Brutalism

CHU SIN CHUNG Adrian 332874 MoMo to PoMo ABPL 30050 Final Essay George Stavrias Thursday 3.15‐4.15 Architecture 304

18. What is meant by brutalism in architecture? Compare and contrast the work of Smithsons with the Japanese brutalists.

Brutalism in architecture was a movement that started to gain momentum in Europe, especially in Britain, in the post war period of the 1950s. During same, a lot of debate was made about whether the modern architecture that emerged at the beginning of the 20th century was any longer suitable for the society1, and brutalism was one the movements that would reform architecture after World War II. This essay will discuss the emergence of brutalism, the different approaches to it with constant references to Le Corbusier, and discuss and compare examples by the Smithsons and Kenzo Tange, respectively from England and Japan, two countries which have been particularly affected by the war.

The term ‘New Brutalism’ was first coined by Alison Smithson in December 1953, as applied to the coarse finish of a terraced house that she and Peter Smithson designed in SoHo2 (fig.1). Although it was only from then that New Brutalism was considered a distinctive style, the principles behind it dated back to Le Corbusier as early as 1923 in his book ‘Vers une Architecture’3 ‐ the post World War II atmosphere in Europe was not completely dissimilar to that of post World War I, and the common element to the emergence of similar philosophies in these 2 periods was possibly being the need for reconstruction after the destruction of the war. The concept of New Brutalism was actually a reaction to Le Corbusier’s use of rough, unfinished surfaces and his vision of a communal living4. This essay will, however, focus on the post World War II period. After the end of the war in 1945, Europe was being in an intensive phase of reconstruction. However, the experimental creativity that 1.

2.

3.

4.

William Curtis, Modern Architecture since 1900, London: Phaidon Press Inc., 1996, 471.

Laurent Stalder, ‘‘New Brutailsm’ ‘Topology’ and ‘Image’: some remarks on the architectural debates in England since 1950’, The Journal of Architecture, 13, no. 3 (2008), 264.

Stalder, ‘‘New Brutailsm’ ‘Topology’ and ‘Image’: some remarks on the architectural debates in England since 1950’, 264.

Anthony Studor, ‘A Bit of Rough: William Cook explains why brutalism, that most provocative assault on suburban sentiment, is now cherished again’, New Statesman, 131 no. 4592 (June 2002), 37.

CHU SIN CHUNG Adrian 332874 MoMo to PoMo ABPL 30050 Final Essay George Stavrias Thursday 3.15‐4.15 Architecture 304

occurred after World War I (fig.2) was not seen again – instead, architecture became more functional and rational in order not to create grand architecture with expensive materials, but rather to address the serious issue of creating housing for people affected by the war. As a result, architects like Le Corbusier, proposed housing solutions like his Unité d’Habitation in Marseilles (fig.3). There, Le Corbusier makes use of heavy raw concrete and huge pilotis to create a sense of mass and roughness. This aesthetic quality of ruggedness has been adopted by later architects, and while the social agenda behind its adoption was sometimes similar to that of Le Corbusier, at times the adoption of raw concrete was only for aesthetic purposes.

Two years after the Unite d’Habitation, Peter and Alison Smithson designed the Hunstanton School in Norfolk from 1949 to 1954. Although the latter building predates the term, it is the first example to explicitly be labelled New Brutalism. The design of the school was inspired by Le Corbusier’s idea of leaving all the materials bare5 and the purism of Mies Van de Rohe’s Illinois’s Institute of Technology6, although in 1954, architectural critic Reyner Banham described the school as being ‘freed of the formalism of Mies van de Rohe’ by showing every element as they really were. The result is a building with a linear structure, light construction of glass and unconcealed structures and materials – steel girders on the interior and unadorned brick on the outside7. Services are also apparent on the outside, with pipes and conduits visibly running through the wall and delivering water and electricity where needed (figs.4, 5). In this instance, the lack of refinement in construction might have been not, as for Le Corbusier, for a visual purpose, but rather because of a lack of funds, materials and knowledge8. The use of raw materials by the Smithsons was also to reflect the harsh social realities of post World War II Europe9. Brutalism was often seen as being an ethic entity more 5.

