brutalism

Brutalism is an architectural style focused on the raw structural and material elements of a construction. Typically, buildings in this style are constructed from concrete, brick, and steel. There are no facades in brutalism.

Its emphasis on being raw makes it a particularly proud style. Brutalism has no dirty secrets; a brutalist building necessarily displays very crack every that forms and vine that grips.

Brutalist constructions are strong candidates being Kantian-ly sublime and beautiful, putting aside his preference for the natural.

Kant distinguishes the sublime from the beautiful and divides it into two: mathematical and dynamical. He describes the feeling of the sublime as a kind of pleasure from displeasure. The source of this displeasure is our natural inadequacies.

The mathematically sublime is a failing of our imagination and natural senses. Ex: to sense or imagine infinity.

The dynamically sublime is knowledge of our physical inferiority. Ex: to observe a terrifying cliff face.

Using our ability to reason, we can overcome these deficiencies. We can reason about things that would escape our capacity to imagine or sense, thus overcoming the mathematically sublime, as well as use reason to know that though we may be physically inferior, we are still in a position of safety in our simple observation, thus overcoming the dynamically sublime.

Without reason, we would succumb to our natural inadequacies. We would navigate our world both mindlessly and fearfully.

The case for brutalist structure being sublime should come easily: It tests our reason mathematically (large beyond perception) and dynamically (too many stairs + thoughts of catastrophic structural failure).

What bars brutalism from stepping into being called beautiful? I say there is no bar. Brutalism is beautiful.

Kant identifies four parts to a judgement of beauty. Here is a brief overview of each.

First Moment: A judgment of beauty is based on a feeling of pleasure without interest. Interest is one’s desire for an object (ex: desire to take a pretty flower home).

Second Moment: A judgment of beauty is universal. Any other that perceives the object ought to judge it to be beautiful.

Third Moment: A judgment of beauty does not presuppose an end, and only seemingly takes the form of having one.

Fourth Moment: A judgment of beauty is necessary. A beautiful object “possesses” beauty, but this perceived possession is an artifact of the human mind rather than an objective property.

I would say that under these criteria, many brutalist structures qualify as being beautiful. Kant cares only for the absolute structure and form of the object and its relation to our pleasure rather than sensation and things which are products of our sensibilities or biases (color, taste, morality, etc).

The horizon of the natural world only expands with each advancement scientific, ideological, or otherwise. And with each advancement, those on the cutting edge drag humanity into regions which pit our reason against our failing capacities. With each triumph, we numb our sensations to lesser experiences.

Overcoming the sublime and being greatly beyond it allows us to make judgments without sensation. And without sensation and other biases, we can make a true judgment of beauty.

What is sublime is what now tests our reason. What was sublime is what our reason has far surpassed. This is how the sublime becomes the beautiful.

With our current level of advancement, it makes sense that we have overcome what was seen as sublime. It is now common to see the two interchanged where they once were separated. We will continue to abstract from the natural world and so will continue to see beauty where we once were afraid.

Brutalism is beautiful, and I think Kant would have thought so, too.

Some brutalist favorites:
University Hall, UIC, Chicago.
Hill of the Buddha, Sapporo.
Boston City Hall, Boston.