The Case for Brutalist Architecture | ARTiculations

[@ARTiculations]

Hi everyone I've made a Discord for further discussions: discord.gg/4DWvahY94U. I'm also more likely to respond there as KZbin comments aren't always the most ideal places for conversation. Thank you!

[@tarnished439]

Wouldn't that be an echo chamber? I'm sure everyone would concur with this

[@ARTiculations]

@@tarnished439 It actually isn't - we have a variety of opinions (sometimes vastly different) and a lot of constructive but differed discussions there. But don't worry - I still often engage with and reply to KZbin comments too.

[@johnmanno2052]

My! It would appear that Brutalism is a rather controversial topic, and seems to elicit some pretty strong feelings! One could argue that that is the point of art, to provoke, to incite an emotional response. I don't especially care for Brutalist buildings. However! I have this secret fantasy, where I live in a simple, Brutalist house that's naught but a concrete rectangular box, with floor to ceiling windows, concrete and tile within, and complete with an utterly open floor plan. So on some level, I adore it!

[@Arnaere]

Can you make a video that isn't swamped in blatant biases. Using egalitarian, privileged, elite, etc is incredibly out of place every time you use it and egalitarian isn't obviously a good thing, it's only something a particular political class desires.

[@jakekaywell5972]

Whenever I look at a brutalist building, I see comfort and security. That the people and ideas contained inside are worth protecting and fighting for. It also symbolizes our triumph over the natural world. We no longer have to scramble around in the mud and in the darkness and it is glorious. It should be clear at this point that I love Brutalism and am actually using it to design my home. To me, it's the defining element of Gothic architecture, extracted from its source and distilled. In any such building, you are a small point in a great, geometrically constructed space. No religion in the mix, just the pure structure of the universe. This space is absolutely neutral and lifeless, which allows you to make up the life within it without the need for an architectural crutch along the lines of the gaudy McMansion that replaced the Lincoln House. Ah well, at least I can build my own house in whatever brutalist style I want. The use of concrete as a defining part of Brutalism also allows for making shapes that just aren't possible with any other material, with fantastic results.

[@lv2draw1]

To my eye, Brutalist-style buildings work best when there's a lot of vegetation around or on it, as on their own they become harsh and oppressing, but when mixed with plant life they feel much less dominating.

[@bentrod3405]

I dont know about that. In some ways to me it feels even more oppressive. It looms over the nature as a monolith, something foreign and unnatural that while the vegetation reminds me of what we the nature we have lost.

[@stripping_architecture]

Absolutely agree, there is something naturally great about concrete and vegetation like they recall their primordial connection, Tokyo as well as South America has splendid examples of Brutalism in combination with greenery.

[@scootergrant8683]

In a campus in forests and lots of greenery, modern mucticoloured buildings don't fit in well at all. I think some of the architectural designs of some buildings looked amazing on paper and I see them like they are on paper but some just age poorly. They are a great foundation though for re-facading.

[@lv2draw1]

@@scootergrant8683 Oh yeah I completely agree. Any building should be designed to enhance the environment its in. But I just meant that while I do think brutalist buildings are ugly, they can work in some situations

[@discordmarauder]

Brutalist architecture works best when it’s being demolished lol

[@hjorturerlend]

"...towards an architecture that is specific and *concrete* ..." lol

[@loranddeka]

From the writer of the architecture joke in Beauty and the Best ;)

[@Tumbledweeb]

*cackles*

[@Wanderer_of_Sol]

Maybe it's an artifact of growing up poor in the 90s, but I've always associated brutalist architecture with struggle and poverty. It never felt progressively inexpensive and sustainable, it felt aggressively cheap and low maintenance. In my home city, many brutalist buildings were in low income areas, and were moderately out of repair, but still functional in a sense that made me feel like "This is good enough for *you*". They were often the building I'd go to with my parents while they looked for work or unemployment, or public areas like libraries which never got decent funding. Visually their unfinished and raw aesthetics said "You haven't earned a coat of paint or windows" and "This building is unimportant because the people it serves are unimportant" as they slowly decayed for the 40+ years since their prime.

[@Aron-ru5zk]

Always had a slight suspicion the style was inspired by the Nazi flak towers of WW2.

[@UmmadikTas]

I think the "never got decent funding" is the keyword here. Look at it from the other side of the coin. Take Turkey my home country for instance. Current AKP government has been in power for a quite long time. They mostly invest money on the non-functional things in cities. The tax money is spent on 5 notorious big holdings which are associates of the ruling party. All they did for almost 20 years was build stupid looking buildings, 2 palaces for the president, plant expensive flowers 2 times the market price, build a stupid 200 million dollar amusement park which did not even open after its construction. However, their spending never helped with growing wealth inequality or the state of the economy. For like 10-15 years AKP supporters thought that Turkey was having a revolution and growing because of all the extravagant buildings. They kept supporting AKP because AKP was the "doers" not the "talkers". Meanwhile the old buildings such as my university is one of the brutalist architecture, arguably the best university of the country, kept it modest and did what it was supposed to do. Not waste money but raise youth, give good education, do research. With the rise of neoliberalism, all the public institutions that served public without the goal of making profits were undermined. The idea of the modernist architecture was never "this is good enough for you". But the neoliberal parties/politicians always underfunded them to make public spending look worse. The reason that these buildings radiate the idea "this is good enough for you" is because of that. The actual idea that these buildings should give you was supposed to be "We are not wasting your money, we are not robbing you. We are trying to help you improve your life in the best way we know." If you look closely, those institutions make the most impact on a poor persons life. Especially if it is not underfunded.

[@rashmigautam7372]

@@UmmadikTas 👏

[@thefrenchbastard1646]

they aren't low maintenance they are just not maintained this is how consirvatives destroy popular social programes they cut there funding so they fail and create public resentement against them and can remove them completly later witout loosing public support

[@professordogwood8985]

I agree. At the very least, my University is beginning to put some more cheerful exterior coatings to the buildings and letting the pants grow up along the sides of the architecture.

[@jonhansen679]

Every single building I saw in this video looks like a super villains hide out

[@Dac_DT_MKD]

I see them as modern way of living (or at least what the 60s thought of modern homes), and I actually like those buildings.

[@HisameArtwork]

yeah they are pretty offensive to look at. then ad a layer of communism's and decrepitude in my country and the result is revolting.

[@jasondads9509]

It’s great, I love them

[@listenhere2006]

yall saying that brutalism looks villainous because the cinema was and is a antisoviet propaganga your movies are xenophobic and political, and images are made to affect you psyche

[@gf4913]

@@listenhere2006 Based and redpilled

[@newdivide9882]

4:36 The fact that you can use a library to shoot a convincing scene that’s supposed to take place in a prison says a lot about Brutalism

[@ringard5172]

It says just how versatile this architecture is... I love it!

[@SKyrim190]

@@ringard5172 It says how dehumanizing and ugly it is. I hate it!

[@ringard5172]

@@SKyrim190 The ugly one is you)

[@SKyrim190]

@@ringard5172 Nah, I am not a building

[@ringard5172]

@@SKyrim190 So... we agree on that part that you are ugly... and you have an ugly taste... GOOD

[@ahmody7500]

In Egypt, there's an entire university made with this style , on a very large piece of land , in a very dry place with too much sunlight , I don't know what they were thinking when they built it but it looks like it was built to keep students away

[@marcelfernandezromero8905]

lol

[@davidking8472]

Ahmed Elshiekh what’s it called?

[@Erix442]

@Norwegian Blue No, fortunately I live in Moscow). For me, this building in video looks well in comparison most russian modern building, Possibly due to street improvement and climate.

[@Erix442]

@Norwegian Blue also they do take good care of Kazan

[@Erix442]

Good or bad architecture becomes understandable in a low standard of living, a cold climate and a complete lack of courtship for these houses. So in bad Russian cities, where there are dirty streets and cold climate, where everyone leaves for other cities or countries, there is brutalism look really depressed, dark and terrible while old traditional architecture(before first world war) still good even in poor condition. Russian old dying village looks better than new modern building in Russia.

[@josephgroves3176]

There are two types of Brutalist: the philosophical, social sensitive works of art; but also cheap, poorly designed cages. The latter caused the hate and is why we are in danger of losing the former. But preserving the latter by mistaking it for the former will be worse. The examples you have are big, expensive projects in national cities. They were sensitive to their environment and designed with care for human use/habitation/interaction. But many brutalist buildings copied the look and ease of construction without care for their human impact. I lived near a brutalist bus-station and council-estate which was the mouth of hell! From simple things like ventilation and drainage (surely a basic design parameter) to more difficult/nuanced like social space and public safety (shadowy twisty walkways, only open space was traffic, isolated corners). The place stank of diesel fumes and piss and you never went anywhere without a torch and a buddy. But it's so frustrating because this style, done right, can be so good. Like the Barbican in London or "l'habitation" in Marseille

[@roceb5009]

This is what I came to say, only said way better. There's a certain style of building I can best describe as "Eastern European Soviet housing block" that I associate with "brutalist" architecture, and when you showed all those buildings my first reaction was "but those aren't brutalist, those are mid-century municipal style architecture". I always associated that style more with art deco architecture than with brutalism.

