4 ms·

Is brutalist architecture actually unpopular, or is it just popular to rail against brutalism?

dijit 2y ago
I grew up in a city called Coventry in the UK- if you like brutalist architecture it was paradise. For me, it was a decaying, grey, tumour-ridden, thorny & hideous hell-hole. The whole city center was wrapped[0] in a snaking, concrete slabbed, elevated road.[1] Every corner of every stairwell waiting to take its toll out of your flesh with its sharp edges. The grey of the sky blending without contrast into the towering blocks of a building so revered that it would be eponymous with the city[2] and dominated the city center[3] yet was quite literally so forgettable that I could not tell you how large it was or what it looked like- despite seeing it daily. And flanked on all sides by dingy towers[4], each identical, cold, and somehow peering at you: telling you that this place was poor, poor not only in funds, but poor in culture, beauty or any sense of personality. No, it was shit. Fuck brutalist architecture and the car dependent designers of the 60’s. They destroyed even more of what was a beautiful city than the blitz did. Even King Charles said as much “property developers have been more destructive […] than Adolf Hitler's Luftwaffe.” Pictures (that, if anything, make it look much better): https://www.theguardian.com/artanddesign/gallery/2021/jan/27/coventry-city-of-culture-brutalist-architecture-in-pictures https://www.theguardian.com/artanddesign/gallery/2021/jan/27... [0]: https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/1/1b/Coventry_city_centre_and_ring_road_%28cropped%29.jpg https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/1/1b/Coventry... [1]: https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/2/25/Moat_street_flyover_2.jpg https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/2/25/Moat_str... [2]: https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/f/f1/Coventry_Point%2C_Market_Way%2C_Coventry_%28geograph_2929944%29.jpg https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/f/f1/Coventry... [3]: https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/4/44/WTC_Anthony_%26_Henri_ThreeSpires6.JPG https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/4/44/WTC_Anth... [4]: https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/d/de/Samuel_vale_house_16s07.JPG https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/d/de/Samuel_v...
- M95D 2y ago
  Those are actually nice brutalist. I'm sure any communist east-europe city can beat your city in uglyness. https://www.pinterest.com/pin/411375747199903984/ https://www.pinterest.com/pin/411375747199903984/
  - dijit 2y ago
    Sure, but it hurts to see what we lost. https://www.historiccoventry.co.uk/broadgate/broadgate.php?pg=broadgate5 https://www.historiccoventry.co.uk/broadgate/broadgate.php?p...
ghaff 2y ago
t's an architectural style with many examples that don't appeal to a lot of people. It also literally often doesn't age well from a materials standpoint. When the Boston Public did a renovation a number of years back to the brutalist wing, I'd argue it still doesn't compare well to the original McKim Building but was a lot more attractive externally and much more welcoming internally.
gibbitz 2y ago
Totally. If the movement was called geometrizism or edge-ist would we have this discussion? No one likes to be brutalized but we want to have an edge. I have a Pinterest board full of brutalist architecture. I love it.
- deleted 2y ago
  [deleted]
- llamaimperative 2y ago
  Right... people who have Pinterest boards of architectural styles tend to appreciate brutalism much more than your average bear. By analogy: if you are going to play music loudly for potentially millions of people over the course of decades or centuries, you have a responsibility not to play either pop that's likely to be shortlived or esoteric niche music that many people will not like. This is the task that architects have with every building they design, yet for some reason[1] decide against building the styles that we empirically know have unbelievable lasting power and extremely broad appeal. So broad and so long lasting, in fact, that we simply call them "classical." [1] They do this because architects and architect-adjacent people, like those with Pinterest boards, give them awards and clout for their "remarkable" and "boundary-pushing" and "thought-provoking" designs, as if those are desirable traits for music played for millions of people across a hundred years.
Yeul 2y ago
I don't know about America but in my country a bunch of historians and architects can decide something becomes a monument and then society has to spend tax money on it for the rest of eternity. Normal people can understand a castle. They do not understand a 1970s police station.

