The Art that People Came to Hate and its Revival: The Brutalist Architecture

     All the avant-garde movements, across the history, show us how a revolutionary idea changed the model and perception of how we view and create a work of art. Some faded away whereas others stayed, paving the way to the future generation with a set of examples that encouraged them to think out of the box. Love it or hate it; art lovers all over the world fight to preserve whatever that is left of that idea. Thus books go online, art gets replicated, music gets improvised and films get inspired. What one wonders whether it would stand the test of time, is a work of art that's a tad bit difficult to maintain, namely: buildings. Many sparks generated in the minds of genius architects, altered the way we built our home and office. With steel, bricks, iron, concrete and glass they created masterpieces on our landscape. Innovations and inventions complimented the luxury and comfort one sought within the four walls of bricks and mortar. One such pioneering idea in the construction sector was the introduction of the Brutalist Architecture that merged cheap options with convenience. Some still stand due to preservation but many buildings based on this idea perished or was torn down due to lack of maintenance and hate from people.

Brutalist architecture can be defined as

(Brutalist) buildings usually... formed with striking repetitive angular geometries, and, where concrete is used, often revealing the texture of the wooden forms used for the in-situ casting. Although concrete is the material most widely associated with Brutalist architecture, not all Brutalist buildings are formed from concrete. Instead, a building may achieve its Brutalist quality through a rough, blocky appearance, and the expression of its structural materials, forms, and (in some cases) services on its exterior. (Creative Commons Attribution)

The architectural form was created by a Swiss architect called Le Corbusier in France during 1950s. The term originated from the material he wanted to use in his building known as beton brut which is known to us as raw concrete. It was British architects Alison and Peter Smithson who coined the term in 1953 but the concept of Brutalism or Brutalist Architecture got popular after the publication of the book The New Brutalism: Ethic or Aesthetic? (1966) by a British architectural critic Reyner Banham.

"Brutalist buildings are usually formed with repeated modular elements forming masses representing specific functional zones, distinctly articulated and grouped together into a unified whole." (Voices of East Anglia) Brutalist buildings stood apart for many reasons. Some deemed it as ugly and chunky whereas some found it affordable and expedient. Many characteristics governed how one building was viewed as Brutalist:

"1. Rough unfinished surfaces

2. Unusual shapes

3. Heavy looking materials

4. Massive forms

5. Small windows in relation to the other parts " (architecture.com)

For its construction Brutalist buildings usually used brick, concrete, glass, steel, rough-hewn stone, and gabion. It was also characterised by distinct projected rooms that signified the importance of that room from the exterior. Thus projection could proclaim the function of a room. One should also note that the Brutalist architecture was adopted all over the world to build museums, schools, universities and courts due to its convenient structural form and expenditure. If one observes carefully even buildings of JNU adopt certain characteristics of Brutalist architecture like its raw emphasis on the materials used for construction ("brick brutalists" (Styleture)) and projected rooms but it stands apart in many ways by incorporating nature and compact size into brutal form thus rendering 'brutality' powerless.

Major Brutalist designers were Ernő Goldfinger, Alison and Peter Smithson, Sir Basil Spence, the LCC/GLC Architects Department, Owen Luder, John Bancroft, and Sir Denys Lasdun, Sir Leslie Martin, Sir James Stirling and James Gowan in the United Kingdom. In Australia Robin Gibson, Ken Woolley, Colin Madigan (who built High Court of Australia and its World Trade Centre) and John Andrews. In the United States of America, Paul Rudolph and Ralph Rapson, Walter Netsch and Marcel Breuer are known for their Brutalist works. It had found its impact on other countries like Argentina, Brazil, Philippines and New Zealand.

        Buildings under Brutalist architecture are usually massive in size which reminds one of the forts. Its rugged looking structure that gave no prominence to aesthetics and massive size became favourable to governments, to construct their institutions. Some believe that such a form was developed by the youth of that time as a retaliation against the "lightness, optimism and frivolity" (Creative Commons Attribution) of the architecture around 1930's and 40's. Banham argues that this form is "expression of an atmosphere among architects of moral seriousness. Brutalism as a no-nonsense style, according to him "makes the whole conception of the building plain and comprehensible with no mystery, no romanticism and no obscurity about function and circulation." (architecture.com) Though the buildings were not brought under the term "Brutalist buildings" the word gained prominence in recent years to denote buildings that are huge and unpopular.

