2 ms·
As with all architecture there are good and bad examples (with bad examples usually lost over time - leaving only the good), and with brutalism in particular is
by fredley 8y ago
As with all architecture there are good and bad examples (with bad examples usually lost over time - leaving only the good), and with brutalism in particular issues with poor maintenance. Maintain any building of any age and architectural 'school' poorly and it will become rundown, shabby, and unpleasant to live in/around.
I walk through the Barbican frequently, which is rightly a much celebrated building, and find it an extremely elevating experience. I also recently visited Royan Cathedral which is honestly one of the most beautiful I've ever been in. I think many brutalist buildings have been blighted by decades of neglect almost from right after they were built. That's not going to leave the best impression on anybody.
- Nursie 8y agoI don't think you can just blame poor maintenance - the material and style choices are just poor to start with. The cathedral looks to me like a gun emplacement, or some relic of a forgotten war.
- darkpuma 8y agoFunny you mention relics of wars. Have you seen the ruins of the Oslobođenje building in Sarajevo? That war ruin somehow manages to capture the aesthetic of well maintained brutalist architecture almost perfectly. Brutalist buildings on their best days look like ruins from a city under siege. Walking into a neighborhood with brutalist architecture feels like you've walked into some alternate timeline where WWIII is raging. The cynical side of me suspects that brutalist architecture is a reflection of the psychological damage WWII inflicted on a generation of architects. They experienced an ugly world, then sought to recreate that ugliness in their work. Experiencing war corrupted them. Their legacy, their still standing buildings, are not unlike the iron harvest French and Belgian farmers experience every year when they till their fields and find bombs from WWI.