Brutalism in the UK

Jul 2010

By andyspain — Filed under: Architectural Photography , Brutalism, UK

Brutalism is the term coined to describe the raw architecture often made with concrete during the 1950s and 1960s (with a later resurgence). I’m an architectural photographer and my fascination with these concrete buildings has led to me document a number of them across the UK (an on-going project).

When you go into a gallery a painting might cause you to stop and look, it isn’t the spectacle but the aesthetics ability to hold the viewer. Concrete buildings have this ability. They don’t fit into the streets and city centres where they appear (they are by their very nature brutal rather than accommodating) but there strength and power speak of a time when people had a belief in architecture as a force for civic good. These structures were solid spaces to create a solid and strong world emerging from the gloom of the second world war. The buildings represent what was great about building a society, universities, hospitals, local governments as opposed to the steel and glass of contemporary retail and office complexes. These buildings were about real people and real issues and they wore this realism brutally on the outside.

But it’s more than that. The form is itself appealing (beyond what that form represents). Simplicity in architecture is rare and to strip back so much of the adornments and leave the bare walls is somehow sensual, the opposite of what so many critics claim. The way lines are created and cut against the sky or interact with other buildings. The regularity of shape and form caused by the shutter process of creating the concrete, the ability to go up to the building and feel the roughness of the concrete matching and creating an indexical link with the way the building was made.

Sometimes a book is hard to read or a film is hard to watch but by completing it you know it was something important and worthwhile which deserved your perseverance. These buildings also deserve your perseverance. They are evidence of a modernism, a time when we didn’t dress up architecture but left it cold and honest for all to see.

You can see some more of my photographs in here.

Comments (16)
Tweets (63)
Links to this entry (5)

-3

Hidden due to low comment rating. Click here to see.

-2

MIESOSOUP says:

OK WELL YOU DONT LIKE BRUTALISM BECAUSE YOU ASSOCIATE IT WITH A POLITICAL IDEOLOGY : COMMUNISM. MAYBE PEOPLE IN BRITAIN DON’T HATE IT BECAUSE THEY NEVER HAD TO EXPERIENCE THE TRAUMA OF COMMUNISM THAT IS ASSOCIATED WITH COMMIE BLOCKS. ON TOP OF WHICH: IN EX-COMMIE COUNTRIES everything WAS “BRUTAL” AND CONCRETE AND HARSH BUT I’M SURE IN ENGLAND THESE BUILDINGS COME IN SMALLER DOSES

# July 29, 2010 at 14:12

GH says:

Some of these are actually pretty awesome. Others are just plain ugly.

In Germany, the concrete industry in the 80s and 90s used to advertise with the slogan: “Beton. Es kommt drauf an, was man draus macht.” (“Concrete. It depends on what you do with it.”) After reviewing these photos, I couldn’t agree more.

# July 29, 2010 at 16:49

Albert says:

Great remarks indeed.

# July 29, 2010 at 22:02

rarespa says:

Hey.

Brutalism is indeed an outdated architectural style… I live in an comunist cuountry and most of the buildings constructed in behalf of the state where made in a very poor brutalist manner, and the style is usualy associated with: dislike of the aristocratic means, poor materials, built after hysorical buildings where forcibly demolished …etc.

but then again we have to thank the brutalist architects for creating a style that inflicted in younger designers the need of a better architecture: deconstructivism

also the pictures are quite very nice.. i like the lines. On some, did u use a tilt and shift lens?

chhers.

# July 29, 2010 at 16:59

Benjamin says:

Brutalism is a winner.

# July 29, 2010 at 18:26

Josh says:

I live in London and have seen some of these buildings. In real life, these brutalist buildings don’t look anything as appealing as these gorgeous, artfully composed black and white photographs.

You might argue that stopping to look at a building through an artist’s eye reveals a beauty you may not have noticed before.

To me though, Brutalist architecture represents the architectural ideal of “truth to materials” taken to the extreme. The result is not an elegant or appealing simplicity, but buildings that are cold and unfriendly, and often ugly too.

# July 29, 2010 at 18:31

Personally I hate brutalism. But your writing is so elaborate and sincere and photos are so stylish and professional that I might re-consider… Just joking, but it is always a pleasure to see beautiful work even on the topic which is not so close to your heart. Thanks for the images… Gorgeous indeed. Way better than reality.

# July 29, 2010 at 22:00

Token of time says:

I think good brutalist architecture is possible. Like some Kahn and Ando buildings, or Le Corbusier. So I think It’s not the style’s fault.

# July 30, 2010 at 04:45

jdcarling says:

Personal note: why do I love brutalism so much, when I know the chances of a client ever wanting something like that again are so slim…. Heres to hoping.

# July 30, 2010 at 08:44

trewz.com says:

So that’s what it’s called Brutalism, I love the barbican centre, is that classed in the same category right?

# July 30, 2010 at 11:24

tDA says:

Interesting to hear how political experience can shape ones view of architecture. If i grew up under the oppressive weight of Communism i might not feel the way i do..
I personally love the visual strength and unapologetic boldness of brutalism. Tadao Ando is an excellent example Token had brought up of a modern master that demands perfection from his concrete finishers to create surfaces that could never be fairly compared with that of cold-war era infrastructure.
Closer to home, Arthur Erickson has shaped my view of architecture with a couple diverse examples: His Macmillan Bloedel building in downtown Vancouver is classic brutalism and the Museum Anthropology could be considered an example of a more elegant, west-coast brutalism.

# July 30, 2010 at 11:26

Hampton says:

I’ve always loved Brutalist architecture. Perception and taste are subjective…these comments remind us of that much.

As an architect I can’t tell you how many times I’ve heard clients describe concrete as ‘ugly’, and yet our architecture magazines cherish the raw, earthy, sensual concrete walls of many projects (Ando, et. al.).

Just as there is often a disconnect b/w ‘popular’ and ‘professional’ taste, there’s often disagreement b/w professionals as to what constitutes good desgin.

# July 30, 2010 at 12:33

Béton brut says:

You should stop by this place if you visit Oslo, -office of ministry:

http://blogg.nrk.no/byen/files/2009/09/Y-blokka_38max-500×333.jpg

Carl Nesjar developet a method of modelling a relieff in the surface of the concrete, this made architect Erling Viksjø and Pablo Picasso go bananacake..

Otherwise its pretty much a blueprint of Le Corbusier siteplan for the United Nations Headquarters, -a good one.

Another good norwegian, in venice:
http://www.flickr.com/photos/seier/2987840608/in/photostream/

# July 30, 2010 at 18:23

emerson says: