The Brutalist Figure—Grid: Exploring New York Brutalism

Abstract

The grid plays a prominent role in architecture, aiding in space organization and influencing all aspects of planning, ranging from urban design to intricate building details. This paper posits that the grid receives heightened emphasis in Brutalism, particularly in constructivist Brutalism, where materials and construction are intentionally exposed. A question arises regarding the grid’s characteristics—despite its subtle appearance, the grid can sometimes be deceptive, ambiguous, and manipulative. The paper analyzes the merits and drawbacks of employing the grid in architecture, shedding light on its contributions to both structural and perceptual comprehensibility, as well as its role in increasing usefulness. To illustrate the application and perception of the grid, the paper examines two primary planning levels: urban planning and building design. The case studies focus on examples from New York City housing developments, specifically those constructed between the 1950s and the 1970s, and projects by architect I. M. Pei, which offer valuable insights into practical implementation. The paper concludes that while the grid can establish order, it may also engender an “uncanny” feeling.

1. The Brutalist Figure—Grid

The grid plays a prominent role in architecture, aiding in space organization and influencing all aspects of planning, ranging from urban design to intricate building details. This paper posits that the grid receives heightened emphasis in Brutalism, particularly in constructivist Brutalism, where materials and construction are intentionally exposed.

The paper analyzes the merits and drawbacks of employing the grid in architecture, shedding light on its contributions to both structural and perceptual comprehensibility, as well as its role in increasing usefulness. To illustrate the application of the grid, the paper examines case studies of New York City housing developments, specifically focusing on those constructed between the 1950s and the 1970s. A notable example is I. M. Pei’s project in Kips Bay, which offers valuable insights into practical implementation.

The architectural Brutalist grid is further examined concerning its impact on social relationships and the perception of the grid at two primary planning levels: urban planning and building design. The paper concludes that while the grid can establish order, it may also engender an ‘uncanny’ feeling. The uncanny feeling is examined using, among other things, the ‘Figure–Ground’ perception, the optical illusion of perception developed at the beginning of the 20th century by the Danish psychologist Edgar John Rubin. Rubin’s concept projects our perception of forms, shapes, sizes, and different perspective viewpoints [1]. The ambiguity of the figure–ground phenomenon is described on a spectrum from simplicity to complexity, obtaining properties such as heterogeneity, brightness-difference, contour, and shape, which are fundamental and essential features of figure and ground. Therefore, adopting the concept of figure–ground into the Brutalist grid assists in a different examination of the perception of the grid in architecture.

2. The Shape of Brutalism

Brutalism emerged in the mid-20th century, after World War II, and is characterized by geometric forms and raw and unadorned materials, as well as by emphasis on function and structure [2,3,4]. Brutalism often features massive structures with a sense of monumentality. These buildings often evoke strong reactions due to their bold and imposing aesthetic.

This paper’s research premise divides Brutalist architecture into two groups based on buildings’ appearance and structure—the expressive and the constructive. The expressive group embraced playfulness and disrupted spatial perception. Their design is characterized by intricate forms and shapes, exemplified by the works of Eero Saarinen, Paul Rudolph, and Pier Luigi Nervi. Saarinen designed the TWA Flight Center at John F. Kennedy International Airport in New York City and the Dulles International Airport near Washington, D.C., completed in 1962 (Figure 1 and Figure 2). His projects often aimed to capture a dynamic sense of movement and create a sense of elegance and integration with the natural environment. These projects are considered daring, pushing the boundaries of technology and showcasing advanced construction techniques.

The second group of Brutalist buildings can be categorized as constructive, exuding a sense of composure and cohesiveness. Typically, designs following the constructivist approach emphasize right angles and rectangular plans and façades. Architects who belong to this group include Le Corbusier, Marcel Breuer (with exceptions), I. M. Pei, and others whose projects often resulted in a grid-like appearance.

3. The Architectural and Brutalist Grid

*Grid—a framework of spaced bars that are parallel to or cross each other; a grating.

