There’s the legacy of Brutalism being such a negative term. It begins the conversation with negativity about these buildings, and this falls into the misreading of them as harsh, Stalinist, or some other kind of monstrous, mean architecture. The name plays into that mischaracterization that’s grown around a lot of them. I think “Heroic’” is a better title for what their actual aspirations were. The architects had a real sense of optimism. They were developing architecture for the civic realm. — citylab.com
Related news on Archinect:
4 Comments
Words hurt, and sensitive modernists need a safe space.
So "heroic" it is. Anyone who persists in using the B-word will be called in to discuss the matter.
Maybe we need to categorize building and architecture as "Good Architecture" and "Bad Architecture". I think that would simplify things. Nobody cares about styles and periods in the real world.
^thats the kind of nuance the new media does not accept. Even this set up as you debate of the day ... Brutalism vs Heroic. A few years ago only archs that knew what it meant used the b word before idiot critics started parroting it in every blog.
"Nobody cares about styles and periods in the real world." Sure.
Block this user
Are you sure you want to block this user and hide all related comments throughout the site?
Archinect
This is your first comment on Archinect. Your comment will be visible once approved.