The Failure of Brutalism: May It Rest in Eternal Torment...
For those who are unfamiliar with the term brutalism, here is a good example. One of the seven towers of the Harvist estate, Islington:
Spoiler Alert, click show to read:
Now, I could go into a rant about these monstrosities all day long. One looks at the progression of Architecture through the ages, and then suddenly one hits the 50s and 60s, and gets these aberrations coming up, with ignorant twerps like Harold Wilson making enlightening and wise comments like "we must pull down, the Georgian, the Victorian, the Edwardian, and replace them with great towers of concrete".
Now, I have never in my 48 years met an apologist for these structures. Even the proponents of modernist architecture wince when they see them. For not only do they irk the eyes, they were also built to only the very shoddiest standards. Ronan Point, for example. A gas explosion tore through it in '69, and it was discovered that the wall cavity, instead of being filled with concrete as stipulated in the plans, was filled with domestic refuse to cut costs. This is what we are dealing with here.
Spoiler Alert, click show to read:
I mean, look at the things! Yes, beauty is in the eye of the beholder, but does anyone see beauty in that^^?
Not to mention (and here comes the historical bit) the well-known social ramifications of growing up in such a structure. Growing up in a vicrorian two up two down with no plumbing or electrics is bad enough, but the unfortunate occupants of these sorry monsters had it far rougher. The gang/hood cultures that grew up around them were frightening. Of course, that does not mean everyone coming from them grew up maladjusted and wielding a combat knife, but social studies are unequivocal in their damning of these things.
Do they have any apologists? Does anyone want to defend them? If so, I suggest they have a bloody good argument...
Reply With Quote
Originally Posted by ClothedBarbarian
