THE BRUTALISM

EUROPEAN BRUTALIST BUILDINGS

Harsh Prajapati, UA2617

Introduction:

The end of World War II and the destruction of many buildings brought about a wave of
changes in the design and concepts of new architecture throughout europe and britain. The
early 1950s design of le corbusier’s unite D’habitation became known for the use of raw
concrete which is described in his book Beton brut.

After the second world war, there were two countries which were needed to reformed
architecture like england and japan , to develop public housing which would be more cheap,
rational housing and commercial development and take them to the futurist and modern style
, so there was an emergence of brutalist architecture as a part of modern architecture .

In 1923, before the second world war Corbusier had mentioned the artistic expression of raw
concrete in his book beton brut . in early 50s to 80s brutalism was considered in many
different way in different countries by their architects but largely brutalism depends on three
aspects: physical setting , contextual setting and social setting and aesthetic architectural
reason.

Before the world war corbusier was considering a brutal as in terms of it’s heroic scale ,
social respond and and it’s physical expression and after unite D’habitation which was post
war building , he makes massive pilotis which was structural elements out of concrete
casted , he felt that architecture is something that which makes magnitude ruins(echoes).
materials are used as a corbusier ideology , bare or natural use of material as they were at
that particular time his postwar building. Corbusier was looking at characteristic of material
as an aesthetic outcome and also material source will be depended on the context and it’s
industrialisation position at that time.
Even before the world war 2 corbusier was used to describe a brutal word as “building as
machine” ,because brutal building has very natural (in terms of material) expression and
unindustrialised (available used material because it’s shortage) and monolithic aesthetic
architectural style. Here he was looking on joints and junctions part which makes him feel
like machine within communal living.

Mies van deh roh’s ideology on material was: purism , mies takes the element in a piece of
building and set them together such as whole assembled expression will be a very harsh
aesthetic due to steel (post war available material). the freedom of the formalism makes
mies’s structure expression will be very pure , light and unconcealed. Most surprising thing
was the way he was used to handle material like glass,steel, brick and it’s complex assembly
in every junctions expressed that how two walls meets.

Brutalism was seen as a being an ethic entity more than an aesthetic architectural style.

During formalism 1953, parallel the life and art smithson gave a definition for brutalism that
:brutalism as having: memorable as image, exhibition of structure and valuation of materials.

(jackson, 1970)

Alison and Peter Smithson assemble the standard section, detail in a very understandment and
pure way of using material which mies has done very complex way.

After the next two decades after the introduction of the new brutalism, the style spread
through England and in particular London. By the 70s it was everywhere and seen in most
typologies: social housing, public housing, theatres, galleries, universities campus , and
libraries. The term brutalist became vaguer in meaning and less specific to the exact theories
given by the Smithson nad banhams.this term referring to a broad category of buildings
featuring a mostly raw concrete finishes with imprints of the tiber used formwork after
pouring and other textured also.and some oversized building elements or showcased
mechanical features like ventilation tower.

PHYSICAL SETTING:

Building are having massive structural forms and its expression, expression through materials
, simple construction techniques by use of natural material which are the subdivision of
physical setting of brutalist buildings which stand as a memorable sculpture in the
surrounding context.

CONTEXTUAL SETTING:

The context where building is going to be built would have been affected by industrialization.
there was a material shortage after post world war2 and pre industrialization .so architect did
have to designed by material availability.

SOCIAL RESPONSE:

After the post world war , there was a need of good and reliable living space in europe , so
designed as a complete environment for a human being , children play area , meeting room
and all large scale sociability. And most important, creating a housing for people affected by
the war.

CHARACTERISTIC EXPRESSION:

Each brutal building has some characteristic because the use of material or the way material
has been used or the expression and its impact of it’s well composed facade which led our
movement or journey in certain narrative, and that style which makes it aesthetic and that
would be the main attribute of the brutalist buildings.

However brutalism would be redefined by the later architecte , and the approach towards
brutalism was not so clear because of different aesthetic definition.as a result, many buildings
which would be classified as a brutalist were simply based on exposed material and structure,
without understanding the idea and principle which was given by smithson.

There are 5 buildings which fall under brutalist building as per corbusier, mies van de rohe,
and alison and peter smithson’s ideology for better and good social living which are
aesthetically designed ( how architecture can change the whole scenario) after world war 2.

1.Unite D’habitation

2.Hunstanton modern school

3.Illinois institute of technology

4.Sainte-marie de la tourette

5.Robin hood garden

Unite D’Habitation:

Location: Marseille ,berlin

Architect: le Corbusier

Le Corbusier built his first unit habitation in the city of Marseilles between 1946 and 1952 ,
approximately after a decade of no realised project. There were 1800 people , who were
supposed to occupied , this number was believed by Corbusier for mini society.It is 18 storey,
23 containing dwelling and all types of amenities along interior street , and some on the roof ,
shopping centre, laundrette , pharmacy, barber shop, post office , hotels and snacks bars.
Corbusier believed that this type of facilities should be contained for peaceful dwelling after
second wold war.