6.

7.

8.

9.

Jeremy Melvin, Understanding Architecture, London: Herbert Press, 2005, 118 Nigel Whiteley, Modern Architecture, Heritage and Englishness, Architectural History, 30 (1995), 229.

David Macaulay, Life’s a Brute In a Fancy building, The Times Educational Supplement, 2262 (January 2002), 10.

Jeremy Melvin, Understanding Architecture, 118.

William Curtis, Modern Architecture since 1900, 425

CHU SIN CHUNG Adrian 332874 MoMo to PoMo ABPL 30050 Final Essay George Stavrias Thursday 3.15‐4.15 Architecture 304

than an aesthetic architectural style since it emerged as a viable response to housing problems by providing rational, cheap, unrefined infrastructure. In 1953, during the Parallels of Life and Art, the Smithsons gave a definition for the New Brutalism as having: ‘Memorability as an Image; Clear exhibition of structure; Valuation of materials’10. However, New Brutalism would be redefined by later architects, and because of these numerous aesthetic definitions, the approach towards brutalism was not as clear and systematic as the Smithsons might have intended it to be11. As a result, many buildings which would later be classified as brutalist were simply integrating the ‘exposed material and structure’ element in the design without necessarily translating the ideas that the Smithsons had when they initially applied the brutalist principles.

One of the examples of these buildings which have adopted the brutalism, but not the ‘smithsonian’ philosophy behind is Le Corbusier’s convent of Sainte Marie de la Tourette (fig.6). Visually, La Tourette obviously demonstrates signs of brutalism: unfinished concrete and a clear exhibition of the structural elements. However, the agenda behind the adoption of brutalism here is neither the limitations of resources nor the need to exhibit the ethics of social institutions. Instead, this new brutal language that Le Corbusier was now using was a reaction against the machine – although he was the one advocating the machine in his earlier works, he was distraught by the mechanical destruction of World War II12 and wanted to move back to a more natural, unindustrialised, monolithic‐like architecture. The building appears to be really heavy and massive. The structural frames and the walls are made of raw concrete, and the openings are seemingly punched into the walls so as not to break the solid composition of the building. Even the glass is fixed directly onto the concrete without any framing softening the transition between concrete and glass. The concrete 1.

Reyner Banham, ‘The new Brutalism’, Architectural Review, December 1955, 358.

2.

Stalder, ‘‘New Brutailsm’ ‘Topology’ and ‘Image’: some remarks on the architectural debates in England since 1950’, .

3.

William Curtis, Modern Architecture since 1900, 417

CHU SIN CHUNG Adrian 332874 MoMo to PoMo ABPL 30050 Final Essay George Stavrias Thursday 3.15‐4.15 Architecture 304

blocks on the windows of the corridors, often known as sugar lumps give the impression that they are supporting the concrete mass above, further enhancing this impression of heaviness13. The brutal character of La Tourette also lies in the fact that it represents a very strong affirmation, a brutal action on the rural landscape since it is a massive crude structure seemingly cut into the natural slope of the hill14. There are, however, some parallels with the post‐war social housings – La Tourette can be seen as an example of the organisation of communal living within the same building15, and some critics such as Colin Rowe even claimed that ‘within the walls community individuality and collectivity are reconciled’16.

La Tourette represents a very good example of how a building can be considered as one of the key buildings of Brutalism, while not exactly responding to the social drivers which initially were responsible for the emergence of brutalism. It demonstrated how architects were quite liberal about the meaning of brutalism and its application in the design of their buildings. The Smithsons on the other hand managed to preserve the ethos of brutalism. This was shown in the Robin Hood gardens, built in London from 1966 to 1972 (fig.7). The Robin Hood Gardens is a social housing building which, like Le Corbusier’s Unite d’Habitation has defined the building typology associated with social estates, with a long repetition of apartment blocks identifiable via the façade17, and with access to a balcony. The two huge, heavy wings were supposed to shield the noise from the outside and create a peaceful haven inside, using the green enclosed courtyard, (fig.8) and the balconies, which they

4.

