A Comparative Critique: Brutalism vs Modernism

Jan 20, 2017 | Publisher: CharlesHill2 | Category: Home & DIY |   | Views: 19 | Likes: 2

A Comparative Critique: Brutalism vs Modernism Uber Doors Brutalism is one of the 20th century’s provocative movements in architecture for its massive concreteness – a stance many experts look at as a criticism. Today, the architectural style has seen a revival of sorts for its raw appeal and socialist ideologies. Modernism, on the other hand, is the most significant of architectural philosophies during the same century for a slew of reasons. The analytical approach on functionality, reasonable use of materials, openness to structural innovation, and discarding of ornaments are the important facets of the modernist movement. Function: Where Architectural Movements Intersect What distinguishes the difference between the two movements of the era is how certain experts in the field determine brutalism as somewhat derivative of post- war modernism. While many believe that the former is a distinct architectural style all on its own, others see it as a categorical subtype of the latter. Despite these declared demarcations, both styles subscribe to the same binding notion. The fundamental principle that Louis Sullivan promotes, “Form remains secondary to function,” is present in both styles. b A Consideration of Style Elements Le Corbusier, who identifies with the modernist movement, became the eventual master of brutalism. His 1952 Unite d’Habitation in Marseille, France is an example of breton brut characterizing a structure of relentlessness. The rawness in rough-cast concrete serves as the response to the concept of low- cost “vertical garden cities.” In addition, the use of bold colors fashions a sense of harmony into the structure. The specificities of brutalism made itself apparent in a number of public housing schemes, impacting the post-war architecture of Britain. Modernist architecture, though, manifests itself in the Barcelona Pavilion building by Mies van der Rohe. Its construction of simplistic planes of stone juxtaposed against slim, polished steel cruciform columns is seamlessly conjoined. It exhibits asymmetrical composition, cubic and cylindrical shapes, a combination of metal and glass in its framework, as well as a white and cream rendering – the characterization of modernism’s style. The two movements have made so much of an impact on architecture that there are elements from both styles that have transcended into today’s prevailing designs. The bareness in brutalist structures resonates in the popularity of steel interior doors, which are often part of commercial properties because of its simplicity and efficiency. Meanwhile, modernism’s openness, functionality, and minimalism can be seen in innovative structures. Resources: http://www.uberdoors.com/store/interior-doors/commercial-steel-interior- doors.html https://www.dezeen.com/2014/09/10/dezeen-guide-to-brutalist-architecture- owen-hopkins/ https://www.architecture.com/Explore/ArchitecturalStyles/Modernism.aspx

Brutalism is one of the 20th century’s provocative movements in architecture for its massive concreteness – a stance many experts look at as a criticism.


Modal Header

Modal body