[@Jorvard]

I'd say the most depressing examples of the "Soviet Housing Block" (and their exact counterparts in western europe) weren't even brutalist, at least not in the beginning. They often tried to hide the fact that they were made from nothing but concrete and painted in diverse colours. Those disappeared over time though.

[@Dev1nci]

Joseph Groves You are completely right. But even good examples of Brutalism can be alienating because of their scale and starkness. We need to keep some of it, like you said.

[@CockatooDude]

+Jovard Some of them have been repainted though. The housing block my grandmother lives in got completely repainted around 2012 in all sorts of really bright colors.

[@aadarshkadambi9319]

Right on ! Those soviet style concrete boxes were just that, soul less piles that are a sorry excuse for unimaginative design being palmed off as 'cost effective and democratic', back when they were built.. We here in India are saddled with those monstrosities, built roughly in the late 70's through the mid 90's period.. its like saying 'Here I am , plain, unopinionated, lacking a thought, but, im good for you !' As plain and pedestrian as architecture can ever get. A tin shanty from a favela has more character and soul in it that those boxes of concrete ! On the other hand, Brutalist architecture is stridently assertive, bordering on arrogance. It literally 'becomes' the space it occupies. If I were to compare it to a person, i'd say he/she had a perpetual chip on their shoulder with lots of axes to grind. No, they are never 'happy' buildings, perhaps happiness was never seen in that light by those guys. Grim, is the word.

[@Soliloquy084]

So Brutalist Architecture for Dystopia and Gothic for Horror; are there other Architecture types associated with film genres?

[@tatianatub]

the international style has been associated with sci fi

[@ARTiculations]

Ooo good question. I can't think of too many that's as heavily symbolic as gothic and brutalist. But - a lot of mid-century modern interior design and architecture directly influenced futuristic movies like 2001: A Space Odyssey (and movies like those in turn also influenced the design world). And that a lot of glamorous hollywood movies in the 20s and 30s featured a lot of Art Deco buildings and interiors - associating deco with the wealthy and elite.

[@KannikCat]

The international style and slick modernist housing was used for many (most?) of the villains in the James Bond series. I'd need to revisit other spycraftian films to see if it became something defining in a genre-sense, but the contrast was purposeful for the Bond films. :)

[@Littlegoatpaws]

Baroque and the offshoots of Baroque like Rococo are often used in cinema and animation to associate aristocracy and royal power, especially very elite and ritualized forms of it while colonial styles and other more subdued styles of the era get associated with modesty and prudence. It may have to do somewhat with the French and American revolutions as well as how modern culture often views Mozart's and Beethoven's time.

[@Littlegoatpaws]

Victorian, like Gothic also often gets used a lot in the horror genre.

[@anivicuno9473]

When you're attending the University of Toronto, Robarts is the least of your worries regarding things being too brutal.

[@Thisisahandle701]

Go on....?

[@qvaerensveritatem9064]

UofT students and alumni know whats up

[@theoe354]

I like the dichotomy you pointed out between gothic with horror/beauty. Because brutalist buildings are some of the rare architectural feats that actually inspire a genuine emotion in me. And i dont think the only valuable emotion is a cliche and naive happy positivity. I kind of like the existentialist and dystopian vibes they give off. Certainly more interesting to look at than the thousandth shiny and curvy "modernist" building.

[@mingyuhuang8944]

The fact that we give these gross, soulless pieces of architectural insult a fancy name like "brutalism" actually just normalises the whole thing. We should stop normalising this stuff. It's so bizarre how humans can just become accustomed and conditioned to think things are normal. When you compare something like "brutalist" buildings to something like Sistine Chapel, or Neo-Classical Greek architecture, you start to realise cyberpunk is just a fantasy since we're already living inside the depraved dystopia that's we've always feared. Let's label it for what it is, cheap, soulless, gross, utterly depraved of any humanity and immoral architecture which had its place in history due to economic reasons but should've now been a thing long left in the past. It's literally goes against everything natural human architecture stands for and therefore is why it's so uncomfortable and ominous, and for some, disgusting.

[@DragonWinter36]

@@mingyuhuang8944 I like it.

[@Piedra_Blanca]

@@mingyuhuang8944 neoclassicism became grotesque in the mid century because it was seen as highly derivative, uninspired, prone to decay and falling apart, especially after WWII. Institutions sought out brutalism as a break from the distinctions of the past, and the architects played around with monumentality and abstraction. Looking back, we can see the excesses of brutalism as monstrosities the same way people saw decaying victorian gothic as monstrosities

[@peterrose5373]

"not as bad as modernist" is pretty damn faint praise. They both are based on the idea that wanting things to look nice is bad, and it shows.

[@username4570]

Odd that you didn't mention their association with a feeling of oppression. Brazil doesn't use them as a sign of dystopia per say but more as an emblem for the rampant bureaucracy that plagues society and drives the plot. They are immovable and block your ability to gain perspective, leaving everyone in the film acting with short-sighted adherence to over complicated protocols which are of no help to anyone.

[@gustavrsh]

It's the destruction of the individual.

[@lesteryaytrippy7282]

I think that would come later in the 20th century. I forgot where I read it but along the years to come Brutalism did become associated with dystopian aesthetics and the architecture of the elite, which is ironic and sad, because it's origins were for the people but was absorbed by the ones in power as part of their fashion.

[@_blank-_]

@@lesteryaytrippy7282 Hell is paved with good intentions. I definitely do not want to reclaim this aesthetic/style. Let's wholeheartedly give it to the rich and hipsters.

[@lesteryaytrippy7282]

@@_blank-_ to this day i don't know what hipsters are, but i disagree about this architecture style being for the elite.

[@mingyuhuang8944]

The fact that we give these gross, soulless pieces of architectural insult a fancy name like "brutalism" actually just normalises the whole thing. We should stop normalising this stuff. It's so bizarre how humans can just become accustomed and conditioned to think things are normal. When you compare something like "brutalist" buildings to something like Sistine Chapel, or Neo-Classical Greek architecture, you start to realise cyberpunk is just a fantasy since we're already living inside the depraved dystopia that's we've always feared. Let's label it for what it is, cheap, soulless, gross, utterly depraved of any humanity and immoral architecture which had its place in history due to economic reasons but should've now been a thing long left in the past. It's literally goes against everything natural human architecture stands for and therefore is why it's so uncomfortable and ominous, and for some, disgusting..

[@JeredtheShy]

I think Brutalism's true problem is how awful the buildings look when they're dirty.

[@TXKXME]

JeredtheShy that's called character lol

[@GloryUnyielding]

I actually kinda like how they look when they are dirty

[@ReasonableRadio]

I think brutalist architecture handles dirt amazingly. Rain damage and such add to the resistant/protest against nature feel. I think international style buildings look awful dirty, even worse than classical and marble structures.

[@outokotikissa1253]

JaredtheShy I have to agree, brutalist buildings often look horrible when they get dirty and run down. Since they where build with socalled maintainence free materials they are often more expencive to clean up and restore in the end.

[@mfpears]

JeredtheShy If you don't like "dirty" things, you don't like brutalism

[@BodyKnight]

Yeah, you should also talk about what was actually destroyed to make space for these buildings, especially in Europe. For a lot of people that was the issue.

[@Harryjw67]

r.i.p. plymouth, england

[@dusanbosnjakovic6588]

That is a part of the point. These architectural statements did away with history both symbolically and literally. History should not be forgotten but so much of historic beauty is forged in blood and injustice. Brutalism attempts to paint a different future.

[@yusenye3649]

Destroy the old, so you can create something new

[@djordjesimic8573]

@@dusanbosnjakovic6588 If you wipe out someone's history trough the mean of it not being visually accessible, you automatically destroy one's ability to seamlessly reflect on his or her history. I live in Serbia, and people here have this idea that the monarchy was something monumental and eternally beautiful, because there is little that remains of the architectural heritage outside of Belgrade, and Novi Sad. Erasing history morphs it into something nostalgic, and it makes myth which is used to justify twisted things. Inequality is bad, but we need something seamless to reflect upon, and remember how it was, and how it is now.

[@JosephRussellStapleton]

@@djordjesimic8573 Well said.

[@nate4745]

Not once did I ever think a Brutalist building was good looking. They have always looked like a fortress for an occupying army.

[@lesteryaytrippy7282]

I think that was the purpose. They didn't, at the time, want the ostentatious look of the pre-20th century likely because the lead up to world war 1 and other wars that would come. I like Brutalism for that sturdiness.

[@nate4745]

@@lesteryaytrippy7282 According to Wikipedia, brutalism started in the 1950's. I think it was an indirect result of the need for low cost housing that began at the end of World War One, when so many people were displaced. An interesting book on the "modernist" movement, written in 1981, is titled "From Bauhaus to Our House" by Thomas Wolfe.

