5 ms·

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

by derriz 6y 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 6y 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 6y 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 6y 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 6y 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...
    - bobthepanda 6y ago
      Philadelphia: https://www.google.com/maps/@39.9249494,-75.1891835,3a,60y,175.03h,103.06t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sGcwiR-zIm5adUtx5mUq1cA!2e0!7i16384!8i8192 https://www.google.com/maps/@39.9249494,-75.1891835,3a,60y,1... It is worth noting that a lot of these tower in the park type developments were demolished and replaced with mixed-income housing due to the problems. NYC is probably one of the last places where many of them are still standing (for lack of money to develop them, and also because there are about 600,000 people on the NYCHA waiting lists). But there was a huge federal pot of money for doing this in the '90s and '00s and many authorities did so. From an architectural standpoint, the difference is that the British homes front the street, whereas your lowrise homes are perpendicular to it, and the towers in the park are generally pointed inward, away from the normal street grid. This has pretty bad effects on crime, because it removes the "eyes on the street" effect from passersby.
      - bsanr2 6y ago
        That's a fair assessment. I have to imagine that the design distinction of "complexes" (with, as you said, limited direct access to streets) rather than "neighborhoods" contributes. Such layouts make it more difficult for "outside" assistance to "enter" or "retreat" in response to appropriate circumstances. It turns out that making the primary concern of design the warehousing and cloistering of as many human beings as possible in as small a space as possible, far away from employment and resources, does not make as many strides towards the goal of promoting stability and healthy socioeconomic development as may have been hoped. I'm a 90s kid and so was not familiar with anything but low-rise housing outside of old TV shows and grandfathered infrastructure; your timeline follows my experience, and also the general trend of halting progress on such issues of social justice, where the answer is and has long been known but is warped in execution by a continued, if lessening, marriage to clearly-incorrect-but-politically-attractive notions about what "those people" need and/or deserve.
stephc_int13 6y 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

by derriz 6y ago

LegitShady 6y 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 6y 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 6y 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 6y 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...
  - bobthepanda 6y ago
    Philadelphia: https://www.google.com/maps/@39.9249494,-75.1891835,3a,60y,175.03h,103.06t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sGcwiR-zIm5adUtx5mUq1cA!2e0!7i16384!8i8192 https://www.google.com/maps/@39.9249494,-75.1891835,3a,60y,1... It is worth noting that a lot of these tower in the park type developments were demolished and replaced with mixed-income housing due to the problems. NYC is probably one of the last places where many of them are still standing (for lack of money to develop them, and also because there are about 600,000 people on the NYCHA waiting lists). But there was a huge federal pot of money for doing this in the '90s and '00s and many authorities did so. From an architectural standpoint, the difference is that the British homes front the street, whereas your lowrise homes are perpendicular to it, and the towers in the park are generally pointed inward, away from the normal street grid. This has pretty bad effects on crime, because it removes the "eyes on the street" effect from passersby.
    - bsanr2 6y ago
      That's a fair assessment. I have to imagine that the design distinction of "complexes" (with, as you said, limited direct access to streets) rather than "neighborhoods" contributes. Such layouts make it more difficult for "outside" assistance to "enter" or "retreat" in response to appropriate circumstances. It turns out that making the primary concern of design the warehousing and cloistering of as many human beings as possible in as small a space as possible, far away from employment and resources, does not make as many strides towards the goal of promoting stability and healthy socioeconomic development as may have been hoped. I'm a 90s kid and so was not familiar with anything but low-rise housing outside of old TV shows and grandfathered infrastructure; your timeline follows my experience, and also the general trend of halting progress on such issues of social justice, where the answer is and has long been known but is warped in execution by a continued, if lessening, marriage to clearly-incorrect-but-politically-attractive notions about what "those people" need and/or deserve.

stephc_int13 6y 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