The HYDRA pavilion, designed by the Asymptote studio in New York, was built in 2002 for the first edition of the FLORIADE fair. It is an example of the architectural style of its time. The construction of the renowned Guggenheim Bilbao in 1998 marked a new era in architecture, where construction technology and design software played a significant role. Organic shapes, intricate geometries, and surfaces with double or triple curvatures have become dominant in architecture since 2000, with the most famous studios striving to align with this trend and create standout pieces for magazine covers.
The HYDRA pavilion was the first project built by the Asymptote studio, which had previously focused on graphic work and exhibition design before 2002. The study focused on creating a "WOW" factor and "iconicity" rather than prioritizing efficiency or other needs. The New York studio sought to capture movement and fluidity using innovative 2002 construction technology, creating a plastic and iconic representation.
This design intention is not questionable: the FIORIADE fair wanted an outstanding feature and held an architecture competition to achieve this. They aimed to make their mark on the world map, and the chosen object is considered the most iconic and visionary. The primary goal is to create a WOW effect and attract thousands of visitors to a fair that only happens every ten years.
Indeed, nothing would be wrong with it, especially considering the frenzy created by the so-called "Bilbao effect." 
However, it is important to note two significant flaws: one in design and one in construction.
Let us begin with the first issue or design flaw: isolation. The obsessive focus on the "object" resulted in a form that completely cut itself off from its surroundings. Despite drawing inspiration from the nearby airport, the pavilion's shape feels like a personal abstract interpretation rather than having any connection to the context or the fair itself. A quick look at the plan and section reveals that the usable spaces are narrow and small since "form" takes precedence over practicality.
The second design error, which is unforgivable, was caused by the evil pursuit of three-dimensional modelling. This led to the failure to remove architectural barriers to temple access or facilities for disabled people.
Even from a construction standpoint, there are errors, both in conception and execution. The advancement of construction technology only sometimes keeps up with the advancement of software. In 2002, specific construction solutions used today did not exist. Therefore, we had to rely on the products and solutions available then. However, more is needed to justify the choice of specific components and solutions. For example, complex glass surfaces, known for their waterproofing and thermal performance issues, and simple plaster for the interiors would have deteriorated and led to maintenance problems.
Additionally, the absence of gutters or similar measures would have caused rainwater to flow on curved surfaces, leading to dirt buildup. The design of a glass basin in the entrance roof seems impractical, as it would collect dirt, water, and leaves. It appears naive, and the designer could have avoided it for a more practical alternative. However, the most significant construction error relates to sustainability.
l community and international events. The geodesic dome will become a time capsule, a portal that will transport us back to 2002 with an educational purpose.