[@lesteryaytrippy7282]

@@nate4745 yes and it's so interesting that this style is eventually something associated with dystopian aesthetics.

[@mryan89]

I disagree but taste is subjective

[@pentagram4745]

@@lesteryaytrippy7282 purpose? Lmao. They are worst in both form and function.

[@loremipsum2237]

Brutalist architecture and plant life go so well together Brutalist architecture is one of the things I use to calm down after a panic attack. It feels reassuring and safe.

[@mingyuhuang8944]

The fact that we give these gross, soulless pieces of architectural insult a fancy name like "brutalism" actually just normalises the whole thing. We should stop normalising this stuff. It's so bizarre how humans can just become accustomed and conditioned to think things are normal. When you compare something like "brutalist" buildings to something like Sistine Chapel, or Neo-Classical Greek architecture, you start to realise cyberpunk is just a fantasy since we're already living inside the depraved dystopia that's we've always feared. Let's label it for what it is, cheap, soulless, gross and immoral architecture which had its place in history due to economic reasons but should've now been a thing long left in the past. ......

[@akaroth7542]

@@mingyuhuang8944 lol k

[@circleinforthecube5170]

@@mingyuhuang8944 lmao what makes you depressed isint universal, people act like theres objectiveness in architecture but only use data related to reading faces and shaky eye tracking software to create a point that will be wildly unpopular in 30-40 years

[@Swen_Oommers]

@@mingyuhuang8944 may be mad

[@calebwilliamsmusician]

@@mingyuhuang8944EXACTLY

[@justadude598]

They were going for egalitarianism and democracy??? Buildings like that always make me think of authoritarianism and oppression😂

[@MrCrashDavi]

Those four are all the same thing.

[@Seethenhagen]

Its the ideological mistake of assuming that because an individual is part of a group, that the entire group works together, instead of working for their own selves and acting upon selfish empathy.

[@TeknoSquirrel]

@@MrCrashDavi yikes

[@XxxKinetypicXxx]

Says a lot about democracy.

[@ThePanguinator]

Fun fact: The architecture of the First Order in the new Star Wars movies is based on brutalism... so yeah. Maybe we should call them Space egalitarians from now on.

[@Rizoof1]

I grew up in a Brutalist city, almost everything was Brutalist. Right now I live in a city where a Corbusier exists, but not much more. Ignoring the ideology and history (which is used by so many to talk about it), let me tell you how it felt to a kid. You grow up in a place where everything is grey except the trees, all the buildings feel unfinished, they look threatening, and darkness (not so much windows) is usual inside. Society is crumbling around you, nobody knows what's next and wars seem to start daily, one 50 km away, all the values which this architecture meant are dead or dying. The opiates industry has went out of control and heroine is on all the corners, in all the kid's playgrounds you find used syringes, you can't play. The addicts are dying every week in the corners of these buildings, they hide in the dark corners, corners which are there for style rather then purpose. You dream of colors, you wish for them, you watch soap operas if you have no hope, or science fiction if you do. You wait for it to pass! From that childhood I miss the trees, now I live in a place with all the baroque and old buildings you could want, but they have no trees and not enough parks. So, moral, the trees made all the difference, and when I visit a Brutalist building today, I get a homesick feeling for my childhood, I remember my parents workplace, my kindergarten, my schools but mostly I miss the trees and the green areas. The green of leaves is the color that made my Brutalist city memorable, not the cement or the populist ideology.

[@FlyingMalamute]

Filip Rizov well said

[@talesdemidioful]

wow!

[@Dev1nci]

Filip Rizov that’s essentially why brutalism collapsed. Too many people stuffed together and treated as all the same. We are individuals though. Still its easy to say this in hindsight. Bad examples of Brutalism is horrible but good examples are amazing. If you want more green space in the city you should be an architect, town planner, landscape architect or politician. Those are the ones who control it, you can too.

[@whong09]

Yep. I find it funny how the video creator tries to praise brutalism as being stripped down and unpretentious when she probably didn't grow up in a massive housing project filled with impoverished residents dreaming of getting out. People need beauty and nature in their daily lives. My last office space was in a a building that used a lot of concrete, but it was a calm white concrete not an intimidating gray. And there were plenty of arches and columns and glass too, plus a giant courtyard in the middle where there were some channels of water and a few fountains.

[@PipeScholar]

Well written Filip

[@Alterraboo]

There's this huge brutalist social housing complex in my city. It's called "Ihme Zentrum" and nobody likes it. Many have argued over deconstructing it and a local politician even once said: "If you don't like to see the Ihme Zentrum, live inside it"

[@SuperGreatSphinx]

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ihme-Zentrum

[@DreiSchwarzeKater]

I have been to the Ihme Zentrum, there is a great art exebition space inside called Ruin HQ (it's quite hidden) and very much liked the calm and dense atmosphere when inside at night (though thats also because nowadays most of it is abandoned ...)

[@carlosboidanidis8825]

same as killing people that u dont like, learn to deal with what you've got

[@astillia6073]

Wait people hate it? It looks super dope.

[@VOLightPortal]

You don't like it because you are not socialist. Once you are socialist you will be re educated to love it. Forever.

[@gideonjones8088]

"Rather than an uncommitted abstract structure that could be any place." Funny, because that's exactly what I would call these buildings. An abstract set of shapes made of bare concrete, at best neglecting but often (and worse) rejecting the surrounding culture and sensibilities for the sake of making some abstract and pretentious artistic statement.

[@overbeb]

Maybe you just don’t know much about architecture and need to learn more.

[@adamliwinski2449]

@@overbeb maybe architecture of public spaces should speak in a positive manner to more than some 5% of society (including architects and ppl who aspire to "understand" "art")? It's especially funny to mention gothic in this video. Never heard anyone who doesn't like it, although I'm pretty sure someone from those 5% has come up with a case against it.

[@HoiSourced]

how is a big block of concrete pretentious? unlearned and stubborn people like to designate everything that they do not understand as pretentious.

[@firstnamesurname6130]

@@HoiSourced It shows an "artist" who only cares about making a building that people will associate with himself. If I look at a beautifully designed building, I enjoy it regardless of whether or not I'm interested in architecture, or the architect, or even if I know what the building is used for. With brutalist buildings they are only "interesting" if you have read about the architects entire life story, philosophical outlook and very specific social or cultural movements occurring just before the buildings construction (and even then theyre still ugly and make everything around them uglier). Brutalist buildings are a architect insulting everybody who has to go near the building, for the sole purpose of further inflating their own egos

[@help8help]

@@overbeb Maybe we should be put into re-education camps where we'll learn to appreciate this ugly gulag style of architecture.

[@albertorodriguez8528]

I lived in Toronto and studided sooo many times at the Robarts Library. This video brings so many nice memories. Brutalist buildings have always intrigued me, and I don't even understand if I like them or not! Brutalism is a really interesting type of architecture, that's for sure...

[@criztu]

best houses are brick, adobe and wood stone, concrete or metal are shite. when architecture becomes industry, those mofos will lie to the end of the world, to sell their product. state and corporate buildings are abominations. no style can save them.

[@gideonros2705]

@@criztu 👏👏👏

[@theoe354]

Same. What i can say is that they actually conjure an emotion in me when i look at them, which is a lot preferable to the nothing i feel when looking at 99% of buildings. Maybe i wouldnt want to live in one, but i certainly wouldnt want none to exist. They give me a similar feeling to medieval castles.

[@ReasonableRadio]

One underappreciated factor in brutalist architecture's appeal is that it emphasizes the geometry of where you stand. A lot of buildings can feel fake, like their facade is just a 2D painting in a 3D world and it feels like there's no adventure in them. Brutalist architecture sheds anything 2 dimensional and focuses on the feeling of standing in a geometry. It's not something that should be undervalued.

[@hanjoyable]

Brilliant point...

[@nobilesnovushomo58]

Fake? They feel like solid buildings with structure. These new buildings feel flimsy, cheaply produced, and easily damaged and replaced.

[@OGPatriot03]

That's a fair point, but a competent classical architecture building can do that 10 times better.

[@ZonkzUK]

I actually really like some brutalist buildings, some of them almost look like something out of a science fiction film and I'm also a fan of the minimalist simple style, but they really need to be cleaned/maintained because they look horrible when they're dirty. The old Library in my city which was knocked down a couple years ago (1:34) actually looked pretty dope in terms of it's shape and design but it was just filthy and gross looking by the end.

[@dchang11]

I think the brutalist interiors needs to be updated to a more 21st century look, but keep the exteriors. It brings out the inner beauty of these concrete monuments.

[@leandroguarteche241]

In Montevideo, Uruguay, we have the USA Embassy that is just and entire block of grey concrete and that it's horrible to see. But we also have the Russian Embassy that is an old building and you need to see it, it's very beautiful. Sorry for my bad English.

