Brutalism: The Beauty of Rawness

If there is one architectural movement that continues to polarize, it is Brutalism. Often described as austere, raw, and unapologetically bold, Brutalism—rooted in the post-war years—challenged conventional ideas of beauty and embraced the unvarnished truth of materials and form. For many, it’s an acquired taste; for others, it’s a masterpiece of modernist design that refuses to conform.

A Movement Born of Necessity

Emerging in the mid-20th century, Brutalism—from the French term “béton brut” or “raw concrete”—was pioneered by architects like Le Corbusier, Alison and Peter Smithson, and Ernő Goldfinger. Its philosophy was grounded in function and honesty, favoring exposed concrete and straightforward designs over decorative elements.

The movement rose from the ashes of World War II, during a time when societies needed affordable housing and public infrastructure. Brutalist architects believed in creating buildings that served the people, emphasizing utility and community. Schools, government buildings, and housing projects became Brutalism’s canvas, each structure designed to embody strength and resilience.

Defining Characteristics

Brutalist buildings are instantly recognizable. Towering geometric forms, rough concrete textures, and a heavy, monumental presence define the style. Many designs prioritized practicality, with structures that included integrated public spaces, wide corridors, and open plazas to foster interaction.

Despite their uniform materials, these buildings exude a sculptural quality. From the intricate folds of Boston City Hall to the fortress-like Trellick Tower in London, Brutalist designs balance functionality with dramatic, often artistic expression.

A Love-It-Or-Hate-It Aesthetic

Critics of Brutalism decry it as oppressive, bleak, or even dystopian. In the 1980s and 90s, many Brutalist buildings faced demolition, dismissed as eyesores from a bygone era. But in recent years, there has been a resurgence of appreciation for the movement. Architects, designers, and preservationists now celebrate Brutalism’s unflinching honesty and its commitment to public purpose.

Part of this newfound love stems from nostalgia for its boldness in an age of increasingly homogeneous glass skyscrapers. Brutalist structures stand as defiant landmarks, unapologetically different from the sleek, polished surfaces of contemporary design.

Brutalism’s Influence and Legacy

Brutalism’s influence extends far beyond architecture. Its raw aesthetic has inspired graphic design, fashion, and even digital interfaces. The movement’s philosophy of embracing the authentic—rather than masking imperfections—resonates in today’s era of sustainable and ethical design.

Efforts to preserve Brutalist buildings have also gained momentum, with campaigns to save structures like the Marcel Breuer-designed Pirelli Tire Building or Alison and Peter Smithson’s Robin Hood Gardens. These efforts highlight the cultural and architectural significance of Brutalism as a movement that valued form and function equally.

A Reflection of Its Time

Brutalism remains a fascinating paradox. It is both celebrated and reviled, a style that embodies resilience and yet feels fragile in the face of demolition. For readers of MidMod, it’s an opportunity to reconsider how architecture—even in its most polarizing forms—reflects the needs, values, and aspirations of its era.

Explore more bold movements and their impact on modernist design in our upcoming blog posts. Stay tuned!