Architects are often encouraged to ensure their designs conform to society ‘norms’ by offering essential means that buildings should offer the user, however, Libeskind is a fond believer that architecture should express brutality in history rather than repressing it. Although normality is what appeals to clients, architecture should be able express rather than repress and this is the approach Libeskind took. Despite initial criticism on the design of the building, for the sole reason it did not resemble that of a ‘typical museum’ (Dezeen Magazine, 2015), the experience he intended to create is supported by data obtained through primary research. 69% of visitors believed Libeskind used architecture as a tool to enhance the exhibition, whilst portraying the history of Jewish people.  

 

Libeskinds journey from the initial design process through to the buildings completion, incorporates a number of key elements and influences that contributed to the foundation of form and space that visitors encounter today. However, although his extensive thought process created a design that is visited approximately 2,000 times per day, elements of his architectural design and intrinsic metaphors are too subtle to be apprehended by some visitors. Primary research suggests that particularly visitors with little to non-prior architectural knowledge favoured exhibition spaces. Thus reiterating the notion that Libeskind possessing an issue of being esoteric, as previously criticised by Puglisi and Doordan. This esoteric approach could be explained by Libeskinds untraditional, fragmented and geometric influences he derived from the Deconstructivist Exhibition.

 

To conclude, within Doordans book, Twentieth-Century Architecture, the analysis of the Jewish Museum appears on the very last page, with the final paragraph stating: ‘This book began by describing daring visions of the future. It ends by describing equally bold attempts to remember the past’ (Doordan, 2001, P. 289). This statement sums up the idea that Libeskinds deconstructivist approach combined with his urge to design meaningful spaces, in turn do create ‘bold’ attempts to remember and not repress the past.