[@SuperGreatSphinx]

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Uruguay

[@BeefyWalrus]

As an American, I am sorry our government always feels the need to show it's head in everyone's business and leave an ugly mess wherever it goes.

[@pumpkinsmasher8346]

@@BeefyWalrus stop being a suck up.

[@BeefyWalrus]

@@pumpkinsmasher8346 I'm not being a suck up, I did research. The US is responsible for crappy architecture and over 200,000 deaths of innocent civilians in the middle east. Maybe you should stop sucking up to the US and pledging blind patriotism.

[@pumpkinsmasher8346]

@@BeefyWalrus nigga were talking about a building in Venezuela not war in Afghanistan stop with the blatant simping for poor rural countries

[@wildercerrate7295]

I walk by Boston city hall everyday and I always think "damn that's outta place"

[@a.p.murdock4081]

I love it, though. Many in L.A., too.

[@rjfaber1991]

I've never seen it in real life, but just looking at pictures, I think it's a glorious piece of design.

[@jonsonronson7270]

@@rjfaber1991 its a art piece not a building . nothing about it is for the person working in it or walking by . The fact most architects loved it and most people hated it makes a lot of sense .the architectural profession doesn't reflect public tastes or opinions and this is the result. an art structure without much art all at the cost of a nice enviroment and area and place to work and live , think about the people in boston here .

[@rjfaber1991]

@@jonsonronson7270 I disagree. A lot of brutalist buildings are very intuitive (after all, the idea that form should follow function is quite strong in brutalism, if not as persistent as in some other styles), and while I can't speak for Boston City Hall as I've never been there, I would not be surprised if it is exactly the same there. From the photos I have seen of the interior, it really does seem to have been designed for people to use, not just to look good. That's really the main problem with calling brutalist buildings artworks, because by definition art serves no purpose but itself, and while no style of architecture checks that box, brutalism certainly doesn't, as it is innately function-driven. There definitely are styles of architecture (such as Classical Greek, Flamboyant Gothic and Rococo) that sometimes actively harm functionality in the pursuit of aesthetics, but you'd never say that about brutalism. That said, while I eventually switched majors, I did once study architecture. So maybe your idea that Boston City Hall only appeals to those of an architectural persuasion isn't wrong. 😁

[@jonsonronson7270]

@@rjfaber1991 how was classical greek architecture in anyway disfunctional. The parthenon stands after thousands of years because the aesthetics of classical design is based on physics and weight distribution , they were incredibly precise and it still stands in helped. brutalism doesnt last because people dont want to live there and then people pull it down cus its a waste of concrete. As a style it is incredibly wasteful and unfunctional , buildings are supposed to last and brutalism ones don't meaning more construction and money redeveloping. natural patterns are literally and antidepressant and people like patterns not a lack of patterns . we evolved from a diverse forest with natural patterns and shapes and proportions that innately calms humans, symmetry and beauty in nature is translated to architecture and it lasts because building on natural designs are millions of years tested and succeeded. brutalism doesn't reflect complexity of human individuality or even natural forms and patterns like symmetry which everyone likes ( basic human attraction is based on proportions and symmetry) we are simply built to find certain things attractive and im sorry you and other architects disagree because it shows the disconnect between public preference and architects preference. studies show people have always preffered classical style and its far more sustainable . Im guessing you werent taught much classical style as the field is not responsive to demands of people but demands of capital and cost minimising.

[@emend015]

i dont care about "sculptural form", I care about getting in sunlight and not feeling like i'm in some prison

[@HydratedBeans]

Then go outside

[@hopeaway9485]

cry

[@yakh8088]

I'd rather appreciate sculptural form than be trapped in some glass box

[@HydratedBeans]

@@yakh8088 Yeah, I'd rather appreciate sculptural form than run my A/C 24hrs a day because my glass box lets in too much sun and melt the planet that much quicker.

[@sensaiko]

That's really dumb, do you think they dont have that in mind? Think about any older building, they never thought about that lol

[@LucasDimoveo]

Without Brutalist architecture Parkour and skateboarding as we know it wouldn't exist

[@miyamotomusashi3679]

If you think about it, parkour and freerunning in more traditional architectural setups would look much more awesome.

[@HateTheBearsFTWbcYOLO]

Assassins Creed Unity looked dope on that classical landscape

[@binozia-old-2031]

G Reyes oh how realistic that was

[@wesleywatson8115]

I fucks with this perspective.

[@ce1834]

Wouldn't be missed imo

[@ARTiculations]

For those wondering, yes - "Trono" is the correct way to pronounce "Toronto." ;)

[@Roxor128]

Just like how "Melbun" is the correct way to pronounce "Melbourne" or "Canbra" is the correct way to pronounce "Canberra"!

[@ARTiculations]

Xactly! :D

[@aarontataryn3623]

This is how I identify my fellow Southern Ontarians.

[@sanchoodell6789]

Just like how' New Finland' is the 'correct' way to pronounce 'Newfoundland' or 'Los Vaygus' is the 'correct' way to pronounce 'Las Vegas' etc

[@drhmufti]

Get oot!

[@2lazy4nick]

you should change your microphone settings or speaking techniques. your voice is distorted on high pitches which makes it a bit painful to listen

[@ThysRoes]

2lazy4nick And added to that, her every sentence starts in a high pitch voice before falling down to a regular tone of voice... Great vid. but room for improvement :). love brutalism!

[@ARTiculations]

+2lazy4nick thanks for the suggestions :) this is my first time making a video like this and there's definitely a learning curve. I definitely need to get a better mic. As for the pitch - that's just how my voice sounds haha so it'll be hard to change. But hopefully with better equipment it will improve the sound to be less abrasive.

[@2lazy4nick]

your voice and melody are perfect, just tweak your settings and you should be good :) ps: by techniques I mean stuff like moving away from the mic just a bit when you are starting a new sentence

[@triforce1898]

Hopefully, you got this fixed in later videos. The sound was certainly brutal on the ears.

[@MotiveCap]

@@ARTiculations before buying new equipment, it might just be an issue with your recording levels being set too high.

[@anokata-kd8oc]

My two cents: I love brutalist architecture, but it doesn't fit anywhere and it shouldn't be copied one to one next to each other. I love the Gemex Tower in Belgrade and I'd love to visit it one day. It's a pearl of architecture which has to be preserved. You're absolutely right, we've to stand up for the pieces of architectural history we've to defend near us. It would be a shame to see them demolished. At least where I live the biggest building is safe, because it's an university like the one in Toronto.

[@nimethjayathilaka5808]

Whenever I pass a brutalist building I feel like it wants to punch me in the face.

[@stourleykracklite7663]

It does want to

[@snappytom2447]

For me it feel like kicking me on the shin.

[@D3wd20p]

That's the beauty of it!

[@nimethjayathilaka5808]

@@D3wd20p "I vant yoo to feel like I hate you, personally." - Gerheart Fjuck

[@D3wd20p]

@@nimethjayathilaka5808 It's like being spit in the face or stepped on: I get if you don't like it, but don't say no one does, or there's no romance to be gleaned from it!

[@AlexS-oj8qf]

Oh wow we have this kind of architecture in Surabaya called Intiland Tower, but they pained it white so it looked like a cruise ship with plants hanging down from the balconies.

[@SuperGreatSphinx]

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/White

[@Dantick09]

There are beautiful brutalist buildings and there are really ugly boring brutalist buildings, it has more to do with the architect than with the style

[@ElectricityTaster]

Let's just say most brutalist architects weren't up to the task and should've designed prisons instead.

[@miyamotomusashi3679]

Yeah

[@brandonluker3660]

fair enough :)

[@baller84milw]

I grew up in Milwaukee where 90% of buildings are brutalist and I don't like it. I think it depends on where you live though. In a city that's ghetto and has high-crime (i.e. MKE) brutalism just adds to the depressing atmosphere.

[@justinokraski3796]

I visited Milwaukee a lot as a kid (from Waukesha, incidentally) and Brutalism defined what a "city" is supposed to look like for me: densely populated areas need to have buildings that are built cheaply and sturdy enough to fit everybody.

[@sensaiko]

Yeah, things would be totally different in neoclassic stylea

[@circleinforthecube5170]

@@sensaiko it would be even more boring

[@OrderRealm]

Better than the all glass, rounded, white and blue modern buildings, that usually come with a modern "art" sculpture like some twisted metal shit or a plain metal sphere.

[@D-angelin.Moarar]

I think both styles are ugly.

[@htf5555]

same trash

[@jacksonbarry5407]

A case of skinny jeans (modern and flashy) vs regular boot cut jeans (classic, comfortable and practical). Boot cut jeans look good when everybody is wearing skinny jeans. And with todays architecture I love brutalism.

[@gens0kyo]

B B BASED

[@calebwilliamsmusician]

Nah brutalist is much more ugly.

[@endeavourist5287]

Ah, my favourite but frequently maligned brutalism. I appreciate the style as you do, and see it for what it was intended to be. It has an almost cold beauty that is somehow still connected to nature through raw materials and natural colours. When executed well, brutalism can be really spectacular.