It found its footing in India too. Major Brutalist buildings in India are the Secretariat building and High Court building of Chandigarh (designed by Le Corbusier) built in the 1950s and Shiv Nath Prasad, Shri Ram Centre for Art and Culture, New Delhi, India, built in 1969. Buildings of Chandigarh had to constantly undergo renovation or were later abandoned due to a humid climate and weak concrete structure.   

       Though it was not preferred by corporate organizations, it was appealing to the population of United Kingdom that was suffering from the aftermath of World War II. They were basically longing for strong, affordable, low-cost homes which were inexpensive to build compared to other structures. Later other architects despite having a lavish budget still incorporated Brutalist form as they found certain honesty in the structure that didn't succumb to the interest of bourgeoisie style. At the time of its inception, it was considered a positive and socially progressive movement that could assist the government to improve the infrastructure of developing cities.

       The past indifference towards its form can be traced back to the association of its philosophy to socialist utopian ideologies. Brutalist architecture found its fans in nations like Czechoslovakia, Yugoslavia, USSR and Bulgaria from mid-1960s. Its bold look and chunky appearance that gained favour later became its biggest flaws."What began as a utopian project to design new schools, libraries, hospitals, housing estates, city halls, using the most cutting-edge building techniques, was deemed to have failed; resulting in ugly, inhuman buildings, unfit for purpose" (Dezeen). Charles, Prince of Wales criticised Brutalist buildings severely, calling it mere rubble and pile of concrete. With its damp climate people of London found concrete structures to be weak and ugly covered in moss and rust. Its cold look reminded them of authoritarian and totalitarian aura.  Theodore Dalrymple, a British author, physician, and political commentator once wrote that "Brutalist structures represent an artefact of European philosophical totalitarianism, a spiritual, intellectual, and moral deformity." He thought that such buildings were "cold-hearted", "inhuman", "hideous", and "monstrous" (Creative Commons Attribution). He pointed out the reason for the hate from people of London due to the fact that the reinforced concrete "does not age gracefully but instead crumbles, stains, and decays".  Matthew Yglesias of Think Progress said that such structures like Boston City Hall "sort of kill pleasant urbanist neighbourhoods". (Hoggard)

       It found its biggest rival in the avant-garde movement of Archigram in the 1960s. Compared to the humongous structures of Brutalists, Archigram aimed at projects "that was neo-futuristic, antiheroic and pro-consumerist, drawing inspiration from technology in order to create a new reality that was solely expressed through hypothetical projects." (Wikipedia) Its founding members were Peter Cook, Warren Chalk, Ron Herron, Dennis Crompton, Michael Webb, David Greene and Theo Crosby. With their wide coverage in Architectural Design magazine with the help of Theo Crosby who was at that time its editor, they came to the attention of Institute of Contemporary Arts, London. There they exhibited their project Living Cities in 1963 that gave an idea about the intended changes they wanted to bring to the architecture. It was in 1961 a pamphlet named Archigram I was published to proclaim their idea to the public. In the pamphlet they declared that they were "committed to a 'high tech', lightweight, infrastructural approach that was focused towards survival technology, the group experimented with modular technology, mobility through the environment, space capsules and mass consumer imagery." (Wikipedia) Though it appealed to the public more than the Brutalist form with its futuristic look, it failed to address many social and environmental issue that would arise out of its implementation. When Buckminster Fuller emphasised the need to build more with less number of materials to save the resources, Archigram found pleasure in a great expenditure of wealth and resources. Their projects like Tuned City intended to build on the existing developing cities to their needs thus consuming old and preserved ideas.