Richard Copans, ‘Le Corbusier: The Cloister of La Tourette’, Architectures, Paris: Arte France, 2007.

5.

Richard Copans, ‘Le Corbusier: The Cloister of La Tourette’.

6.

William Curtis, Modern Architecture since 1900, 423.

7.

Peter Serenyi, ‘Le Corbusier, Fourier, and the Monastery of Ema, The Art Bulletin, 49, no. 4 (December 1967), 286

8.

William Curtis, Modern Architecture since 1900, 533.

CHU SIN CHUNG Adrian 332874 MoMo to PoMo ABPL 30050 Final Essay George Stavrias Thursday 3.15‐4.15 Architecture 304

nicknamed ‘streets in the sky’, as a social space. Indeed, the Smithsons wanted to see themselves as social reformers, and use architecture as a social catalyst, a way of marrying traditional family life with modern architecture18. The use of the brutalist language was as a symbol of post World War II working class life, and the cultural achievement of the Welfare State19. However, Robin Hoods Gardens failed to achieve what the Smithsons intended it to. The heavy concrete walls created claustrophobia and isolation and the poorly designed circulation meant that people were afraid to be mugged at every corner20. Even the structure proved to be defective, and a building that was initially meant to create community ended up being a centre of crime21. The reason why this building has failed possibly lies in the fact that the architects were stuck in an academic vision of what postwar social housing needed, and were unable to foresee that society and lifestyles would not be stuck in this postwar reconstruction period. Failure to foresee the future consumerist society that would emerge after the 1950’s was probably what marked the decline in the reputation of Alison and Peter Smithson22.

The destruction of the war also spread to other parts of the world. The most heartbreaking visions of destruction were probably the ruins of Hiroshima and Nagasaki after 2 atomic bombs were detonated there in August 1945. The scale of destruction was such that the landscape was complete flattened within a two kilometre radius around the explosion and nearly half the population was

9.

Nicholas Beech, Problem with Easy Street:London: University College of London, 2006.

10. Nikolai Ouroussoff, ‘Rethinking Postwar Design in London’, The New York Times, 19 March 2009, C1.

11. Nikolai Ouroussoff, ‘Rethinking Postwar Design in London’, C1.

12. Hugh Pearman, ‘Meet the Smithsons: separating the hype from reality. Should Alison and Peter Smithson have stuck to th

talking:’, Gabion, 2009 (accessed 25 April 2011)

http://www.hughpearman.com/articles5/smithsons5.html 13. Hugh Pearman, ‘Meet the Smithsons: separating the hype from reality. Should Alison and Peter Smithson have stuck to th

talking:’, Gabion, 2009 (accessed 25 April 2011)

http://www.hughpearman.com/articles5/smithsons5.html

CHU SIN CHUNG Adrian 332874 MoMo to PoMo ABPL 30050 Final Essay George Stavrias Thursday 3.15‐4.15 Architecture 304

killed within 5 years23. However, the determination of the survivors spurred a boom in the economy and the widespread reconstruction of the city. In 1950 the Japanese architect Kenzo Tange was selected to design the Hiroshima Peace City (fig.9), an architectural symbol of post war reconstruction.24. Tange was invited to the CIAM meeting in 1951, where he got the opportunity to meet Le Corbusier. He also became a member of Team X, an architectural group in which the Smithsons were prominent figures. While his meeting with le Corbusier informed his language with the use of rugged concrete25, his interaction with the brutalists resulted in a division which led to the development of metabolism26 The difference between the metabolists and the brutalists is that brutalists worked to solve problems on a human scale27 (for example social housing) while metabolists worked on a larger scale. However, the decision of Tange to use the modern language was, similar to Le Corbusier and the Smithsons, as a reaction to history, a wish to look towards the future as a way to exorcise the consequences of the war. This was demonstrated explicitly in one of his quotes: ‘How do we face the past when history itself has become so traumatic? How can we rebuild the world once we have shattered it?’28 Despite the distinctions that exist between metabolism and the brutalism, there are several similarities between them as well. As mentioned previously they were both architectural philosophies that emerged as a reaction to war and both expressed materials and structures. The Hiroshima Peace Memorial Museum is visually very similar to Robin Hood Gardens. The use of unfinished concrete and the horizontal repetition of elements 14. Joanne Silberner, ‘Hiroshima and Nagasaki: Thirty Six Years Later, the Struggle Continues’, Science News, 120, no. 18, (October 1981), 284.