[@hanjoyable]

Love from a fellow Torontonian! Thanks for making this video (and featuring so many well known/well loved places!)... I used to hate, I mean completely abhor, brutalist architecture. I found it grey, oppressive, ugly and, well, brutal! However, on a trip to London, UK a while ago, I had reason to spend some time in the Barbican complex, the public spaces, the theatre and one of the gorgeous apartments... I was smitten! The incredible integrity of material, the solidity of the building and the simple grandeur of the open spaces (not to mention the gorgeous variety of textures that can be accomplished with concrete) absolutely won me over. Simple fabrics also look rich and sumptuous juxtaposed with the hard surfaces and angles, really very beautiful. Since returning home, almost all brutalist spaces have been captured in this new, magical light for me. I have to say, that if I were building a home for myself, it most definitely would have some serious brutalist leanings! Thanks for making this video and giving some background and context to this under-appreciated architectural movement!

[@maninatree1]

"risk of brutalist buildings being demolished" Oh no that sucks.

[@CoryWolfheart_89]

"Oh no Anyway"

[@michealdrake3421]

Yeah, sure would suck if we didn't get look at huge cement bricks all over our cities. We all know how cozy and welcoming they are

[@jjrod33]

If I ever build a labor camp I know what style I'm choosing

[@dferrazm]

Ask a child if it's beautiful and should be kept or if it's ugly and should be demolished, and boom, you'll have the answer. Sometimes I think adults overthink stuff too much. Like finding reasons to think that such depressing buildings have some sort of intrinsic beauty.

[@peter_hhm]

Lol as a current student at the University of Toronto, both my friends and I found the brutalist buildings to be quite depressing… especially when the skies are cloudy in most part of the summer, and the days are dark in winter months…

[@YoonHan35]

I think there's a stoic beauty in brutalism. Not everything has to be superficially gorgeous for it to hold meaning. My school was built in the brutalit style and I adore it.

[@ImpeRiaLismus]

Why do you exclude beauty (ornamentation) from function? Beauty is a function, a very important one.

[@ARTiculations]

Architectural theorists in early 20th century tend to exclude ornamentation from function (I don’t, but sometimes when I explain theory I do to point out this difference). In this video kzbin.info/www/bejne/eZjWlnppi7l6qa8 I explain why postmodern architecture theorists don’t exclude ornamentation from function and argue exclusion of ornamentation is one of the failures of modernism.

[@evanraw3450]

I would associate many of these buildings with multi-storey​ car parks.

[@SKyrim190]

My favorite brutalist building is anyone that has been demolished and replaced by something half-decent

[@jakekaywell5972]

Brutalism is much better than the buildings they replaced. So much needless ornamentation.

[@calebwilliamsmusician]

EXACTLY. Brutalism SUCKS!

[@fabio2634]

A good salesman can make a case for anything, apparently even for brutalism.

[@vaahtobileet]

except she didn't even really seem to try to convince anyone, she just listed some facts about Brutalism.

[@davidec.4021]

I really like brutalism tbf, so 🤷🏼‍♂️🤷🏼‍♂️

[@bornofpixels]

Big geometric shapes made of a solid color? that's like the stuff of my dreams. Dont need to be a good salesman to sell me brutalism.

[@hebneh]

My first awareness of Brutalism was the Hotel Bonaventure in Montreal, where my family stayed when we went to Expo '67. Some of the interior walls had the very typical Brutalist touch of vertical ribs which had been intentionally chipped. The contrast of this raw, rough concrete with the orange carpeting that bordered it on the floor was quite striking to me at the age of 13.

[@SuperGreatSphinx]

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Montreal_(disambiguation)

[@MazHem]

RIP Birmingham central

[@matthewheath7839]

My, that is specific

[@rin_etoware_2989]

To provide a counterpoint, this whole argument can be seen as merely an appeal to emotion. "Sure, it seems ugly to you, but we like this building now, so we appreciate its details, etc." Does that address any of the complaints against Brutalism? The main problem of Brutalism in my opinion is that it is artificial. The classical buildings of the past are not just structured willy-nilly: it follows a ratio that man can relate to. It incorporates man into the building. Brutalism, on the other hand, in its quest to put utility above aesthetic, has put aside the "human element" in architecture. Brutalism, by nature, is artificial. With that, it is easy to see why Brutalist buildings are used in dystopian films: they represent an organization, a machine, that is unnatural and does not take interest in the individual. Gothic buildings are incorporated in the mystery/horror genre because of its nature as well: by design, the Gothic cathedrals seek to bring down the image of Heaven upon the observer. It seeks to show the existence of something mysterious, something powerful, something mystical, something divine. This is my case against Brutalism. I would appreciate any opinion, whether in agreement or not.

[@Broockle]

I appreciate your view, as I'm just familiarizing myself with the term of "Brutalism". But your use of 'Natural" and "Artificial" alienates me. What is that supposed to mean in terms of architecture? Golden Ratio, Ovals, historic natural growth of cities? All buildings are going to be Artificial unless you maybe build them in such a way that they look like a hill with a forest ontop or something, or incorporate nature in it somehow. I feel like Brutalist Architecture is designed to respect the everyday procedures people have to perform in and around the building everyday. From reaching the building by public trans, car or bike to delivering files from one department within the structure to the other. It should be possible with as little effort as possible. Kinda like how your body sends resources and collects waste through the arteries and capillaries. That to me sounds more akin to "Natural" or perhaps "Organic". Ideally you'd want both efficiency and aesthetics to be satisfied in the design to begin with. It was definitely a period in history where people realized they can do a lot with very little and went a little crazy with the reinforced concrete. Now we look back at these buildings thinking "ehh... we can do better these days right?" We can thank the style for some great designs in movies. That's for sure.

[@CamCat13]

Oh wow, I never considered that. I have always found flat, minimally windowed buildings to be ugly. I thought "why would they make that?". Where I lived, we had a lot of buildings that had a similar style. As a gothic teen, I loved the artistry of the ornate details of older buildings. The way you explained the architecture of Brutalism, it makes me appreciate them more. Thanks!

[@jessewaughcom]

The best Brutalist architecture I’ve seen is the Gulbenkian Museum office building in Lisbon. The stark Brutalism is contrasted with, and complemented by, overhanging foliage. Raw concrete looks excellent juxtaposed with plants - together their look connotes ruin (sometimes postapocalytic), and is therefore inherently tranquilizing.

[@zeliedehepcee723]

Jesse Waugh I've visited it too ! It's a beautiful space

[@kumoryuuichi]

Have a look at the Centro Cultural de Belém (CCB) in Lisbon. It's not quite Brutalism as it uses limestone bricks as opposed to concrete, but it certainly evokes the same atmosphere of contextual design and visual contrast.

[@Dev1nci]

Jesse Waugh what do you think of Ricardo Bofill’s La Fábrica?

[@jessewaughcom]

Devin du Plessis - La Fabrica looks like it has amazing spaces and is a true phenomenon which I would like to see - I think it’s near Barcelona where I’m at. But I have to say that I find its overall aesthetics to be a bit painful on the eye. I would be most interested in seeing the planting contrasting the architecture - which contrast I suspect looks utopian. The landscaping he did looks beautiful and impressive.

[@Dev1nci]

Awesome man, let me know what the spaces feel like if you go. What do you mean by the aesthetics are displeasing?

[@joedatius]

I think the thing i like about Brutalism the most typically when it comes to concrete is how the structures look over time, weathered and dirty. There is something oddly more natural and comforting about a building openly showing its age instead of trying to hide it under layers of paint. In a way to me it makes these kinds of buildings feel more safe since its almost like showing off that the elements are not a concern and that it doesn't need to hide that age because the building itself almost has an air of confidence that many other kinds of structures simply don't have

[@MiScusi69]

Okay, then go in some soviet popular housing, far, far away from us normal people

[@MiScusi69]

Oh, wait, I found your perfect place: North Korea!

[@majesticmonil]

Brilliantly compiled! Thank you for this.

[@cheekycheesy3447]

Not even a single word about Soviet Brutalist Architecture. If you come to Russia or any other past Soviet Countries you will find a plenty of such unbelievable buildings you would never think of!

[@ARTiculations]

Ran out of time also didn’t have enough footage of Soviet architecture to really go in depth about it. Remember, just because someone doesn’t talk about an aspect doesn’t mean they’re not aware or don’t want to. Sometimes you just have to omit stuff in videos. I’ll probably make a follow up video some day. Or - there are also other good KZbin videos about Soviet architecture too I’m sure.

[@soaluc]

That building at 0:46 is a couple km from my place and I pretty much grew up there. Its a beautiful, inviting and wonderful place in a city that can be harsh at times. Check it out, its called Sesc Pompeia and the project is awesome.

[@Rimpala]

One way I've learned to appreciate brutalist buildings is some of them remind me of natural stone features such as cliffs and caves.

