as widely advertised as before. One complained that it was not advertised on Death by Architecture, a leading website. “A number of my friends in America, who would have loved to have entered, were unaware until too late that the competition was being held,” said the entrant, who also had to remain anonymous or risk expulsion.

The number of submissions has outstripped expectations, however, and it is likely to take several months to judge. Among the 500 entries are several innovative designs including one in the shape of a large sail and another whose gentle sloping form resembles a wave.

There are also less professional entrants. One fan from Spain has entered a building in the shape of a harp, which has been described as “amateur in the extreme”.

Jennifer Boyer, an American architect based in Dublin, said the designs show the changes in architectural taste following the destruction of the twin towers. “There has been a huge rethink of the concept of tower building,” she said. “There has been a new thinking to get beyond sheer height which is evident in the designs both to replace the twin towers and here.”

U2 were initially dismayed at being forced by the DDDA to move out of their studio in a renovated warehouse on the campshire of Hanover Quay. The authority wants to develop the area as an open-space public amenity. After initial protests, the band agreed to move to a new building in docklands.

The new building will house a mix of commercial and residential property as well as the band’s recording studio. The multi-million euro project is due to be completed within three years.

I can attach a scan of the image from the Times if Paul is OK with it.

Originally posted by GregF
I agree, I have’nt seen the design…..but it should be given to a big name. I’m sure Gehry would produce something of a focal point and a talking point for everyone….and that’s what Dublin needs to put it up there with the big guns of cities today…..else it will just stagnate and fade back into the doldrums of insignificance. ZZzzzzzzzzzz!

For the love of God can we not give it to Gehry please. Every major city in the world is going to have a Gehry or a Gehry rip-off in the next 20 years. This is a chance for someone with a new voice to make their name. It is exactly this kind of project that propells a designer into the premier league and to saddle us with an architect who , although interesting, is already beginning to seem dated and jaded,well, its a ludicrous waste.
Why must we fall back on a ‘sure thing’ when we finally have the chance of creating a scheme that is innovative and exciting and contenious. We should be taking chances on this one not playing it safe.

Oh yes lets import someone who is already beginning to parody himself (‘doing his best work at the moment’????- have you seen that music centre), rather than create our own design renaissance as the Scadinavian’s managed to do in the last century.
They created a legacy through self support and the development of national identities in this area and have continued to develop these initial innovations into the by proxy brand that Swedish, Danish and Norwegian design is today. Ireland could be on the brink of a great design age. We have well educated and talented young contributors who, if given the chance could spark a golden era in our cultural history.
Even if the winner of this competition isn’t Irish ( and I’m not suggesting that they should be) I’m shocked at the suggestion that the project should just be delivered on a plate to someone who has repeatedly demonstrated his interest in nothing more than furthering his own legacy.

Isn’t looking outside your own region and believing all is good and great from the mighty kingdom also parochial thinking. Admiration and respect for other design disciplines, methodology and aesthetic is only too normal, but a belief in the same as some sort of holy grail is questionable. Yes, a phenomena, aka the black obelisk of 2001 Space Odyssey, is a truly remarkable attribute of a successful project, but there are many others who I think can deliver such.

If one wants a champion to bring forward the debate on local culture then choose wisely, I would recommend.

The question is: is this the attribute the sponsor’s of the competition are seeking from the winning entry? No idea, with the only clue being in the brief which is full of same old waffle you get in any architectural brief!

If this competition is to become some sort of criticism session of one Architect and his Architecture surely this has wasted the time, energy and money of the 500 or so who made the submission.

Originally posted by DogsonFire
If this competition is to become some sort of criticism session of one Architect and his Architecture surely this has wasted the time, energy and money of the 500 or so who made the submission.

This point is a very good one. Its not really about whether you like Gehry of not. The issue is one of self interest. Rather then proliferate the agendas of already established architects, could not a project like this be seized upon as a chance to ‘discover’ a new talent, perhaps one that is closer to home. The subject material of the brief is inherently ‘youth/pop culturally’ orientated. To sacrificially donate the chance to someone so obvious is somewhat perverse.

Originally posted by AndrewP
I just hope that thing the Sunday Times printed that looks like a giant black gantry doesn’t get built….

I have to confess to not seeing this image. Is it possible to see this somewhere other than the Times, a publication i’m unable to have access to.