Skip to main content
Loading Explore guides…
Brutalist Architecture Psychology · Acedra
Home
Explore
Psychology
Brutalist Architecture Psychology
Sign in to save
Chat
If YouTube asks you to sign in, open the video on YouTube.
Watch on YouTube
Reload player
Transcript
45 segments
Copy
Hide video
0:00
So...The Brutalist... Multiple Oscar nominations... But a lot of people didn't really like it. How dare you? Most of you said something along the lines of “misery porn, masquerading as something deep”. But even Vulture called it “bloated & self-important” “and packed with prestige cinema cliches” “like the Holocaust... “drug addiction, disability, sexual violence, postwar angst.” This is not friendly. But this time, I really have to disagree, and I felt like it was my duty
0:32
as an architect to make this video. Because for the very first time in Hollywood, the brutalist manages to capture something that they never quite get right, which is the psychology of an architect... ...and just how truly messed up we are. But first I want to give you guys a little bit of context. And this is actually going to be kind of hard for me. Architecture is a cult. Architecture departments were called “light houses on the campus”.
1:01
because studios were always full, like, whether it was day or night. And people would literally bring their sleeping bags to studio. My personal record for an all nighter is four nights in a row.
1:15
Yeah. But the really sick thing is, deep inside, you actually kind of love it. So there's something about architecture that drives people to sacrifice everything. What is that?
1:30
Perfect. It will be beautiful. So there's multiple scenes throughout the movie where the main character, Laszlo, goes out of his way to offend someone about how something is not very beautiful. They are not very beautiful. Over and over again, he's expressing a kind of hostility for ugliness. Everything that is, ugly. Cruel. Stupid. But most importantly, ugly. Is your fault. but some of you might be saying: “Well, brutalist buildings aren't that beautiful.”
2:08
So what does beauty mean to someone like Laszlo Toth? Is there a better description of a cube than that of its construction? And that was Laszlo's answer. When Van Buren, the client, asks him why he became an architect. I find our conversations intellectually stimulating. He's saying no description of a cube will ever come close to conveying the truth of the cube. the best and most accurate description is the materials, the structure and the function of the cube itself.
2:42
So what's important for Laszlo is the truth. And I'm going to explain this a little bit more in depth. But first I think it's helpful for you to understand the context, Because this way of thinking is consistent with a group of architects of a certain time. Especially these guys.
3:03
The most direct inspiration for this character is probably Marcel Breuer. he was born in Hungary, and he was one of the key figures of the Bauhaus movement. Where did you study? Bauhaus. The Bauhaus was a school founded in 1919 by the architect Walter Gropius. And it was very revolutionary for that time. It was this reaction to excessive ornamentation and historicism from styles like Art Nouveau and Beaux-Arts, which people were starting to feel was kind of stuffy.
3:33
Bauhaus embrace the spirit of the industrial era by merging craftsmanship with modern manufacturing. And they use clean lines made with steel and glass and concrete. And Marcel Breuer’s Wassily Chair, It really embodied this ideal of form follows function. You know there's nothing in this chair that does not serve a specific purpose. he's taken away all the unnecessary components of a chair and stripped it down to its bare essentials, to the steel frame structure and the fabric.
4:08
And yet it's incredibly proportionate and balanced and beautiful. But Bauhaus wasn't really just about esthetics. It was this utopian vision for the world with this new way of thinking and new way of making things. Beauty could be accessible to everyone, not just the elite. And they believed that design could help create a more equal and human society. And this made them a political target. And Nazi Germany. So it was shut down in 1933. And a lot of the main figures, like Mies Van Der Rohe
4:42
and Marcel Breuer, were forced to flee to America. And this is when his style changed into Brutalism.
4:54
The name of the movie is “The Brutalist” not Bauhaus. So when these architects arrived in the States in the 30s and 40s, America was just recovering from the Great Depression and entering into World War II. And so steel and glass were mostly redirected for the war, and it was very expensive. So architects were forced to start experimenting with concrete. But it was actually after the war that construction really exploded. Millions of returning veterans.
5:25
They needed housing and also places where they could get educated. So universities. So they needed a building method that was cheap and fast. And at the same time, there was this desire for stability and permanence in a time of postwar anxiety. So these raw concrete structures, it was both the pragmatic and symbolic and esthetic choice, because concrete does have a monumentality. But steel and glass just doesn't. I remember the very first time visiting the Whitney Museum by Marcel Breuer,
6:03
and you can feel the mass and weight of the structure just hovering over you. And for the brutalist, this was beautiful. But you might be saying, wait, wait wait wait wait wait. How can this be beautiful? Brutalism is, in fact, one of the most hated architectural styles in the world by the general public. What do you think about the gymnasium? being off the off the side like that? - I'm not sure.