[@Frikzter]

Brutalism on a low budget, turns into sensory deprivation! Everybody living and working in grey boxes and bunkers. It's like living in the architectural equivalent of arid terrain. Uninviting, abrasive surfaces. It's somewhat worth a note that it accompanied terribly oppressive ideologies, and that is more than I need for Not wanting to defend it.

[@antonioalbul00]

It looks boring on the outside but doesn't mean that the interior is the same

[@ibelieveicansoar]

As this video shows, Canadians had their spirits dampened / crushed by these savage buildings as a prelude to a stealthy socialist takeover.

[@stephen1137]

Such architecture is an assault on the human mind and spirit. It comes from the pit of hell.

[@PtolemyJones]

I like a lot of Brutalism. I honestly suspect more people would like it if it had a less rough sounding name. Marketing means a lot. Of course some wouldn't like them anyway, but I think it would be less of a given that most people dislike them.

[@circleinforthecube5170]

brut means concrete in french, it was just a inconvenient coincidence

[@lightbox617]

I have alays associated "Brutalist" architecture with Stalin era domination of Central and Eastern Europe. It did start with La Corbusia and Mike Vanderoe. It can be very efficieant and sometimes very beautiful. There are a lot of Central European Brutalist pieces that I would rather have in My home (Newark, NJ) that the cheap, out of scale glass and aluminum junk I see in Newark

[@IAmNumber4000]

The motivation for brutalism wasn’t domination, but to cheaply construct the essential shelter needed for survival and give it for free to people who needed shelter.

[@shyF0x]

i guess if you make institutions and government structures brutalist" you don't have to worry about riots and can really give off an inviting disposition to the public. these are basically defensive structures codified into architecture" by intellectuals. its inception may not have been for social control and A-bomb resistance but that's why it flourished. these buildings are political statements and as such should be subject to the political wind.

[@natedornbirer]

As opposed to what? The US is slammed with neoclassical architecture. The intention being to promote the values of freedom, democracy, and public discourse. That's worked out fabulously. lol. At least you know what you're getting into with a brutalist public building. She ain't hiding her intentions.

[@shyF0x]

@@natedornbirer hi, thanks for reading my comment. well many residents who vote in these municipalities hate them, just saying we shouldn't historic site them all, nor tear down them all. i actually think they are super interesting, these are nuclear combat bunkers , and ya there is a brutal honesty to them.

[@slipkinti]

@@shyF0x the preppers community like your comment.

[@shyF0x]

@@slipkinti haha!

[@medviation]

I adore brutalist buildings. It's like exploring a mountain rock formation when I'm in them. I hope we see a second wave of brutalist architecture. Give it a modern refresh which includes sleeker and lighter forms.

[@FelonyArson]

I think with a bit more colour those buildings would look super nice! Maybe if we combine Brutalism and Urban gardens🤔

[@m.woodsrobinson9244]

@@FelonyArson I agree! Brutalism, as it was originally conceived, was all "point" and no "counterpoint". There were no design elements to complement it or contrast it. It's not dynamic. There's no vitality to it.

[@xSmakxx]

Love your videos! Keep up the good work! Brutalist buildings have a unique sense to them; they have an identity. Unfortunately, as you have mentioned, many buildings are on the verge of being demolished. I believe the public/municipal brutalist buildings are worth keeping. Residential buildings are truly an eye-sore

[@prezac7]

Thank you for giving more insight into the Boston City Hall and plaza. I hae worked and walked by this plaza for years and never understood why it looked like that. It really stood out and didn't make sense to me. This clears up a lot of fog i had towards it. Thank you, enjoy the videos you do.

[@AlexandreSoma]

What building is the brazilian? I think is one art building Sao Paulo downtown, is it? Loved the doc. Thanks!

[@roodborstkalf9664]

Brutalism gone wrong (that is in 95% of all cases) is the most disgusting form or architecture in the history of mankind. These architects should be put on trial for crimes against humanity.

[@experiment506]

I usuallly just think of the buildings that look like bunkers or prisons, theae ones look amazing.

[@stevecarter8810]

So much is about context. University libraries usually work for me in this style: the style implies intellectualism over comfort and a scale larger than the individual (e.g. Knowledge). Boston city hall seemed to me quite uncouth in a city that is largely on a walkable scale

[@mdjey2]

There is nothing intellectual about it.

[@stevecarter8810]

@@mdjey2 cool, well I'm convinced then

[@mdjey2]

@@stevecarter8810 In Latvia we have different style for Universities kzbin.info/www/bejne/rn_am4OohcSXfs0

[@Regnet35]

The argument that brutalist and modernist design is egalitarian and socially progressive is the equivalent of saying, "if we can't all have nice buildings then nobody should have them". The disconnect between what architects shit out and what people actually like have destroyed many european cities and towns, and it continues also today sadly. The only areas that were allowed to keep their beauty are the areas where architects actually lived.

[@calebwilliamsmusician]

Exactly. Brutalism sucks!!

[@chilledtea6614]

great job putting in all those sources!

[@shrimpdynamics4003]

YEAH THAT MIC QUALITY IS BRUTAL

[@UltimateAlgorithm]

Yeah, the voice is clipping. I can even notice it on my phone.

[@tzw001]

4:55 "Over the years, many once abhorred Brutalist buildings have evolved into deeply treasured and loved landmarks by its citizens." - When did this happen?

[@benschebella673]

Over the years

[@ivanoffw]

What I have found is that Architects and those who buy architectural magazines like modern architecture, and no one else.

[@SKyrim190]

In the imagination of architects that go to universities and learn how "great" those buildings are

[@SKyrim190]

@@ivanoffw yes, that is exactly correct! It should tell you how it's not serving its purpose to real people

[@jakekaywell5972]

@@SKyrim190 The masses don't know what they want regarding architecture and as such their opinion means less than nothing.

[@kalamaroni]

There's precisely one good looking brutalist building I know of, and it is the Dulles International Airport. The DC Metro is also pretty good, until you realise there's trash and rats scampering around the ditches they dug on either side of platforms. I don't know of any other brutalist buildings I like being around. Walking around the plazas surrounding the US Department of Health and Human Services buildings on a hot, muggy day to get some documents renewed has genuinely been one of the worst city-going experiences of my life. Even on a practical level, it's hard to tell where you're going, the pavement is hard and will soon cause your knees and ankles to ache, it heats up terribly in summers and gets very dirty after just a single rain. It is shocking how bone achingly horrible this stuff can be. Another example is the Hoover FBI building, which has this top floor that sticks out over the sidewalk, and for whatever reason the underside of that floor is always wet and dirty, and sometimes drips down onto passers by. To me, brutalism has always felt like one thing: bureaucracy.

[@vtpanda]

Agree with everything you said. I also have a soft spot in my heart for the Lake Anne plaza in Reston.

[@tomrevay1173]

This was really wonderful -- thank you! I will share this with my colleagues, who, like I, guide architecture tours in Boston with @Boston By Foot. One point: at about 1:30 you identify Kallmann, McKinnell and Knowles as the architects of Boston City Hall Plaza. Not so, they only did Boston City Hall. The lead architect for the project, including the layout of the plaza, was I.M. Pei. The building shown in the rearground of the photo at 1:30 is the JFK Federal Building by The Architects Collaborative, a Cambridge, Massachusetts firm led by Bauhaus founder Walter Gropius.

[@chrisr8080]

Subscribed and enjoyed - There's one thing more brutal than Brutalism - the gain setting on your microphone on this upload :)

[@ETBrooD]

My argument for brutalist architecture: next to it, even I look handsome Just kidding, not even brutalism can save me ugly face

[@nqh4393]

Leave a classical building unattended for centuries and it will still be beautiful. Forget to clean a brutalist or modern building for a year and you'll never want to see it ever again.

[@eran0004]

Perhaps it would last a couple of decades, but you’d see some serious decay after half a century. Classical buildings are constantly maintained to preserve their appearance.

[@MrQbee87]

Exactly the opposite is true. Brutalist building will visually age very little. That is how concrete works. I live in Normandy and I have visited many bunkers from WW2. They look almost exactly the same the day they were built.

[@manictiger]

@@eran0004 I went to school for half my childhood in a 1900s catholic school that was badly stained with algae and moss, and had rebar showing from the elements and from cracks sustained back in the 1906 California Earthquake. It was still beautiful. Most of the sculpting was still intact. The stained glass windows and the church were second to none on this side of the country. The only buildings more marvelous were all in Europe. I think it's better maintained now, but when I went, they didn't have the funding yet to refurbish all that.

[@eran0004]

@@manictiger The main problem is that the roof will start to leak within a few decades, and once water is entering the construction then the building will deteriorate quickly. Although your school didn't have the funds to fix all the issues, I'm sure the building was still maintained.

[@thunderpooch]

The opposite is true. Classical buildings take endless maintenance. All brutalism needs is a power washing.

