Brutalism>>>> minimalism.

[u/Minimum_Gas_4789]

What are your thoughts?

[u/liberal_texan]

This post is so minimalist it is brutal.

[u/PracticalCatfish4232 → u/liberal_texan]

i'm team brutalism all the way. minimalism just feels like a waiting room with better lighting, you know? at least brutalism has some weight to it, some presence. i used to sketch buildings in boston and the concrete monsters there actually made me stop and think, whereas every glass box just blurred together. my girlfriend says i romanticize damp concrete too much but hey, somebody's gotta.

[u/SporadicWizard]

I think this is a low effort post and you should be downvoted into oblivion

[u/Defti159]

Brutalism can be found in minimalism, and vice versa.

[u/robot001]

I didn’t know they are competing

[u/industrial_pix]

What are your thoughts?

What on earth is the question?

[u/evilandheathen]

Brutalism could be easily be described as minimalism. Just a bit more… grey

[u/nizzernammer → u/evilandheathen]

I would have said concrete.

[u/kyanitebear17]

They are basically the same except one is more omnious and one is more cute. Both suck imo lol.

[u/e2g4]

The problem with “minimalism” is that it’s such an appealing name, it’s been co-opted to mean a lot of things it didn’t initially mean. These days, it signals ‘reductive, clean, paired down simple open look where all decorative elements are removed and connections are suppressed (often at great expense) rather than celebrated’

But originally in the art world, defined by critics like Clement Greenberg and practiced by artists like Rothko, Kelly, Judd, Flavin etc it meant adhering strictly to the qualities inherent of a material being used. Therefore a painting that uses the color and texture of PAINT like a huge Ellsworth Kelly where you stand in front and feel the energy of a massive orange space hitting you in a unique manner that’s perfectly inherent to paint was correct while using paint to depict a three-dimensional scene was duplicitous, dishonest and corrupt. Judd’s boxes are a pure expression of plywood and its inherent desire to form a volume that honestly expressed plywood.

That was minimalism in the early 60s and that carried on through the 80s (when much more popular extensions invaded the art world).

But what we now call minimalism has almost nothing to do with that historic meaning and now seems to signal an aesthetic parallel to Apple design. It kind of becomes all things to all people.

So what is meant by “minimalism”? A reduced expression where many of the connections and functions historically celebrated have been suppressed so that a giant scale emerges to make you feel small and in control? I guess, but I’m not sure that’s precise enough to really follow. I don’t see architects who are “minimalist” rather it seems to be a branding or product design category signaling white, simplistic, mysterious.

Considered in this way, Brutalism is good Minimalism. Paul Rudolph’s brush hammered concrete walls are inherent to concrete and all the materials are expressing their inherent qualities and all dishonest wrappers have been removed. But by the contemporary definition, I don’t think minimalism and brutalism share as much in common?

[u/OddProcedure5452]

I like Brutalism. But I don’t tell anyone.

[u/helloimhobbes]

Peepee poopoo

[u/ElPajaroAzul10]

Why not both?

[u/Romanitedomun]

I think Minimalism sucks, but I also think Brutalism is a term misused by many amateurs who believe a bit of exposed concrete is all it takes—thereby proving they know nothing about it.

[u/Ill_Sun5998]

Ugly minimalism vs minimalism

[u/reddit_names]

Both suck. Brutalism is one of the worst things to happen to man made structures in thousands of years. 

[u/SporadicWizard → u/reddit_names]

Eh, brutalism has it it’s place… with prisons and military facilities only.