6:30
I think it looks like a barracks. Less. Perhaps because you never enlisted Harry. and yet very much loved by the architect who made them. There's probably no other architectural style in the history of architecture, where there was such a huge misalignment between the vision of beauty from the architect and the public. But you know what they say... Beauty is in the eye of the beholder. Tastes change, public opinion changes. But when you build something that is true by stripping the building
7:03
to its raw essentials and removing all of the ornaments that's made to please the eye, then the idea is that the building would not be subject to the superficial changes of people's tastes, and it could stand the test of time. There's this great quote by the architect Moshe Safdie that really captures this idea. I had this in the cover of my first year portfolio, by the way. And it goes like this:
7:32
“He who seeks beauty shall find vanity.” “He who seeks order shall find gratification.” “He who seeks gratification shall be disappointed.” “He who seeks truth shall find beauty.”
7:51
As a creator who's also an architect, I can be a little bit of a control freak when it comes to design. Especially web design. And that brings me to today's sponsor,Framer. Right now we're in the process of redesigning our website, and we've hired web designers. But I just found it very limiting because in the end, I just want to be able to play around and see the design for myself. So using Framer has been a game changer.
8:20
Framework gives you full creative control while supporting modern features like Lottie Animations, Reactive Forms and CMS and API integration. And the best part is no coding required. It's actually super fun to use here. I'm using the Figma plugin to turn my design into a web page. One of my favorite features is a variable fonts with slider controls to fine tune great and slant and weight, and you can even animate them, Framer also lets you create scrolling animations
8:53
or slide effects, and they're constantly adding new features. So if you're like me and you like to have a little bit more control with the design of your website or portfolio, you can sign up for free using the link below. And if you want access to advanced features, you can use my discount code for a 25% discount. And it's totally worth it.
9:25
This is one of my favorite scenes. It's eerie and beautiful, and it really explains why architects are so obsessed with this concept of material honesty. I think whether we like it or not, architects have this belief that materials have a soul, that they're more than just objects. That they carry a spirit that can be expressed in the building. For example, a piece of wood still has the memory of the tree. You know, the Romans actually tried to capture this unexplainable essence.
9:59
A place with a mind and a soul. And they called it genius loci. So an honest building with a soul. I think the brutalist architects believe that this is how you transcend a building beyond any temporary idea of beauty. However, the pursuit of beauty alone, above all else, can be questionable. In fact, Plato says that beauty is an ultimate value, like truth or goodness, something that can be pursued for its own sake. If you ask someone, why are you interested in something?
10:34
The final answer can be because it's beautiful. Just like it can be. Because it's good or because it's true. But while goodness and truth are usually compatible, the pursuit of beauty alone can lead to a life against virtue.
10:58
This is where the client, Van Buren, takes advantage of Laszlo on a very disturbing way on their trip to Italy. And some people that I spoke to said that this scene was completely unnecessary, and they felt like it was just added for shock value. But personally, I do think it was necessary. Harrison is a successful capitalist who doesn't really understand anything about beauty, but he understands the value of beauty and Lazso’s value. So he pays him and he essentially buys him.
11:34
and Laszlo even after this incident, even after knowing what he did, he goes on to complete the project. I think this scene was necessary because there's not a lot of other ways that can help you understand the sheer obsession and the tunnel vision that you need in order to do something like this. Just imagine the amount of self-loathing and hate that he has for himself just working on this project day in and day out. So why was it money? No.
12:06
Because he offered to pay for the design changes personally. You know, the changes that the client did behind his back. This refugee who was sleeping in a closet offers to pay for the client's design changes with his own fees. No, I think it was because the project is intrinsically tied to him as a human being. because great architects of that time, they weren't remembered. For their relationships or who they were. They were remembered for. What they built.
12:43
There's certain personality types that I think are the most susceptible to this sickness of architecture. “99% invisible” actually did a great episode on this, but in the early 1950s, they tried to do a scientific study on creativity, and they tried to quantify into measurable traits this thing that was seen as kind of mysterious at that time. But one of the most successful studies involved a group of really famous architects.
