Skip to comments.One Ugly Church Bites the Dust (Christian Scientist in DC)
Posted on 02/26/2014 7:22:12 AM PST by C19fan
Christian Scientists have won their long, twilight struggle against brutalism -- so says a wrecking ball at the corner of 16th and I streets in Washington, D.C.
For what seemed like an eternity, members of the Third Church of Christ, Scientist fought with architecture historians and city bureaucrats over the right to tear down their own church. Churchgoers never liked their 1971 classic brutalist structure -- an architectural style that is well, brutal -- and have even suggested it has something to do with their dwindling numbers.
(Excerpt) Read more at realclearreligion.org ...
Blech! Brutalist architecture is cold and imparts nothing artistic. The FBI and HHS buildings in DC are built in this style, and they’re just ugly.
As I recall, this style was also associated with fascism/socialism to display a sort of uniformity or modularity with no “flair” or personal distinctions of color.
Looks like buildings in East Berlin.
They did the same thing to Forbes Field in Pittsburgh and replaced it with that hideous Three Rivers Stadium which still wasn't paid off when it was mercifully dynamited some 30 years later.
Brutalist architecture = Soviet architecture
This leads to the obvious question of what lunacy possessed the earlier generation of Christian Scientists in DC that they picked a brutalist architect (or worse a brutalist design out of design competition) for their building.
yes--very utilitarian... no beauty... which i despise...
Actually, I know something about the brutalist movement because my closest colleague is married to a French architect (who hates brutalism which had a long and inglorious run in her homeland): it was indeed foisted on the world by leftists, not to glorify regimentation of socialism, fascism or communism, but in the spirit of Lenin’s “the worse the better” to make capitalism more oppressive by housing workers in oppressive buildings. They *knew* the stuff they were designing was ugly, indeed when they succeeded in their intent, inhumanly ugly, and wanted it that way.
not only are the designs lacking in beauty, but i cannot recall ever seeing one structure with beautiful color... the structures are usually an ugly, gray concrete... the buildings always look dirty, dingy, polluted... old... depressing... maybe color blocking could have improved the look...
On the link are 35 pics of ugly churches over the world. #11 is a round church in Norway...I swear the first thought that popped into my head was ...lord if the rings. Then there was another one with ugly projections sticking out at ya...looked like the church was giving you the finger. I haven’t had my morning coffee yet.
Why were the Christian Scientists so upset? My understanding is from their perspective there never was any church there to begin with.
Hopefully, they can find a nicer place.
Why demolish it? The government would fit right in in a building like that. I’m sure they’d love to buy it.
Are we sure the ugliness wasn’t just an error of the mind?
Completely at odds with the rest of the campus, and a total waste of skyline over the Potomac.
Funny; the Wikipedia page on brutalist architecture shows two DC buildings as examples: the Health and Human Services Building (Kathleen Sebelius' stomping grounds) and the FBI Building.
Things that make you go hmm.
“...and have even suggested it has something to do with their dwindling numbers.”
Maybe the “automatic handwriting” for this cult is on the wall.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.