The grid has been a ubiquitous feature in architecture throughout history, finding widespread use across various scales, from furniture design to city planning. The examination of both advocates and critics of the grid by well-known scholars provides a background for researching its significance in Brutalist architecture. The grid serves as a foundational structure promoting social equality and justice in a non-hierarchical form. Rosalind Krauss highlights its influence on art, shaping movements like minimalism and abstract expressionism, emphasizing flatness, surface, and order as symbols of objectivity and democratic promise [5]. In architectural forms, grids organize spaces efficiently, aiding in floor plans, elevations, and urban planning, ensuring consistency and intended outcomes [6].

In the 20th century, theoreticians and architects advocated for the use of the grid in architecture [7]. Le Corbusier developed the Modular system, which is based on a grid derived from the human body [8]. Colin Rowe confronts the use of the grid in the architecture of Le Corbusier and Palladio, focusing on geometric principles [9]. Sigfried Giedion viewed the grid as essential for organizing space and promoting standardization [10]. Superstudio and Archizoom employed grids to equalize space and promote social change, envisioning global structures for equality [11]. Christopher Alexander opposed hierarchical structures, advocating for organic, interconnected systems fostering human interaction and community [12,13].

While architectural theorists embraced the grid, there were opposing voices. For instance, Camillo Sitte advocated for city planning based on artistic principles, criticizing the dominance of grid systems [14]. Robert Venturi challenged modernist reliance on grids for their rationality, advocating for a more nuanced approach [15]. The perspectives both advocating and opposing the use of the grid do not necessarily contradict each other. Instead, they represent varying viewpoints on its effectiveness in generating quality planning without overshadowing architectural design with the visibility of the grid.

The Brutalist Grid

Among those who opposed or advocated the use of the grid, Reyner Banham stands out for his examination of the grid’s advantages and disadvantages [16]. Banham discussed the grid in his book ‘The Architecture of the Well-Tempered Environment’ as a rational and efficient planning tool that has been widely used in urban and architectural design [17]. Banham recognized the functionality of the grid in organizing space, providing infrastructure, and facilitating movement. However, he also critiqued the potential monotony and lack of diversity that can arise from the strict adherence to the grid. He argued that the grid can lead to uniform and repetitive environments that neglect a place’s individuality and unique qualities.

Banham’s premise of Brutalism’s quality is defined by three categories: 1. Formal legibility of the plan; 2. clear exhibition of structure; and 3. valuation of materials for their inherent qualities ‘as found’ [18]. Banham’s categories can be examined while referring to the Brutalist grid: 1. The grid facilitates the plan and arrangement of space; 2. the grid, in many cases, is part of the structure and projects onto the façades; and 3. the appearance of the grid is evident due to its exposed materials.

Brutalist architecture is characterized by the use of raw concrete or other exposed materials, employing geometric forms and conveying a sense of massiveness. Although not directly associated with a strict grid pattern, Brutalist buildings often feature strong linear and grid-like elements in their design [18]. Structural integrity, a fundamental aspect of Brutalism, aids in load distribution and reinforces stability, even in terms of visual representation. The utilization of repetitive patterns and linear forms in Brutalist architecture can create a feeling of order and structure. Despite the geometric clarity brought about by the coherent regime of orthogonal surfaces and grids, Brutalism retains its essence by challenging perception to defy complete quantification and comprehension.

Brutalist architecture relies on the strict grid as a foundational element for shaping spatial perception and guiding the construction of buildings. The architectural grid in Brutalism serves three primary purposes: it provides a visually understandable form, represents the repetitive elements inherent in industrial construction, and offers endless potential for expansion. The strict grid of Brutalism is evident across different scales, from urban design to building structures and façades. Its presence blurs the boundaries between various elements, promoting a sense of equality and reducing hierarchical distinctions. In 1959, the journal Architectural Forum elaborated on the article titled ‘The Monotonous Curtain Wall.’ The article stated that ‘curtain-wall building is well on the way to becoming the new American vernacular: last year (1959), an estimated thirty-five million sq. ft. of metal curtain-wall panels were put in place on American buildings (other than factories). And the glass-and-metal curtain wall is sweeping other countries as well. Unfortunately, most of it looks absolutely terrible’ [19]. The article further commented on the lack of variety and monotony in the design of curtain walls, particularly in the United States, where designers seemed unable to stop until the entire building was uniformly covered with a checkerboard pattern.

