This has less to do with the ‘brutal’ look of concrete buildings than with the French term for raw concrete (‘béton brut’). On the one hand, concrete architecture wanted to design buildings for a new society, on the other hand it was (and is) rejected by many as ugly. This mix of meanings makes brutalist architecture a good point of departure for thinking about what is considered ‘brutal’ today.
In this workshop in the context of the exhibition ‘Béton’ we want to ask who calls whom ‘brutal’ and from what point of view, as well as asking which associations lie in relation to it, and which animosities in current society the term implies. The brutality of sexist hate postings and right-wing agitation, for instance, is often considered an expression of stupidity and lack of education. ‘Brutal’ is associated with the idea of crudeness and a lack of culture (of communication). But aren’t there also situations where the use of blunt language could be understood as a rebellion against what is suppressed and excluded in society? Is the concept of cultivation, the intention for the transformation of brutes into civilised humans, not characterized by a cruel history itself? How can we talk about brutality without reproducing a system based on the division between the good and the bad, the civilised and the primitive, between humans and others?
Languages: according to needs Deutsch, English, Espanol
In Kooperation mit Denkfabrik, einem jungen Freundeskreis der Kunsthalle Wien.
Photo: Daniel Jarosh
Due to a limit on the number of participants, please register until 17.9. at email@example.com