The Influence Of Classical Architecture On The Age Of Humanism

The reference to Rudolf Wittkower, and his 1952 publication Architectural Principles in the Age of Humanism was conspicuous here. By the time of the New Brutalism’s publication Wittkower’s works had already, in his own word, “caused more than a polite stir” in post-war architecture. His analysis of proportion, rationality, and abstraction in Palladian architecture was seen as an endorsement on the “hard” Modernist architecture over the “soft” Scandinavian Modernism. The controversy was further fueled by the works of Colin Rowe, Wittkower’s student, on the Classical language found in Le Corbusier’s works. To claim the relevance of Classical architecture in New Brutalism, for these architects, was to manifest their belief that New Brutalist architecture should be understood as the actual heir to the first generation of Modernist architects. The Smithson couple stated such ambition in the first sentence of their writing: “Our belief that the New Brutalism is the only possible development for this moment from the Modern Movement.” What is noteworthy is that in this one page writing these authors paid tributes to not only one but two émigré historians of the time. The use of the term Modern Movement was a deliberated reference to the works of Nikolaus Pevsner. By evoking Pevsner’s study from William Morris to Walter Gropius, the Smithson and Crosby emphasized the avant-garde spirit in New Brutalism.

Crosby and the Smithsons’ preoccupation with history had already been in placed before Wittkower’s influential publication. Not only would they have known of Colin Rowe’s work through their IG connection, Peter and Crosby’s respective education background had led them to develop an interest in the relationship between Classical and Mo...

... middle of paper ...

...ccording to Banham, originated from their casual reading of Bruno Taut’s already dubious study of Japanese architecture, The Fundamentals of Japanese Architecture of 1936. Banham explained that the link between New Brutalism and Japanese architecture should not be taken too seriously since Japan was merely serving as an image of spatial sophistication that was previously unknown to Westerners. Eager to brush these references to history and tradition aside, Banham urged readers to turn the pages of the January 1955 issue of AD and admire the works of Vladimir Bodiansky and ATBAT-AFRIQUE, which Crosby and the Smithson introduced as other examples of New Brutalism. For Banham, these architects who worked in “a more primitive society” were the better representatives of New Brutalism since their works were responding to both “social ethics and architectural aesthetics”