The idea of the ‘starchitect’ – architects who are globally renown for their signature style in the design of buildings, has emerged as something of a phenomenon in recent years. It is a term coined to describe the so-called superstar architects whose work has emerged as iconic of its time. We think of architects such as Zaha Hadid, Frank Gehry, Peter Zumthor, and Tadao Ando – their work attracts millions of people simply to look at and experience their buildings.

Starchitects have a significant position and profile in shaping public opinion and engagement with architecture; but whether they create ‘personality cults’ or encourage development and innovation in the field of architecture is not so certain. We decided to ask ourselves, what is it about starchitecture? For the purposes of gathering our thoughts, we have taken the term starchicture to mean iconic architecture designed by celebrity architects.




Which is the real aim of the architecture? This is the question that we should do to us. The architecture was the name that received the discipline that was dedicated to the construction and the design of buildings, it has a great evolution across the history changing style and it forms to adapt to the requirements of the society and the epoch.



Is it really the parametricism an improvement in the architecture? Or is it a worsening of the principal function of sheltering and giving comfort to the users in exchange for doing impressive buildings for the sight?

To create spaces adapted for his use studying all the variables that could concern it should not be scolded by the aesthetics, the problem arises when something secondary turns into the principal aim. The comfort of a building could not be estimated by the senses, at the moment of using this one it turns into something valued more than this that we could touch or observe. Parametricism yes, but not forgetting the functionality. 














But is it fair to group all starchitects in the same group of neglectful architects? Is it correct to say that all projects from this generation of architects fail to serve their purpose and deliver to the community? Is starchitecture the problem? There is a reason Foster, Ito and every single main architect of our time is where they are.






The future generations will be surprised that nowadays architects have not taken into account the fact that a building should be energy efficient and sustainable. This is why now it is thought that architecture from today does not have the same value as it use to have. Also new architecture was perceived as an invasion of historical places. We insist in preserving old towns because we can not make new cities.


The Dubai Creek Tower is a project from Santiago Calatrava located in Dubai. This project has already started and it is planned to be finished in 2020. This tower is going to be the highest skyscraper of the world. It is inspired by the the image of a minaret, which is a characteristic feature of islamic culture.




Disregard means to give little or no attention or to ignore a fact or circumstance. The starchitects, like they are designated by Peter Buchanan in his writing ‚Starchitecture and sunset effects‘ attach no importance to the urgent problems of our times. Thus they reveal their ignorance to the challenges we have and exacerbate them possibly.

Usually Starchitecture emphasizes more on a nice appearance than on technological advance and environmental performance. Although it intends to imitate nature’s forms, biomorphic shapes are not justified with biophilia or biomimicry. Unfortunately it‘s not learning from the nature and is neglecting the protection of natural ressources of our planet. Energy-profligate and sustainability are inadequately implemented, thus Starchitecture ignores the environmental crisis of our time. The unconvincing replication of the nature is questionable. Why do we recreate natural forms but forget the most important thing - the nature itself and everything that is required to protect it?






Thus, the ill-founded way Starchitects like Frank Gehry or Zaha Hadid derive their designs is another fact. The senseless concepts and the unconvincing justifications depict the disregard to the norms of modern archi-tecture. The gesturing forms are without any logic and discipline and are unprofitable pertaining to use and functionality. This arbitrariness makes the ground plans of these buildings often useless and results in disuse. What remains are sculptural forms that are of no avail. Why should someone have the intention to design such a building instead of a clear layout and working arrangements?





A characteristical example for the ignorance and arbitrariness of the starchitects is the fire station of Zaha Hadid on the Vitra Campus in Weil am Rhein in Germany which was built in 1993. The building’s obliquely intersecting concrete planes, which serve to shape and define the street running through the complex, represent the earliest attempt to translate Hadid’s fantastical, powerful conceptual drawings into a functional architectural space. Hadid put much effort in repre-senting the nature of a fire station, but her design saw no real service in that role. Instead, it is now used as an exhibition and special event space and nothing remains of his primary purpose.