|
|
|
|
|
by hosh
803 days ago
|
|
I think Christopher Alexander has some good arguments that modern “functional” architecture is the least functional of all. So while the stated aim is to be functional without ornaments, instead, it lays bare how irrelevant the human experience is, in the name of supposed functionality. I don’t really see that site as really brutalism even in this sense. If anything, it hews a lot closer to the Small Web, such as what one might find in Gemini space. |
|
But this is a bit of a charicature of brutalism. In reality it does consider human experience, but it perhaps values different aspects of it. Brutalist paces are built to facilitate flows of people, to make it easy to get done what you need to. But it is also a reaction to traditional architecture styles which carries with them a lot of baggage: often certain social structures such as stratification, empire, patriarchy, racial inequality, etc. When we consider brutalism as an act of opposition to these, the humanistic intent behind it shines through, even though it make the building no more appealing.
Brutalist spaces can in my opinion be welcoming and inviting if furnished correctly. To me they have a nostalgic and hopeful connotation because I walked through them growing up. Nowadays they're a refreshing change from the kind of corporate glass and plastered concrete spaces of today.