13:14
Over the time span of four weekends, they were tested on all kinds of things, including esthetic sensibility or creative problem solving. They were even asked some very absurd questions like. Where should you attach a third arm? And one of the very last questions they asked them to rank each other. And pretty much every architect ranked themselves as number one. So a character trait across all the test subjects was high personal aspirations and self-centeredness,
13:47
You see, early in life I had to choose between honest arrogance and, hypocritical humility. I chose honest arrogance, and I've seen no occasion to change. AKA...ego. And it's not really a surprise, because architecture school teaches us that the spaces that we create, we can help people and we can fix problems. And we are creating these concrete manifestations so everyone can see them and experience them. But especially during the mid 20th century, architects had way
14:18
more influence probably than any other time in modern history, because postwar governments gave them massive projects like universities and civic centers and housing projects. So they really shaped entire cities And I would say even national identities. And back then it was all about this singular architect, right? Louis Kahn, Mies van der Rohe, Frank Lloyd Wright, as opposed to now where it's more common to name your studio something like MVRDV
14:49
or Nollistudio, which kind of speaks to the fact that it's a team effort. So there has to be an aspect of this that's driven by ego. You just can't avoid it. it is mine again.
15:03
He got three meters from the top. I added to the bottom. But when I was reflecting on my days in architecture school and getting PTSD all over again, wondering why did I do an all nighter four days in a row? Personally. I think I was compensating for something that was kind of a flaw in myself. Maybe if I can create this beautiful project and I can impress people with my work, maybe it'll make all of my problems go away. A lot of these great architects were deeply flawed in their personal lives.
15:40
Not that I'm comparing myself to these great architects, but I do think that a part of the motivation might be similar. Louis Kahn, who designed some of the most incredible spirit tool structures. He was juggling multiple families in secret, and he died broke and alone in a train station. And I think a part of it was this singular obsession and the search for beauty in their work That they completely neglected their own existence. my father, in the sense that he had such belief
16:14
that somehow doing these things, giving in the way that he gave it something good would come out of it. Even in the middle of a war. There was a war with Pakistan at one point, and the construction stopped totally. And he kept working because he felt, well. When the war is done. They'll need this building.
16:29
But the work is a reflection of the person who. The personal struggles of an architect always manifest in the work. This building by Laszlo probably would have looked very different if he hadn't gone through what he'd gone through. So I wonder if for these brutalist architects designing these monuments, let's say I am here. Deal with it. As opposed to something that's, blends a little bit better with the surroundings. I wonder if it wasn't driven just a little bit
17:01
by a lack of stability in their own lives? There was a war on And yet it is my understanding that.
17:13
Many of the sites of my projects had survived
17:17
there. They remain there still in the city.
17:28
The end of the movie was super interesting. It's the Venice Biennale and they're honoring his achievements. And his niece, who's speaking on his behalf. She describes the building as a physical manifestation of the horrors that his wife endured at the concentration camp. But for me, I was a little bit skeptical. Was this really the intent behind his work? Because that's not how he presented it to the community or to the client. Maybe he snuck it in because he hated the client.
18:00
Or maybe he was just so haunted by the trauma that it subconsciously manifested in his work. But as such, a skillful architect who gets the assignment to create a building for the community. I don't know if he would have intentionally try to recreate his oppression in this community building. so to me, the ending was more about how despite all of your passion and talent and obsession, despite all of the traumatic journey that you go through, in the end you're intent doesn't really matter.
18:36
What matters is the interpretation of the people who use it and who give meaning to it. Especially from the next generation.
18:45
No matter what the authors try and sells you,
18:50
it is the destination, not the journey. You know, in the arts, we love to talk about the process and journey before the destination. But isn't it the singular vision of the building that kept him going and maybe focusing on the journey? It's a luxury that someone like Laszo couldn't afford. But you could also say that by having this singular focus on the destination, Lazso had to endure so much and he had to give up so much of himself in the process. And by glorifying this, aren't
19:27
we kind of distilling him down to his work and not his experience as a person? And I also wonder, wouldn't this just be a concrete box if it wasn't for the story behind it? Because I think it's the process that gives meaning to buildings and turns buildings into architecture.
19:49
Anyways, that's what I thought. I'm really curious to hear your thoughts. Let me know in the comments and if you haven't watched the movie, I would highly, highly, highly recommend it. Whether you're in architecture or not, it's just a great movie. And with that, I'll see you guys in the next video. Bye.
Here to help you learn
Sign in to keep a private conversation with your course tutor.
Ask me anything about the material…
Sign in to chat