15. Isamu Naguchi, ‘Uniting Tradition and Modernity: A Postwar Photographic Journey’, Grand Street, no. 72, (Autumn 2003), p45 16. William Curtis, Modern Architecture since 1900, 434.

17. Francis Ching, Mark Jamzorbek, Vikramaditya Prakash, A Global History of Architecture, New Jersey: John Wileys and Sons. Inc., 2007, 738.

18. Ching, A Global History of Architecture, 738.

19. Isamu Naguchi, ‘Uniting Tradition and Modernity: A Postwar Photographic Journey’, 46.

CHU SIN CHUNG Adrian 332874 MoMo to PoMo ABPL 30050 Final Essay George Stavrias Thursday 3.15‐4.15 Architecture 304

along the building and the location of the building in the middle of a social environment are common elements. The columns at the base of the building are a clear expression of the structure and is very similar the Unite d’Habitation in Marseilles. Isamu Naguchi, a Japanese sculptor who participated in the design of the Hiroshima Peace Memorial Park said that the reconstruction of Hiroshima after the bombings of August 1945 had very strong parallels with the building from scratch of Chandigarh in the 1950s29, one of the most famous building of which is the very brutalist Secretariat Building by Le Corbusier (fig.10).

The relationships between the different buildings that would be classified as brutalist are not very clear. Since its first use by Alison Smithson in 1953, the term brutalism has been redefined by several architects, and its application has been quite liberal. The aesthetic qualities have, however, been more or less preserved, although the Smithsons’ definition advocated valuation of material and not specifically concrete which has subsequently been an identifying element of the style. The reason was probably the influence of ‘beton brut’ of Le Corbusier who was after all a prominent figure in the development of brutalism. The social implications of brutalism are also difficult to flesh out. In Britain, it started out with a social agenda to rebuild schools, housing and other institutions in the cheapest, most rational manner, and to use architecture as a social catalyst to create community. Le Corbusier focused on the communal dwelling and Kenzo Tange used the style to symbolise reconstruction, but not from a social perspective, but a commemorative one. The variations in the proximal drivers of brutalism have been as numerous as the architects who have adopted that language. However, the distal origin was this need for reinvention, an architecture that would mark a turning page of history and the new society that would emerge in the post war era.

20. Isamu Naguchi, ‘Uniting Tradition and Modernity: A Postwar Photographic Journey’, 46.

CHU SIN N CHUNG Adrrian 332874 MoMo tto PoMo ABP PL 30050 Final Esssay George SStavrias Thursday 3.15‐4.15 A Architecture e 304

Figuree 1: Smithson ns’ house in SSoHo Sourcee: Richarrd Benham, TThe New Bru utalism

Figuree 3: Le Corbusier’s Unite d’Habitation in Maarseilles Sourcee: Great Buildings On nline http:///www.greatbuildings.com/cgi‐ bin/gb bi.cgi/Unite__d_Habitation.html/ci d_24664522.html

Figure e 2: Experimental creativvity after WWI – Tatlin Tow wer, Vladimirr Tatlin Sourcce: Philip p Goad, Vision vs reality ((lecture)

Figure e 4: Interior of Hunstantoon School, Peterr and Alison S Smithson Sourcce: Nigel Wgiteley. Ba anham and ‘‘Otherness’

