Visuality Peaks, Function Lasts: Iconic Architecture on Instagram

Author: Nadia Alaily-Mattar, Vincent Baptist, Lukas Legner, Diane Arvanitakis & Alain Thierstein
Year: 2025
Source type: article
Raw file: raw/articles/alaily-mattar-2025-visuality-peaks-function-lasts.md

Summary

Using an automated pipeline on 264,000 Instagram posts and 140,000 images about 16 European star-architecture projects (2011–2019), the authors empirically investigate how iconic architecture performs on social media. They distinguish two content regimes — buildings posted primarily for their spectacular architecture versus those posted primarily for their function (exhibitions, concerts, events) — and find two divergent trajectories: architecture-driven buildings enjoy an instant burst of popularity that fades, while function-driven buildings gain popularity slowly and steadily over time. The paper proposes this "visuality peaks, function lasts" pattern as a partial refutation of the hypothesis that accentuated visuality alone sustains audiences' attention.

Key Claims

• Two distinct temporal patterns: (1) instantly popular buildings whose popularity fades/stagnates (e.g. Elbphilharmonie, Markthal); (2) buildings that gradually gain popularity (e.g. Turner Contemporary, MUSE, Riverside Museum); event arenas show periodic fluctuations tied to hosted events.
• A correlation between content and trajectory: buildings primarily posted for their architecture tend to peak and fade, whereas those posted for their cultural function gain steady long-term popularity.
• The study defines iconic buildings (built artefacts that have acquired iconic status) differently from iconic architecture (defined by the tropes of spectacularity and symbolism; the latter drawing on Jencks's "enigmatic signifiers").
• In image content, architecture (especially facades) and function dominated; in text, function was the most prevalent topic (over 80% for some buildings), while explicit architectural aesthetics were rarely discussed.
• The dazzling visual pull draws an initial audience, but repeated cultural experiences foster genuine long-term engagement; spectacularity alone is "not sufficient to maintain public interest once the novelty of architectural form has worn off."
• Positioned against the tourism/media claim that image circulation is central to iconicity (Sklair, Plaza & Haarich on the Bilbao effect; Colomina; Frampton).

Connections

Concepts: Bilbao Effect · Iconic Architecture · Instagrammability · Star Architecture
Authors: Nadia Alaily-Mattar · Charles Jencks · Leslie Sklair
Debates: Spectacle vs. Function
Related source notes: Andreotti 1999 — Unitary Urbanism

Direct Quotes

"buildings primarily posted for their architecture are generally also the ones to gain instant online popularity that subsequently faded over time. In contrast, buildings primarily posted for their function and facilities slowly gained popularity on the social media platform over time." (Abstract)

"the spectacularity of a building is not sufficient on its own to maintain public interest once the novelty of architectural form has worn off."

"There is no minimizing the centrality of the image in the production and iteration of iconicity." (quoting Sklair, 2017)

"If Walter Benjamin stated that 'Buildings are received twofold: through how they are used and how they are perceived', then the two main trends uncovered in our combined analysis of Instagram post activity and content very much reflect this dichotomy."

Open Questions

• Is this dual trajectory (visuality peaks, function lasts) specific to Instagram, or does it mirror wider public perception of iconic architecture beyond this platform?
• How do selection biases (European, public, star-commissioned buildings; short inauguration-phase observation window) limit generalizability?