(harwood, 1975)

This new post war housing based on his some older theories before the war , for example
utilising the modular system of human scale, resting a building on a pilots so that the ground
can be used for circulation , greenery and traffic , or using a roof as if it were a new ground
level.

(harwood, 1975)

Pilots were bulkier and more expressive in form, which was sculpturally echoed in the body
of ventilation chimneys on the roof and it’s also confirming the idea of machine for living in -
by its expressive elements. this building offers the best expression of the artistic intuition. So
there is an imperfect workmanship of the concrete on the roof, chimney, parapet and stairs.
This flawed workmanship takes some similar artistic value in its physical character.

Le Corbusier ended up using more concrete than originally required, because the post war
steel shortage ( unindustrialisation),and it will also serve the ideology of using natural
material like concrete to being modern. Challenge was to design as availability of material at
it’s contextual industrialization.

Figure:1 rain forced concrete piloties Figure : 2 cubical form or sculpture

So this art work generated by construction and after completing the pouring , building was
seen as a gigantic sculpture in the landscape. And the form of the building is not working as a
functions which are given to these functions, double height is not clearly appeared and central
lobby which separated from front and back elevation. Beton brut term which is used for this
building due to the construction error but that was inspirational for corbusier.

(curtis, 1900)

The section of each apartment has a double height space , a terrace and is interlocked with the
opposite apartment over three equal floor, separated by central corridor from which
apartment can be accessed.

Figure : 3 variation of volumes from inside Figure : 4 one cubic form from outside
Hunstanton school

Architect: Alison and peter smith son

Location: Norfolk

Two year after the unit habitation , peter and Alison Smithson designed the Hunstanton
school in Norfolk 1949 to 1954, the later buildings prove the term , it is the first example to
explicitly be labelled new brutalism. The building designed as part of competition.

The whole building made out of steel which gives a clear indication of stylistic. Building
facade seems like it has been bounded. The building is symmetrical and neat and unarguable
corners. The central multi purpose hall is placed across the shorter axis and is flanked by two
open light courts . the rest of accommodation - service room, heavy and dirty areas, on the
ground floor , classrooms on the floor above .the symmetry of the plan and elevation pattern ,
should not be seen as major architectural objectiveness of the design

(jackson, 1970)

The floors and roof slab are built up of precast concrete slab and these are left as exposed
concrete on the underside. Walls that are brick on the outside are brick on the inside , fair
faced on both sides.

Figure : 5 formal organisation of spaces Figure : 6 steel framed structure

Mies builds up complex and light junction one side , wherever one stands within the school
one sees its actual structural material exposed, without plaster . The electrical , pipe-runs and
other are exposed with equal frankness. On one side , wherever one stands within the school
one sees its actual structural material exposed, without plaster which shows the post war
harsh expression. . The electrical , pipe-runs and other are exposed with equal frankness.
smithson assemble their standard section with a conspicuous understatement. This building is
having very pure and formal plan and material which he has used as an exposed , building
looks like a machine object which is resolving old style into modern aesthetic style.
(banham, 1966)

The design of the school Was inspired by le Corbusier idea of leaving all the materials bare
and the purism of mies van de rohe’s Illinois’s school where every element are shown as they
really were. The result is a building with a linear structure , light structure of glass and
unconcealed structures and materials : steel girder in the interior and brick wall on the
outside. On one side , wherever one stands within the school one sees its actual structural
material exposed, without plaster . The electrical , pipe-runs and other are exposed physically
with equal frankness.

Figure: 7 exposed services

The lack of refinement in construction might have not been as for le Corbusier for a visual
proposal, but rather a lack of funds, material and knowledge. The use of raw material by the
smithson was also to reflect the harsh expression of that particular context’s industrialization
after post war II.
Robin hood garden:

Architect: Alison and peter smith son

Location: London

In 1966, after a decade of no built projects, the smithson as a part pf lcc of architect, were
briefed to design public housing on the site which is surrounded by busy streets , the black
wall tunnel and the industrial buildings near the river Thames. Using housing ideas they had
previously explored in their golden lane design as well as berlin.

They produced a logical response to the harsh context of site, such as separated pedestrian
access above ground and vehicular access situated on a mote lowered into the ground , from
the outside. The noise and population of the busy surroundings were to be kept out with help
of trees and high acoustic wall concavely shaped , with angled gaps breaking apart overpower
feeling the walls may impose on a passer by. A similar rhythmic presence of fins around
window on each facade supposedly also reduced the noise which gets into the housing unit.

(harwood, 1975)

Figure : 8 compact housing

Figure : 9 inside and outside disconnection

Which is showing a better and peaceful and safe living environment(social respond) for
people after second world war. Consideration was put into the placement of the decks and the
living rooms as they were on the side of the traffic and the quiet side facing the secluded
garden was reserved for the bedrooms.