[@timstarockz]

I grew up in Boston and frequently admired city hall as a child. It always felt like a staple in the history and reputation of Boston. It’s boldness felt unmistakable and iconic, like Boston couldn’t be the same without it.

[@travelsofmunch1476]

You are from Boston, you should know better. Scollay square was the Times Square of Boston, over 20,000 people were displaced and 1,000 buildings demolished solely to build that lifeless plaza and building.

[@timstarockz]

@@travelsofmunch1476 There are many examples like yours, but that doesn't directly correlate to the feelings evoked from the architecture.

[@travelsofmunch1476]

@@timstarockz It is inescapable. Context is not optional when considering a piece of architecture. A Frank Lloyd Wright Prairie home is not complete without the leafy Chicago suburb it sits in, the Palace of Versailles and the legacy of the french monarchy cannot be understood without each other.

[@timstarockz]

​@@travelsofmunch1476 Context for most people is subjective, though. Just like I mentioned, I was only a child. The feelings evoked from me were not the history of the land it sits on; it was my subjective experience in life so far. I agree that if you have the knowledge of events that took place over time in a particular place, it will, in fact, change your experience, but that does not happen for everyone at all ages.

[@aislingd1806]

My university, trinity college Dublin, was founded in 1592. It is a stunning campus with breathtaking architecture, buildings which are hundreds of years old have been maintained and you can really sense the history. On one side of the square you have the world famous long room library, and then on the other side there’s the arts block. A brutalist monstrosity of a building which is just depressing to look at. It is cold and uninviting, the colour palette is grey, grey and grey. It is an eyesore to the entire south inner city, and almost goes out of its way to drain the character from the campus during the miserable, rainy Irish winter. Maybe it’s “art”, but it just feels so out of place in an otherwise beautiful location. Thankfully, being an old city, Dublin’s official buildings are also mostly old-style, but it seems that even in newer cities, these “statement” brutalist buildings just don’t appeal to those of us who want to appreciate a building for its looks and function, not what it represents artistically.

[@siddharthtyagi8980]

Man I searched it up. It looks very weird compared to the old architecture style like the contrast can't be stronger.

[@marc0523]

I checked it out, it looks great, but dirty. It needs cleaning, that's all.

[@remcolangbroek656]

Unfinished concrete? What do you mean? Are they still working on it?

[@SuperGreatSphinx]

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Concrete

[@TheAllAroundMan]

This super distorted audio makes me feel like I'm watching a bad ytp

[@hebneh]

While there might well have been a sense that Brutalism was egalitarian and "for the people", in fact a great many corporate buildings and banks used the style as well, and these were obvious symbols of the elite and moneyed. The offices of the extremely wealthy title character in 1968's "Thomas Crown Affair" were high Brutalist, as just one example.

[@SuperGreatSphinx]

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Thomas_Crown_Affair_(1968_film)

[@Ballacha]

art is a highly subjective matter. that's why the the vast majority of displays of art are located in places where you have to make a conscious choice to enter in order to experience, like a museum for example. using huge unavoidable sights like buildings as artistic statement is simply inconsiderate.

[@OFilellinas]

I totally agree.

[@eruno_]

I don't know if you are arguing for or against brutalism with your comment.

[@OGPatriot03]

It's not even an artistic expression, it's an OVERT political statement as was said in this video, SJWs thought beautiful buildings represented the middle class (bourgeoisie) and so these things were made to look nothing like them. They weren't made for any other reason, just to look completely different than the classical style as a form of political protest via eye strains.

[@SystemBD]

I'll say that the problem was that brutalism itself (i.e., exposing the underlying construction, without decorations) was not the problem, but the main material they used. If they used wood, stones or other type of "natural" material, the general perception would have been different. The grey of the concrete, mixed with the lines that water generates over time... looks like something cold and devoid of life.

[@cyclingcmdr]

Makati City in the Philippines has so many Brutalist buildings, some of which are at risk of getting demolished.

[@utzius8003]

I love brutalism. The simplicity of it, no fancy schmancy stuff, just steel, bare concrete and geometry. If I was allowed to design a city it'd be a mix of behemoth brutalist architecture, just with loads of marble and Greek/Roman architecture with all of the open buildings, pillars and arches.

[@mingyuhuang8944]

The fact that we give these gross, soulless pieces of architectural insult a fancy name like "brutalism" actually just normalises the whole thing. We should stop normalising this stuff. It's so bizarre how humans can just become accustomed and conditioned to think things are normal. When you compare something like "brutalist" buildings to something like Sistine Chapel, or Neo-Classical Greek architecture, you start to realise cyberpunk is just a fantasy since we're already living inside the depraved dystopia that's we've always feared. Let's label it for what it is, cheap, soulless, gross, utterly depraved of any humanity and immoral architecture which had its place in history due to economic reasons but should've now been a thing long left in the past. It's literally goes against everything natural human architecture stands for and therefore is why it's so uncomfortable and ominous, and for some, disgusting......

[@circleinforthecube5170]

@@mingyuhuang8944 "It's literally goes against everything natural human architecture stands for and therefore is why it's so uncomfortable and ominous, and for some, disgusting......" ah yes because humans are known to like one method and one method only, Any dystopia is created by systematic opression but sure, the concrete is the problem and not capitalism

[@NotOneToFly]

For my entire childhood, I associated the city (in my case Boston) with the glass towers of the International style and the Brutalist blocks of the government buildings and hated both. There was no distinction between the two in my mind; as a child obsessed with detail and form I saw in both styles crass economics and lack of imagination. As an adult, a more nuanced understanding of the differences in the styles and the populist goals of Brutalism has done nothing for my appraisal of them as architectural works, ESPECIALLY as works meant to serve the public. They are harsh. They are almost intentionally unpleasant and VERY intentionally unnatural. They have traded classical ornateness for stupefying sheets of emotionless grey, losing only the humanity of the architectural form and none of the elitism they wanted to shed. I mean, "I don't like nice buildings"? Who the hell do you think you are? The resulting buildings are almost to a fault "placeless", works of imagination only relating to their surroundings in the most abstract of ways, made by architects that have spent long enough in the artistic tradition to have lost the layperson's meaning of "abstract" altogether. Brutalism deserves to die and we deserve better than it or any attempts to preserve it. The whole movement deserves to live on only in the distopian movies it decorates and ultimately embodies: populism without the people.

[@eruno_]

Brutalism is nice style to a lot of people. Don't generalize like all people dislike it.

[@Miquelalalaa]

@@eruno_ Brutalism is founded on ignorant postmodern philosophies that rejected the fundamental importance of beauty or form to human existence. Beauty is only subjective to an extent, we might find ourselves more attracted to one thing or another but objective beauty and ugliness exists, only a mind warped by contrarianism and flawed ideological foundations could deny this. Right from the beginning, the ordinary populace found brutalism ugly, but their voices were suppressed for so long by elitist (in practice and reality) postmodern scholars and intellectuals. These people often had total and unquestionable influence in their fields. Brutalism has failed completely.

[@eruno_]

@@Miquelalalaa You are delusional.

[@Miquelalalaa]

​@@eruno_ That's all you have? It just goes to show that there are no valid points for brutalism that can hold there own, once people were finally able to question it it fell to pieces. That being said, brutalism is far from the only flawed architectural style, but it's proponents were particularly arrogant and allowed the most ugly style to gain such undue prominence.

[@JeffreyOakarPhotos]

Great video! Part two could include more buildings from Brazil. Oscar Niemeyer wasn't an overtly Brutalist architect but some of his buildings fall into the category. Let's just consider the whole city of Brasilia and you'll find some Brutalist gems.

[@Borrelaas]

4:30 is it not testament enough at how ugly this architecture is that it was used as a prisonscene in a movie?

[@moraine2442]

Unless I'm wrong, using concrete is not an ecological design option because the sand needs to be taken from shoreline ecosystems.

[@help8help]

The sand used in concrete doesn't come from beaches. Whatever other ecological issues concrete might have it's not destroying shorelines nor is it polluting shorelines. All of concretes ingredients are mined.

