A few weeks ago I read with surprise and happiness about the exhibition about Spanish contemporary architecture that the MOMA will held in the next months. But in the last days, such happiness has been changing into worry since I had the opportunity of reading the complete list of the works exhibited. Works that are certainly as bright and colourful as a contemporary architecture work is expected to be, but with many suspicious and unanswered questions that I will try to disclose.

Without doubt, it is really difficult not to take interest in the Spanish contemporary architecture. The economical, emotional and cultural boom caused by the end of the dictatorial regime of Franco, and the subsequent democratic changes, added to some punctual events such as the so called "Effect 92" (Olympic Games and the Universal Exhibition in Seville'92) have turned Spain into a first class contemporary artistic atelier. The multicultural, even multinational character of Spain, added to the climatic and landscape variety, has created a broad spectrum of architectural answers, some of them certainly more brilliant than others.

THE BARCELONA CASE

In this context, no other Spanish city proves to be more interesting or paradigmatical than Barcelona. After the economical and cultural boom resulted of the Olympic Games of 1992, the Catalonian capital turned into the arrow flint of the Spanish architectonical avant-garde and, with the only possible exception of London and the interventions in German cities after the fall of the Berlin Wall, in the most interesting collection of contemporary architecture of Europe.

For example, have a look at one of the stars of the MOMA exhibition: Jean Nouvel's Agbar Tower , a spectacular steel and glass kaleidoscope that formally resembles to. well, choose the comparison by yourself (yes, even a sexual one.). It's true that the building has an undeniable beauty, but it's also true that some questionable aspects have accompanied it.

As in almost all the much hyped architectonical works created in recent years, the publicity machinery that preceded its construction attended to proclaim the two greatest contributions that the colourful tower would bring to the city: the possibility of the birth of a new symbol to Barcelona, replacing Gaudí's works such as the Sagrada Familia or La Pedrera ; and a revitalization boost to a quite depressed city district

Nevertheless, the result was quite questionable: in a city with the gothic splendour of its stunning Cathedral, the organized city planning of Ildefonso Cerdá's plain -possibly the most important urban city planning of the 19 th century- and the organic, mystic taste of Gaudí, it's really very hard that a phallic extravaganza tower achieve the category of symbol, at least in such a short time. In the other side, a short visit to the kaleidoscopic Tower was enough to certificate my worst omens: such "revitalization boost" is actually inexistent, and the building seems absorbed, selfish and self-indulgent, with no dialogue between it and its less fortunate neighbours.

Of course, the night view is fabulous, and the postcards sellers are surely very happy with Jean Nouvel's architectural trick.

Another much-hyped architectonical intervention is the showground created for the Forum de las culturas (Forum of the Cultures) of year 2004. Apart from polemical questions, economical (even with the astronomical price of the tickets the event was quite disappointing) or ecological (some groups criticise the impact on the Mediterranean surroundings) a simple analysis to the actual situation of the Forum raise a very repetitive question: And now, what? What to do with an apparently useless showground, which includes a very beautiful building by Herzog & de Meuron? Two years after, this question is still unanswered, and the appearance of the showground is the picture of the desolation

THE CITY OF THE CULTURE

The monstrosity firmed by Peter Eisenman that is currently being built in the suburbs of Santiago de Compostela is the result of the selection process made by the Xunta de Galicia (Galicia's Government) aimed to create a "cultural district" to the Galician people. Wow! Sounds nice, so. is there any reprehensible in a project with such laudable aim? Well, yes it is. Of course it is.

The first point criticized since the very first was the controversial location of the project, emplaced in a hill on the outskirts of Santiago, absolutely disconnected of the historical and cultural center, establishing itself as a selfish and introverted "neocity", completely apart of a medieval city whose most appreciated feature is its ideal size, with the possibility of being travelled entirely by feet.

From a formal and constructive point of view, the project also presents reprehensible aspects. Of course, all opinions about forms and appearances are equally respectable and debatable, but an objective piece of information will perhaps change many opinions: in the false roofs of Eisenman's project could be introduced the entire historical center of the city of Santiago (known as the almond ). Constructively, along with the disproportionate scale of many elements, there are a lot of controversial solutions, such as the library's roof, finished with a 2 inches wide quartzite layer, increasing the weight of the 8000 square meters structure. The Wolf has also hear a rumour about Eisenman's original and ridiculous idea of placing a useless column in the middle of the stage in the Opera Theatre, until a group of architects convinced him not to do that with the argument of that "sometimes the trees block the sight of the forest."

Another controversial point: the functionality of such "magnificence" work. Does a so culturally organized city as Santiago de Compostela really need such "culture container"? Obviously not. Nevertheless, dimensions are quite notorious: the Music Theatre exceeds the 15000 square meters ( 3,7 acres ) as does the building called "New Technologies". The Library is a gigantic, 42 meters tall, 6 floors, and 11000 square meters ( 2.7 acre ) walnut shell. Interestingly, journalist and writer Ramon Chao commented that a few years ago he tried to donate his private library to the Culture Department of Galicia's Government, and that he never received an answer. This weird issue can be used as an example of the also weird politics made during the Government of Manuel Fraga: first, we build a much hyped Museum, aimed to attract the attention of journalist and politicians. Then, let's see what the hell we can put into it.

The final point is without doubt the most polemical and shameful, and possibly not reflected at the MOMA's exhibition: the endless and unstoppable rising of the project's budget, initially estimated at €132 million (almost $150 million) that has risen to €374 million ($450 million). But, in the very unlikely case that the project could be finished in its original shape, many architects estimate that the final number could exceed an astonishing €500 million (almost $600 million). This number is enough to discredit Eisenman, his project and the stupid politicians that defended such architectonical madness. Perhaps the new Galician Government can change the situation, although an important amount of money is already unrecoverable.

POSITIVE ARCHITECTURE

Of course, not all the Spanish scene is so negative. In recent years, many young architects have created a new architectonical trend that could reconcile any architecture lover.

For example, one of my biggest and nicest surprises while reading the first news about the MOMA's exhibition was the inclusion in it of the Art Center of A Coruña, firmed by Acebo y Alonso, perhaps the most promising Spanish architects under 40 years old. The building, shown left, is, under its simple and even anodyne appearance, a brave experimentation aimed to combine in a same container two different functions (Conservatory and Provincial Museum). A glass skin covers the Conservatory and surrounds the concrete skeleton that take in the Museum

Even some works initially criticised by many architects have demonstrated to carry more positive than negative things. Here we can talk about Santiago Calatrava and his best known work, The Sciences Museum of Valencia. It's true that Calatrava's personal interpretation of the architecture, predominating the engineering aspects, is not well accepted by many architects, but the final result was quite admired by neighbours and tourists; a building with a reasonable budget that -unlike Nouvel's Agbar Tower- has revitalized a quite depressed zone

That's all -for now. As you can see, there are enough great architectonical projects to keep the faith on the Spanish architecture. Even when the users of the much hyped passenger terminal T4 of the Barajas Airport in Madrid are still looking for their bags.