There were 214 dwellings, spread over two meandering block with continuous facade,
dictated by the shape of the existing site and split like a kipper. The two long blocks with
their walkways were supposed to encourage a sense of community and enclosed space with
the garden and mound in the middle was designed with families and children in mind.it lose
the intention of controlling the noise on site.

(harwood, 1975)

Figure : 10 two blocks act as a barrier

The Smithson introducing this scheme as an example of a new urban organisation, with a
vision of giving the working class a new habitat .it was hoped that with their years of research
and conclusions , the attention to detail which they put into the house would improve the
quality of life and turn produce a peaceful society.

(harwood, 1975)
Illinois institute of technology:

Architect: Mies van de rohe

Location: USA

Mies van der rohe Here the presence of beton brut and other naturally surfaced materials, this
puritanical exercise in the assembly of highly unfinished synthetic materials such as glass and
steel, the technological materials may seem a surprising beginning. Mies van der rohe had
made of steel, glass and brick in the campus building for the illusion in university. Steel had
been ringing in the ears of modern architects from the time of futurist onwards, made
manifest to the eyes in modern architecture.apart from glazing bars, visible steel and visible
structural steel above all had been restricted to a few specialised settings.

(banham, 1966)

In his building the frame is exposed and gives an outline of the grammar of a visible steel
framing. Mies has been succeeded from not as an abstract idea of structural stiffness but as a
real substance having a surface, substance and character of its own. Steel is not made visible,
but the manner of its assembly is made manifest. Mies takes the elements in a piece of
building, and sets them together in a manner that is most characteristic of themselves and in
this position they make space sand architecture.

Figure : 11 complex steel junction Figure ; 12 mass organisation seems like a urban organisation

The time when it was built , the building was surrounded by rural area ,there was no any
development of urban planning, so this building it self served an organisation as it was an
urban city plan to allow the surrounding area to develop . so by using steel (which was
available in that context at that time) in a very complex way of assembly (by welding ) it
made us to feel the harshness material and after post world war period unindustrialised
country.

Sainte-Marie de la Tourette:

Architect :

Location :

This is the one of the examples which have adopted the brutalism , but not the smithson’s
philosophy behind is le Corbusier’s philosophy. It demonstrate the sign of brutalism :
unfinished concrete and a clear exhibition of structures .this new brutal language that le
Corbusier was now using as a reaction against the machine - he was indicating the machine in
his earlier works, he was distraught by the destruction of world war 2 and wanted to move
back to more natural, unindustrialised, monolithic architecture.

(curtis, 1900)

The building appears to be really heavy and massive. The structural frame and walls are
made out of raw concrete , and the openings are seemingly punched into the walls so as not to
break the solid composition of the building. Glass is also fixed directly onto the concrete
without any framing between concrete and glass. The concrete block above the windows of
the corridor , seems like they are supporting the concrete mass above, which is the impression
of heaviness.
Figure : 13 central courtyard which is surrounded by Figure : 14 building responding to ground
functions

This massive crude structure is fixed into the rural landscape by cut into the ground , so this
expression of sculpture itself is another contextual respond and physically responded by it’s
form.

This can be the example of organisation of community center and living center with in same
building. But mostly it depends on its aesthetic architectural style and physically and
contextually response.

Conclusion :

Over the years brutalist architecture has experienced various points of high and low . after the
critiques in the 1980s , with increased theoretical education, prioritisation of sustainability in
light of climate change , and accordingly , an increased respect towards the practice of
conservation , the early 2000 saw a change in attitudes towards the brutalist style of
architecture , suddenly many younge architects and historians developed an appreciation this
architecture which they had seen around them growing up after second world war .

Brutalism was the first step of towards modern architecture , there were many problems in the
1950-80 when brutalism has been started , but for the peaceful , safe social housing,
industrialisation and provide a job and these needs of post world war has developed brutalism
in all over wold .

Bibliography
banham, R. (1966). the new brutalism , ehic or aeshthetic? london.

curtis, w. (1900). modern architecture. architectural press.

harwood, e. (1975). space,hope and brutalism : english architecture. london: yale university press.

jackson, a. (1970). the politics of architecture: a history of modern architecture in britain. london:
architectural press.

Figure : 1 (banham, 1966)

Figure : 2 (banham, 1966)

Figure : 3
https://www.google.com/search?q=unite+habitation+marseille+corbusier&rlz=1C1CHBF_en
&source=lnms&tbm=isch&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwiQ357X7ODkAhW673MBHQOiCckQ_A
UIEigB&biw=1536&bih=722&dpr=1.25#imgrc=bCnbMRZtBsamsM:

Figure : 4 (banham, 1966)

Figure : 5 (harwood, 1975)

Figure : 6 (banham, 1966)

Figure : 7 (banham, 1966)

Figure : 8 (harwood, 1975)

Figure : 9 (harwood, 1975)

Figure : 10 (harwood, 1975)

Figure : 11 (banham, 1966)

Figure : 12 (banham, 1966)

Figure : 13 (curtis, 1900)

Figure : 14 (curtis, 1900)