4 ms·

Couldn't agree more. Exactly what I think every time I see our cities here in France.

• stephc_int13 5y ago
  Not to mention his sympathy for Nazi Germany before and during the war. What happened to Architecture in the 20th century is both sad and instructive about the risks of abusive modernity.
• parenthesis 5y ago
  Fair enough if you don't like Brutalism, but please tell me that you have at least as much dislike for some of the abombinations that have replaced some brutalist buildings: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Library_of_Birmingham_(32958941706).jpg https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Library_of_Birmingham_(32... https://stjamesquarter.com/ https://stjamesquarter.com/
  • derriz 5y ago
    My problem with Le Corbusier is not the architectural style of Brutalism - some of my favourite buildings are in that style. It was the iconoclasm and outright hostility to existing architecture he promoted. It reminds me of Mao's cultural revolution - he and his followers seemed to delight more in the frenzied destruction of existing architecture than in the act of creation and invention.
    • LegitShady 5y ago
      This was a facet of many post war movements. Architects imagined they could design buildings that solved social problems as if people are that easily manipulated. Semi officially the end of their line of reasoning came with the demolition of the Pruitt Igoe complexes in st Louis in the 70s although it was clear these architectural social Interventions were utter failures well before then. Edit:typos due to posting while phone is in a waterproof bag
      • TheOtherHobbes 5y ago
        Architects can design buildings that solve social problems. But they can't use Le Corbusier's authoritarian methods - or any derivative of that mindset - to do it. This was a typical early 20th century worker housing project. It was pretty successful for the time - so much so it's now expensive and gentrified. https://www.google.co.uk/maps/@51.5114036,-0.2416956,3a,75y,103.14h,85.73t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sxk6ogDSrQJ4uFQV4_tKbFw!2e0!7i13312!8i6656 https://www.google.co.uk/maps/@51.5114036,-0.2416956,3a,75y,... Most people want to live in low-density human-scale housing with plenty of greenery. There's nothing complicated or difficult about this. The problem is that architects want to Make A Statement, and you don't do that by giving ordinary people what they want.
        • LegitShady 5y ago
          Architects can design buildings that meet people’s needs, but that doesn’t necessarily solve social problems. That’s why it seems simple when in fact building someone a house is not the same as making them self sufficient or giving them the knowledge, skills, and habits to be successful, especially in wider social contexts where social problems live. The problems that architects solve are much simpler. Disclaimer - I studied architecture in university and then engineering, and I have a fine appreciation of art and good design but a poor opinion of most architectural theories, including the ones where they give themselves super powers while designing balconies or laying out kitchens.
        • bsanr2 5y ago
          Those look not unlike American social housing on the East Coast (not NYC). I suspect structural concerns outside the building's design (primarily support for the people living in and maintaining them) are an important input. Edit: Here's an example, Highland Dwellings in DC. https://images1.apartments.com/i2/ydNxyNvVCntpdglekPc48HV9vvm0p7FBmHsugL8EWvU/117/highland-dwellings-washington-dc-primary-photo.jpg https://images1.apartments.com/i2/ydNxyNvVCntpdglekPc48HV9vv... https://livingnewdeal.org/wp-content/uploads/2020/08/Highland-Dwellings-.png https://livingnewdeal.org/wp-content/uploads/2020/08/Highlan...
          • 5y ago
    • stephc_int13 5y ago
      Agreed, Brutalism as an art movement is not without merit. But Le Corbusier tried to cancel every architectural movements before him. Ecole de Royan is a nice example of an architecture that is also inspired by Brutalism and the Bauhaus movement, but done in a much more humane and artsy way. https://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fichier:Royan_villa_3.JPG https://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fichier:Royan_villa_3.JPG
  • xxpor 5y ago
    The problem with him aren't the buildings themselves so much IMO. It's his "towers in a park" style. It's like he never actually lived in a city before. You want things to be walkable. Instead, you end up with huge buildings with nothing in between. You get all of the downsides of density with none of the upsides.
    • stephc_int13 5y ago
      He was against the concept of street. Light was more important than people. In fact, many of the proponents of this school of thought are going as far as considering that the constraint of having people living in their space is a hindrance preventing them to fully express their ideas. Architecture is Politics, and Le Corbusier is embodying the worst ideas of the 20th century.
      • einpoklum 5y ago
        I would upvote most of your answer, but your last sentence is somewhat overstated. Remember the worst ideas of the 20th century and how many people they killed.
        • stephc_int13 5y ago
          Yes, I am talking about the same ideas, the different flavors of 20th century totalitarism, in my opinion Le Corbusier was operating in the same vein. Also he had well documented sympathies for the Nazi regime.
        • timeon 5y ago
          https://brill.com/view/journals/fasc/6/2/article-p196_196.xml https://brill.com/view/journals/fasc/6/2/article-p196_196.xm...