It was around 1980s and 90s many Brutalist buildings were knocked down for projects that reflect "contemporary tastes". Its death was followed by the introduction of Structural Expressionism and Deconstructivism in architecture. For some, these structures stood as a symbol of government power and hold among the population. Some others found it distasteful to the aesthetically more qualified future projects. In recent years Brutalist fans fight to preserve the buildings built on their golden age as a resistance to such futurist, consumerist and wealth-driven housing projects. The intense concentration of the wealthy people in and around London figuratively forced them to seek refuge under old and abandoned concrete structures for shelter. For them these vandalised, squatted, graffiti-filled abandoned concrete gardens reflect the dream of a population weakened by war for cheap public buildings and social housing. There are Tumblr accounts like "F*** Yeah Brutalism" and other websites created by such fans to spread their love and information about Brutalist architecture to the world. It's being featured in magazines and movies due to its cultish followers. Concrete with its great history (Roman constructions like Parthenon and the Colosseum), its great flexibility and ease to meld into different huge structures has forced architects to re-evaluate their approach towards Brutalism.

"Buildings once deemed monstrosities are now national treasures. We’re queuing up to buy flats in masterpieces of mid-20th century design such as London’s Barbican or Patrick Hodgkinson’s Brunswick Centre (both now Grade II-listed).Denys Lasdun’s 1976 cast-concrete National Theatre (once compared, by the Prince of Wales, to a nuclear power station) has just had a much admired £80 million refurbishment." (Hoggard)

It is finding a revival in recent years and a definite proof was provided when the Burntwood School designed by architects AHMM, won the 2015 RIBA Stirling Prize for the UK's top architecture. It was based on the Brutalist style adopted and created by Marcel Breuer. Though mass protests organised to prevent the demolition of British buildings like the Tricorn Centre and Trinity Square multi-storey car park failed, other structures like Preston bus station garage, the Hayward Gallery could be saved from crumbling down. Gus Zogolovitch residential developer of Solidspace, who won an award for his concrete home Zog House in London is on a move to build more concrete based flats near to London Bridge due to its popularity. He says "“There was a move towards simplicity. We realised that we’ve got these great materials like concrete and brick, which are substantive and beautiful in their own right, so why are we covering them up? Why can’t we expose the inner workings and see them for what they are?” (Hoggard) Many architects argue that the re-entry of brutalism in the 21st century in London is an attempt to capture the social democratic values of the past decades.

In conclusion, what does Brutalist architecture offer to India? Its innovations with concrete have paved the way to the creation of fabrics infused with a special concrete that hardens when applied moisture, to be used in disaster-stricken areas all over the world. Cheap and mass-produced housing is a necessity for its growing population that cares only for a shelter and not for the beauty of its construction materials. Its adoption to School and University buildings offer Government more options to construct more facilities with less money and effort. The brutalist form also has a higher chance to withstand the seismic activities on our land. Futuristic buildings may seem an attractive option to developed nations like the United States of America and the United Kingdom. India needs a mixture of both.

Bibliography

·        architecture.com. 2015. 14 April 2016 <https://www.architecture.com/Explore/ArchitecturalStyles/Brutalism.aspx>.

·        "Creative Commons Attribution." 2006. Brutalist Architecture. 16 March 2016 <http:/ / creativecommons. org/ licenses/ by-sa/ 3. 0/>.

·        Dezeen. 6 March 2016. 15 April 2016 <http://www.dezeen.com/tag/brutalism/>.

·        Hoggard, Liz. The Telegraph. 28 Januray 2016. 15 April 2016 <http://www.telegraph.co.uk/art/artists/whywemustlearntolovebrutalistarchitecture/>.

·        Styleture. 2 July 2014. 15 April 2016 <http://styleture.com/brutalism-design>.

·        "Voices of East Anglia." 2014. Rise and Fall of Brutalist Architecture. 12 April 2016 <http://www.voicesofeastanglia.com/2011/08/theriseandfallofbrutalistarchitecture.>.

·        Walker, Alissa. Gizmodo. 24 April 2015. 15 April 2016 <http://www.gizmodo.com/7-endangered-examples-of-the-most-hated-archtectural-s-1636643535>.

·        Wikipedia. 3 May 2015. 15 April 2016 <http://www.wikipedia.com/archigram>.