Introduction
If we were to further define Brutalist architecture as a style, we’d eventually reach a dead end.
Most of the times, architectural styles are in direct cultural relation to its contemporary counterparts in art, literature and other mediums. Medieval literature written by authors like Goethe described actions that took place in medieval buildings such as fachwerk houses. Later on, the Age of Enlightenment gave us the all encompassing Renaissance movement with all its specific aesthetics and philosophy.
The 20th century has mostly been shaped by the Modern movement and its successors, postmodernism. The latter, being too recent, is followed by poststructuralist styles such as deconstructivism. We see these styles in literature, philosophy and in architecture, interior design and even product design.
On a span of several centuries, we notice a succession of cultural movements, followed by reactionary styles. The progression seems to be linear, causal, even time based.
Brutalism as an architectural style however does not follow this rule.
This article explores the what, the how and the why behind Brutalist architecture. In order to do so, we shall look at three consecutive historical contexts through three different perspectives.
What is Brutalist architecture?
I’ve read more than one definition of brutalist architecture. Brutalism unofficially has its origin in Neoclassical architecture. Some link it to Soviet architecture, others to Le Corbusier and the French term “bèton brut”. In the United States, architects Alison and Peter Smithson develop a style called New Brutalism. The two describe it as more than a particular aesthetic but a philosophy, a way of life.
The brute of Brutalism
Linked to Le Corbusier’s contribution to the Modern Movement, the name of Brutalism references the French term “bèton brut”. In this case, the tem does not necessarily describe the roughness of the material. It is linked to the sincere design gesture of leaving structural materials bare, visible to the eye. In reality, this is more than an aesthetic choice. Concrete structures are among the cheapest and quickest to build. Post War Europe was in desperate need of new urban housing, as quickly as possible.
Later on, through New Brutalism, architects proposed large scale urban housing with mixed use, meant to be the collective property of all its inhabitants. This case also requires low cost construction, and so the building material is yet again reinforced concrete. However, in order to make it more appealing, architects design bold sculptural shapes, repeated in obvious patterns.
The policies of the Brutalist Style
Referencing the scale and austerity of Neoclassicism, we see Brutalist architecture in Nazi Germany. There are built examples such as the Olympiastadion, a gigantic concrete structure built for the 1936 Olympic Games by Hitler’s regime. Another existing example is Palazzo della Civilta Italiana, built in the style of Italian Rationalism. The Palazzo is shaped like a perfect cube, with a repetitive facade composed of simplified archways. There are also unbuilt examples such as Albert Speer’s Germania, a gigantic project that reinterpreted Roman imperialist architecture.
After the Second World War, Soviet regimes were building entire cities at an intense rate in the style known as Socialist Realism. On the Western front, a group of architects, self-proclaimed Brutalists, began designing and writing during the 1960s and 1970s. While most of the Brutalist projects during that period were unbuilt utopias, there is one project that stands out. One project that comes to mind to anyone when thinking about Brutalism. This project is the Barbican – a mixed used residential complex built by the city. Originally leased to its inhabitants as social housing, its appeal was so great that it eventually started becoming privately owned during the 1980s. The commercial compromise of using concrete casted in unusual shapes had given even more aesthetic value to this utopic architectural style.
It’s interesting how so-called old Brutalism is linked to fascism while New Brutalism is linked to socialism. The policies switch to a complete opposite while the buildings stay the same. Ultimately, first generation Brutalist buildings seem to make individuals feel small as they appear to have been built by a higher, non-human entity.
You can do it too. Brutalist Style for interior design
While Brutalism represents more of an unbuilt utopia than an actual architectural style, there are several aesthetic elements we can use today. We can insert these in a Brutalist Style. The sincerity of leaving building materials bare, uncovered is a Brutalist gesture. The exposure of structural elements such as pillars, columns and beams, allowing them to participate in the interior design composition is also a Brutalist gesture. Finding the simplest, most effective solutions for physical aspects for shelving or cabinets is also a Brutalist gesture. Exaggerating structural elements in furniture, such as table legs or chair seats is also a Brutalist gesture. For specific Brutalist interior decorations, you can read my article here.
Most importantly, Brutalist interior design is not to be confused with industrial interior design. Industrial design is included in the Brutalist style. However, Brutalism doesn’t necessarily have to look industrial. While honesty, transparency and over stabilization point towards the elemental aspects of a building, the industrial look has a more theatrical, exaggerated approach. Industrial interior design reinterprets constructive elements while Brutalist interior design only enhances it.
In conclusion, if you aim to design a Brutalist interior, just be honest. Offer stability. And don’t forget to be a little theatrical in the most simple gestures, making sure the users notice them.