[@etangdescygnes]

Thank you so much for this excellent video! Brutalist buildings were harshly criticised as soon as they appeared, hot on the heels of modernist buildings. I am tempted to say that brutalism evolved naturally from modernism, but there is no proof of its inevitability. Many buildings combine modernist and brutalist elements as defined by academic architects, so one should label them as “mostly modernist” or “mostly brutalist”. When people say they like a “modernist” or a “brutalist” building, you should ask which features they like. Sometimes people like a brutalist building for its modernist features, and vice versa! Many people do not know the difference between modernism, brutalism, and postmodernism, so when they claim to like one of these styles, they are not saying what they mean: they actually like a set of architectural features that might correspond with a recognised style, but probably doesn’t. In any case, many, or even most architects are keen to move away from the pure styles as defined by academics, because they restrict creativity and stand in the way of optimal solutions. Before I judge brutalism, I must tell you what I understand by it, and modernism. Modernist buildings are characterised by the use of reinforced concrete, plate glass, steel, and aluminium to create buildings with wide rooms and windows. They have thin reinforced concrete floors, which also permits cantilevered balconies, jetties, and rooms that project far from the side walls without being supported from above or below. However, many modernist buildings have floors perched high above the ground on amazingly thin reinforced concrete columns. Where balconies and jetties are impossible, a modernist building will often have glass curtain walls that are transparent and/or reflect the sky. Such features interrupt what would otherwise be big solid blocks. You can often see parts of the background between, or even through the structure of a modernist building. In many modernist buildings “inside” and “outside” are blurred; open-plan areas extend through large plate glass sliding doors onto balconies and platforms, there may be big skylights and/or courtyards, and flat roofs may have sundecks, barbecues, and even swimming pools. Natural light streams into a modernist building. If it seems to you that the architect has tried to make a building look light and airy, it is probably modernist. (Curved walls also appear in modernism, although their use is much more marked in post-modernism.) Buildings that display three types of modernism to perfection are Frank Lloyd Wright’s “Falling Water”, Le Corbusier’s “Villa Savoye”, and the “Seagram Building” of Mies van der Rohe and Philip Johnson. All schools of architecture use these as examples for their students. Modernist buildings have two big problems: many are difficult and expensive to heat in winter, and builders construct their flat roofs without the slight gradients requested by the architects, so that rainwater pools and seeps down into the building. It is also true that some architects push the characteristic elegance of modernism into minimalism, and their great desire to remove clutter results in attractive buildings that are not functional, and which can even be unsafe, e.g. due to a lack of balustrades and banisters, or overstressed concrete. (Read about the problems of “Falling Water” - they are common in modernist buildings.) The open architectural style can also make it difficult to provide privacy, e.g. in a modernist housing complex. Modernist buildings are happiest on sunny, stable slopes in Mediterranean climates. And now for brutalist buildings. Much of their surface area is raw concrete, pebbledash, or chipped stone. The windows are often small and resemble dark holes when seen from the outside. Many brutalist buildings seem to squat heavily on the ground. The edge of a brutalist building is not broken up by spaces to the extent seen in a modernist building. Brutalist buildings absorb and block sunlight as opposed to letting it shine through, or reflecting it. Internally, there is a huge emphasis on functionality. They require much artificial lighting. So why would anyone want a brutalist building? If you are living in a place with long, cold, dark winters, you will be spending almost all your time indoors. A dark exterior helps to absorb rather than reflect what little sunlight there is, thick walls and small windows conserve heat, and the lack of natural light doesn’t matter, because you will need artificial light, even between sunrise and sunset. People tend not to go outside for short breaks if they must put on thick clothes and boots, so the building must be very easy to live in - it must be completely functional. Brutalist buildings are happiest in places with cold winters having long, dark nights. The exteriors of brutalist buildings remind many people of grim castles and prisons, but they truly ought to be judged on their interiors, which are of overriding importance. The big problems of brutalism are the difficult of integrating such buildings into natural environments without dominating and/or degrading them, and the demoralising effect of their prison-like exteriors, which can even exacerbate depression and antisocial behaviour. For this reason, many architects design buildings for cold climates that are essentially brutalist, but which incorporate features of modernism that “soften” the building. You will often see much use of light-coloured wooden floors, ceilings, and panels in brutalist buildings, as they bring the natural world and warmth into what would otherwise be unacceptably cold, hard, and austere. Natural wood surfaces are aligned with brutalism. Light coloured exterior cladding is also very common. Aesthetically I much prefer modernism to brutalism, (which is typical), but if I lived in a cold, dark climate, where I spent many hours indoors, I think brutalism would be the winner! And one must also bear in mind hybrid and evolved forms. Pure naturalism has never evolved beyond a tiny niche, but “organic modernism” - in which architects design modernist buildings to accommodate plant and animal life ab initio, is booming. Some of the deconstructionist (or unconstructionist) forms of postmodernism are too glitzy and clever-clever for my taste: rhinestones designed by architects to show off their own talents and/or the wealth of their clients. A complex, interesting, or even fascinating building is not necessarily beautiful and/or functional, but merely an exercise in intellectual conceit and self-aggrandisement. A rather simple and humble house can be both beautiful and functional. It is a good to think about how people will view a building 100 years in the future!

[@mingyuhuang8944]

The fact that we give these gross, soulless pieces of architectural insult a fancy name like "brutalism" actually just normalises the whole thing. We should stop normalising this stuff. It's so bizarre how humans can just become accustomed and conditioned to think things are normal. When you compare something like "brutalist" buildings to something like Sistine Chapel, or Neo-Classical Greek architecture, you start to realise cyberpunk is just a fantasy since we're already living inside the depraved dystopia that's we've always feared. Let's label it for what it is, cheap, soulless, gross, utterly depraved of any humanity and immoral architecture which had its place in history due to economic reasons but should've now been a thing long left in the past. It's literally goes against everything natural human architecture stands for and therefore is why it's so uncomfortable and ominous, and for some, disgusting.......

[@Swen_Oommers]

@@mingyuhuang8944 bro copied and pasted

[@RedKnight-fn6jr]

It's funny, but medieval Gothic is really an early form of Brutalism with heavy structural emphasis on the outside and light filled delicacy on the inside. Also funny is the fact that Gothic cathedrals are built on a grid pattern like modern buildings. Such buildings might have been seen as monstrosities in their day. What's also amusing is that many modern buildings in 2018 are in a style that brutalism replaced (Internationalism and Bauhaus). Now that building concepts of the 1960's and 1970's is gaining appreciation, we must be careful not to repeat the same mistakes in collective judgement and bash everything that comes from 30 years previous (in our case, the 1980's and early 1990's) - as with most things, there's good and bad.

[@OGPatriot03]

Absolutely NOT, no idea how you got that BS in your head....

[@rzu1474]

Brutalism = egalitarian. Make everyone equally miserable.

[@ARTiculations]

Lmao this is such a gold comment.

[@MrQbee87]

No wonder it originated in Eastern Europe under USSR.

[@jakekaywell5972]

@@MrQbee87 It actually originated from Le Corbusier. He was French-Swiss. USSR's Brutalism merely perfected it and I'm not talking about the commie blocks.

[@sockreeteeezdeznewts4981]

Doesn’t the creation of concrete make up for a massive percentage world emissions with a Chromebook sized slab being the equivalent of driving a car 12 million miles. While there are studies done around concrete which could possibly hold in its greenhouse gasses when bing created, right now it’s a little bit of a stretch to say buildings made solely of raw concrete is better for the environment.

[@LuciusClevelandensis]

The death of brutalism would not make me sad. The style is featured in dystopian movies for a reason.

[@vladimiryuriev2641]

As a law graduate I see no case here at all. No arguments for that kind of architecture were placed forward. No real benefits were mentioned. The only thing closely resembling an argument falls along the lines of : I grew up around it, so can't be that bad, right ? As for my opinion. Brutalism is a blight on the soul and reflects the uncaring oppressive state flawlessly. It brings discord in any public space and have no redeeming qualities unless one aims to make above ground bunker for some reason.

[@cinemasailor]

Terrific overview. Captures my own feelings about Brutalism very well. In Trenton, New Jersey, near where I grew up, there are a number of smaller-scale Brutalist public buildings; as a result of my early childhood experiences with these buildings, I’ve come to associate Brutalism with a sense of both stability and visual interest, as well as with civic life - just as the architects intended. For me, these buildings are both reassuring and stimulating, and they affirm and support the reality of "the public," of public life. (In fact, I’ve long felt that an alternative name for this style of architecture could be “civic modernism.”) Thanks for this really nice piece.

[@ARTiculations]

Civic modernism - I like it! Thanks for watching and thanks for the lovely comment :)

[@D3wd20p]

Honestly I love Brutalism. Maybe it's growing up in an age of waste and entropy that makes something efficient and honest stick out - but hey, it was incredible watching this video and learning how much it meant at the time! Still, it's tragic it's fallen so far out of favor. Even the comments here are pretty against it; props for not being an echo chamber, but did anyone besides me come here out of adoration and not contempt? We already live in a dystopia, and it's mostly made of glass - I'll take artsy violent concrete any day.

[@jakekaywell5972]

Same. I love Brutalism and am actually using it to design my home. It's the defining element of Gothic architecture, extracted from its source and distilled. In any such building, you are a small point in a great, geometrically constructed space. No religion in the mix, just the pure structure of the universe. This space is absolutely neutral and lifeless, which allows you to make up the life within it without the need for an architectural crutch along the lines of the gaudy McMansion that replaced the Lincoln House. Ah well, at least I can build my own house in whatever brutalist style I want. The use of concrete as a defining part of Brutalism also allows for making shapes that just aren't possible with any other material, with fantastic results.

[@jacobkilstrom]

We must never accept uglyness as a form of beauty! Those brutalist buildings that have been demolished got what they earned!

[@animecoolmoments2023]

HOPE THAT YOUR KZbin CHANNEL CONTINUES!!!