CHU SIN N CHUNG Adrrian 332874 MoMo tto PoMo ABP PL 30050 Final Esssay George SStavrias Thursday 3.15‐4.15 A Architecture e 304

Figure 55: Hunstanto on School, Pe eter and Alisson Smithson n Source: Laurentt Stadler, Neew Brutalism,, Topology aand Image

Figure 66: Le Corbusier, Sainte M Marie de la Toourette

Figure 7 7: The Smith sons, Robin Hood Gardeens

Source: Buildings Onlline Great B http:///www.greatb buildings.com m/cgi‐ bin/gbi.cgi/Conventt_of_La_Tou urette.html/ccid_2463 890.gbii

Source:: http://ttracontraconn.blogspot.co om/2009/10 0/r obin‐ho ood‐gardens..html

Figure 8: The Smithso ons, Robin Hoood Garden,, enclosed green social space.

Source: http://ruthhedges.wo ordpress.com m/category/society/

CHU SIN N CHUNG Adrrian 332874 MoMo tto PoMo ABP PL 30050 Final Esssay George SStavrias Thursday 3.15‐4.15 A Architecture e 304

Fig gure 9: Kenzoo Tange, Hiroshima Peacce Memorial Musseum So ource: http://www.jaapantabibito.com/hiroshima‐ sig ghtseeing

Fig gure 10: Le CCorbusier, Se ecretariat building in Chandigarh So ource: http://architecctsgig.com/b bestArchitectts.php? id= =9 y

CHU SIN CHUNG Adrian 332874 MoMo to PoMo ABPL 30050 Final Essay George Stavrias Thursday 3.15‐4.15 Architecture 304

References 

Reyner Banham, ‘The New Brutalism’, Architectural Review, December 1955.



Nicholas Beech, Problem with Easy Street: London: University College of London, 2006.



Francis Ching, Mark Jamzorbek, Vikramaditya Prakash, A Global History of Architecture, New Jersey: John Wileys and Sons. Inc., 2007.



Richard Copans, ‘Le Corbusier: The Cloister of La Tourette’, Architectures, Paris: Arte France, 2007.



William Curtis, Modern Architecture since 1900, London: Phaidon Press Inc., 1996.



David Macaulay, Life’s a Brute In a Fancy building, The Times Educational Supplement, 2262 (January 2002).



Jeremy Melvin, Understanding Architecture, London: Herbert Press, 2005.



Isamu Naguchi, ‘Uniting Tradition and Modernity: A Postwar Photographic Journey’, Grand Street, no. 72, (Autumn 2003).



Nikolai Ouroussoff, ‘Rethinking Postwar Design in London’, The New York Times, 19 March 2009.



Hugh Pearman, ‘Meet the Smithsons: separating the hype from reality. Should Alison and Peter Smithson have stuck to talking:’, Gabion, 2009 (accessed 25th April 2011) http://www.hughpearman.com/articles5/smithsons5.html

CHU SIN CHUNG Adrian 332874 MoMo to PoMo ABPL 30050 Final Essay George Stavrias Thursday 3.15‐4.15 Architecture 304

 Peter Serenyi, ‘Le Corbusier, Fourier, and the Monastery of Ema, The Art Bulletin, 49, no. 4 (December 1967).



Joanne Silberner, ‘Hiroshima and Nagasaki: Thirty Six Years Later, the Struggle Continues’, Science News, 120, no. 18, (October 1981).



Laurent Stalder, ‘‘New Brutailsm’ ‘Topology’ and ‘Image’: some remarks on the architectural debates in England since 1950’, The Journal of Architecture, 13, no. 3 (2008).



Anthony Studor, ‘A Bit of Rough: William Cook explains why brutalism, that most provocative assault on suburban sentiment, is now cherished again’, New Statesman, 131 no. 4592 (June 2002).



Nigel Whiteley, Modern Architecture, Heritage and Englishness, Architectural History, 30 (1995).