I grew up in a city called Coventry in the UK- if you like brutalist architecture it was paradise. For me, it was a decaying, grey, tumour-ridden, thorny & hideous hell-hole. The whole city center was wrapped[0] in a snaking, concrete slabbed, elevated road.[1] Every corner of every stairwell waiting to take its toll out of your flesh with its sharp edges. The grey of the sky blending without contrast into the towering blocks of a building so revered that it would be eponymous with the city[2] and dominated the city center[3] yet was quite literally so forgettable that I could not tell you how large it was or what it looked like- despite seeing it daily. And flanked on all sides by dingy towers[4], each identical, cold, and somehow peering at you: telling you that this place was poor, poor not only in funds, but poor in culture, beauty or any sense of personality. No, it was shit. Fuck brutalist architecture and the car dependent designers of the 60’s. They destroyed even more of what was a beautiful city than the blitz did. Even King Charles said as much “property developers have been more destructive […] than Adolf Hitler's Luftwaffe.” Pictures (that, if anything, make it look much better): https://www.theguardian.com/artanddesign/gallery/2021/jan/27/coventry-city-of-culture-brutalist-architecture-in-pictures https://www.theguardian.com/artanddesign/gallery/2021/jan/27... [0]: https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/1/1b/Coventry_city_centre_and_ring_road_%28cropped%29.jpg https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/1/1b/Coventry... [1]: https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/2/25/Moat_street_flyover_2.jpg https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/2/25/Moat_str... [2]: https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/f/f1/Coventry_Point%2C_Market_Way%2C_Coventry_%28geograph_2929944%29.jpg https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/f/f1/Coventry... [3]: https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/4/44/WTC_Anthony_%26_Henri_ThreeSpires6.JPG https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/4/44/WTC_Anth... [4]: https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/d/de/Samuel_vale_house_16s07.JPG https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/d/de/Samuel_v...

M95D 2y ago
Those are actually nice brutalist. I'm sure any communist east-europe city can beat your city in uglyness. https://www.pinterest.com/pin/411375747199903984/ https://www.pinterest.com/pin/411375747199903984/
- dijit 2y ago
  Sure, but it hurts to see what we lost. https://www.historiccoventry.co.uk/broadgate/broadgate.php?pg=broadgate5 https://www.historiccoventry.co.uk/broadgate/broadgate.php?p...

ghaff 2y ago

t's an architectural style with many examples that don't appeal to a lot of people. It also literally often doesn't age well from a materials standpoint. When the Boston Public did a renovation a number of years back to the brutalist wing, I'd argue it still doesn't compare well to the original McKim Building but was a lot more attractive externally and much more welcoming internally.

gibbitz 2y ago

Totally. If the movement was called geometrizism or edge-ist would we have this discussion? No one likes to be brutalized but we want to have an edge. I have a Pinterest board full of brutalist architecture. I love it.

deleted 2y ago
[deleted]
llamaimperative 2y ago
Right... people who have Pinterest boards of architectural styles tend to appreciate brutalism much more than your average bear. By analogy: if you are going to play music loudly for potentially millions of people over the course of decades or centuries, you have a responsibility not to play either pop that's likely to be shortlived or esoteric niche music that many people will not like. This is the task that architects have with every building they design, yet for some reason[1] decide against building the styles that we empirically know have unbelievable lasting power and extremely broad appeal. So broad and so long lasting, in fact, that we simply call them "classical." [1] They do this because architects and architect-adjacent people, like those with Pinterest boards, give them awards and clout for their "remarkable" and "boundary-pushing" and "thought-provoking" designs, as if those are desirable traits for music played for millions of people across a hundred years.

Yeul 2y ago

I don't know about America but in my country a bunch of historians and architects can decide something becomes a monument and then society has to spend tax money on it for the rest of eternity. Normal people can understand a castle. They do not understand a 1970s police station.