4 ms·

I think brutalist web design would be different. These design elements like hyperlink styles, colours... these are not so much a representation of the cconstruc

I think brutalist web design would be different. These design elements like hyperlink styles, colours... these are not so much a representation of the cconstruction materials. They just feel like arbitrary design choices that through the power of ‘default’ become ubiquitous and so damn played out that they are offensive to the eye imho. The construction of websites these days would be revealed in visible responsive columns. Visible cookies... Visible scripts, indented into the page, modular html5 tags... Sticky nav bars are brutalist I think. Don’t they just feel brutalist? It’s the blocky additional toolbar vibe, it feels like a utilitarian UI choice. I guess what I’m trying to say is that the OP’s idea of brutalism feels a little lazy. It feels more anti-design then true to brutalism. The brutalist buildings in my city don’t feel like textfiles. They feel raw, geometric and useful.. kind of like the fan of my old PC tower... If nothing else, then for the sake of my eyes please just change your colours a bit and go to google fonts and switch it up. This isn’t Morse code. Also, there is no way a brutalist architect would put their profile picture at the base of their building.

brianzelip 8y ago
I get what you’re saying. But the OP addresses this argument, shifting attention away from code and more towards the purpose of the site: “A website's materials aren't HTML tags, CSS, or JavaScript code. Rather, they are its content and the context in which it's consumed. A website is for a visitor, using a browser, running on a computer to read, watch, listen, or perhaps to interact. A website that embraces Brutalist Web Design is raw in its focus on content, and prioritization of the website visitor.”
- betenoire 8y ago
  same for buildings though... You don't go to a brutalist building to experience the building. The building has the "content" you came for inside. The building houses the content. The webpage isn't the content, it also houses the content.

brianzelip 8y ago

I get what you’re saying. But the OP addresses this argument, shifting attention away from code and more towards the purpose of the site: “A website's materials aren't HTML tags, CSS, or JavaScript code. Rather, they are its content and the context in which it's consumed. A website is for a visitor, using a browser, running on a computer to read, watch, listen, or perhaps to interact. A website that embraces Brutalist Web Design is raw in its focus on content, and prioritization of the website visitor.”

betenoire 8y ago
same for buildings though... You don't go to a brutalist building to experience the building. The building has the "content" you came for inside. The building houses the content. The webpage isn't the content, it also houses the content.