Possible abstract
The Second World War revealed the raw and brutal truth about human nature. Hundreds of millions of lives were unjustly ended and disrupted due to fanaticism, opportunism and a sheer disregard for one’s fellow human life. But, within these horrors were also acts of extraordinary compassion, remarkable selflessness and unwavering resilience. As the dust settled, London, the once-great capital of a British Empire now in its final throes, found itself decimated into rubble facing the mammoth task of reconstruction within a cultural and historical context that has been forever altered.
One of the most lasting remnants of New Brutalism are the social housing estates built in the wake of the destruction of the War. In 1956, in the midst of this reconstruction, architects Alison and Peter Smithson who had been gaining prominence due to their then-recently completed design of the Smithdon High School, were again turning heads with their House of the Future exhibition. The model home showcased their boldly optimistic re-imagining of the Post-War domestic space. More importantly, it reveals their aspiration of architecture and technology being integrated and utilized to improve society by catering to every human need and want. This intent echoes their unsuccessful 1952 bid for the Golden Lane Estate. Sited on a plot devastated by the Blitz, the Smithsons proposed to incorporate the existing ruins into the large scale mass housing project. Rather than treating housing as an isolated fragment, ’streets in the air’ would integrate the housing estate and its residents into the city’s socio-cultural fabric. Soon, they would find a chance to bring their vision into life.
In accordance to the New Brutalist ethos, the Smithsons’ Robinhood Gardens sought to regenerate the community of its bombed-ravaged site. In their ‘Urban Re-identification Grid’, the Smithsons deconstructed urban living into more comprehensible scales: city, district, street, house. To them, successful urban communities arise from a network of spaces that support social and community interaction at each scale. Indeed, this intent is evident throughout the Robinhood Gardens. A ‘moat’ was created by placing parking below ground level segregating pedestrian and vehicular circulation to allow for a safer, quieter walking environment. The distinctive, landscaped mound placed at the center of the park between the two blocks of the estate pin a relatable identity for the community whilst providing an enjoyable amenity. ‘Streets in the air’ or elevated walkways that run along the length of the building did not only provide access to individual apartments, but was envisioned as a social space where community life could flourish; mimicking the role of traditional streets. However, this intent has also become its main criticism. People of lower socio-economic backgrounds are more vulnerable to crime, and the openness of the Robinhood Gardens left its residents feeling even more exposed. Nonetheless, the enduring impact of New Brutalism cannot be denied as its humanist ethic truly transformed architecture; advocating it as a powerful force that could uplift its wider community.
Possible list of sources
Banham, Reyner. 1966. The New Brutalism. London: Architectural Press.
Bullock, Nicholas. 2002. Building the Post-War World: Modern Architecture and Reconstruction in Britain. New York: Routledge.
Clement, Alexander. 2018. Brutalism: Post-War British Architecture. Marlborough: The Crowood Press.
Crinson, Mark. 2018. Alison and Peter Smithson. Swindon: Historic England.
Gindrod, John. 2018. “Brutal Ethic or Aesthetic? The Moral Case for Brutalism.” In How to Love Brutalism. London: Batsford.
Grindrod, John. 2014. Concretopia : A Journey around the Rebuilding of Postwar Britian. Brecon: Old Street.
Harwood, Elain. 2015. Space, Hope and Brutalism: English Architecture, 1945-1975. New Haven: Yale University Press.
HIggot, Andrew. 2007. “Making It New: The Discourses of Architecture and Modernism in Britain.” University of East London.
Henley, Simon. 2017. Redefining Brutalism. Newcastle Upon Tyne: Riba Publishing.
Huevel, Dirk van den, and Max Risselada. 2004. Alison and Peter Smithson – from the House of the Future to a House of Today. Rotterdam: 010 Publishers.
Highmore, Ben. 2017. “Building on Ruins.” In The Art of Brutalism : Rescuing Hope from Catastrophe in 1950s Britain. New Haven: Yale University Press.
Hill, Jonathan. 2013. “Ambiguous Objects: Modernism, Brutalism, and Politics of the Picturesque.” In The Politics of Making. New York: Routledge.
Hopkins, Owen. 2017.
“Ambitions and Ideals.” In Lost Futures: The Disappearing Architecture of Post-War Britain. London: Royal Academy of Arts.
Johnston, Pamela, Rosa Ainley, and Claire Barrett. 2003.
Architecture Is Not Made with the Brain : The Labour of Allison and Peter Smithson. London: Architectural Association.
Risselada, Max, Alison Smithson, and Peter Smithson. 2011. Alison & Peter Smithson : A Critical Anthology. Barcelona: Ediciones Polígrafa.
Schneider, Katherine. 2020. “Postwar British Fictions of Inhabitation.” University of Cambridge.
Smithson, Alison and Peter Smithson. 2002. The Charged Void: Architecture. New York: Monacelli Press
Thoburn, Nicholas. 2022. Brutalism as Found : Housing, Form, and Crisis at Robin Hood Gardens. London: Goldsmith Press.