Another prominent American Brutalist architect is Walter Netsch, a member of Skidmore, Owings & Merrill (SOM). Netsch was known for his innovative grid use in his designs, which adhered to the ‘Field Theory design philosophy’ [20]. This philosophy emphasized a three-dimensional grid system as a framework for organizing architectural spaces. Netsch believed that the grid offered flexibility, adaptability, and efficient construction while maintaining order and logical structure. An example of his grid-based design can be seen in the United States Air Force Academy in Colorado Springs, completed in 1958 (Figure 3). The campus layout and buildings followed a strict grid system, intersected by diagonal walkways and structures, creating a sense of rhythm and tension. The grid layout challenged traditional urban movement and explored the expression of the Brutalist grid in both urban and individual building design.

Brutalism is part of the structuralist theory approach in architecture that emerged in the mid-20th century. Structuralism sought to understand and analyze architecture by examining the underlying structures and systems that shape built forms (Structuralism primarily associated with architects and theorists such as Aldo Rossi, Lucien Kroll, and Christopher Alexander). Structuralism emphasized the study of architectural systems and patterns and aimed to identify the underlying organizational principles, rules, and relationships that generate architectural form and spatial configurations. Also, topology played a significant role in structuralist thinking [21]. Architects sought to categorize and classify architectural forms into types based on their shared characteristics, functions, or historical development. In general, conventional Brutalist grid structures prevail over non-grid designs due to their simplicity, requiring less effort in planning, design and construction, thus reducing both time and cost [22].

This paper tracks the American Brutalist architecture discourse and elaborates on examples that show the gap between the Brutalism premise of exposing the society and the architecture as a result and its consequences. The use of grids in architecture contributes to the establishment of order, structure and efficiency in design, while also providing a framework for element placement and enhancing visual interest in buildings or spaces. Therefore, this paper delves into the concept of ‘Constructive Brutalism’ and thoroughly explores its distinct qualities and characteristics. However, the question arises as to whether this can be characterized—despite its subtle appearance, gridded Brutalism can sometimes be deceptive, ambiguous, and manipulative.

4. Urban Grid—New York Urban Gridiron

Urban grid design plays a crucial role in the organization and functionality of cities. It involves dividing urban areas into a grid pattern of streets and blocks, creating a systematic and efficient layout. This approach enables easy navigation, connectivity, and optimization of land use. The United States has a long history of utilizing the grid system in city planning, dating back to the colonial era. The grid’s regularity and predictability allow for efficient resource and development allocation. One notable example is Washington, D.C., the planned capital city with a unique grid system designed by Pierre Charles L’Enfant in 1791 [23]. The city’s urban planning includes wide streets, diagonal avenues, open public spaces, and monumental architecture, which contribute to its distinctive character and identity.

The Commissioners’ Plan of 1811, known as the New York Gridiron, stands as an early example of grid planning in the United States [24]. The Manhattan grid possesses a unique feature, as it is oriented at a 29-degree shift from the south, aligning with the island’s length, with a uniform size, averaging around 200 feet by 600 feet (61 m by 183 m) (Figure 4) [25].

Apart from the urban grid, the grid is commonly observed in various types of buildings, particularly in office and factory structures. However, this paper explicitly examines housing developments in New York City, where deviations from the grid pattern are more prominent and housing developments exhibit a greater emphasis on social aspects and equality.

4.1. Off-Grid Urban Planning and Towers in the Park

Housing development in New York City is a complex and diverse field encompassing numerous projects and initiatives. Given the city’s dense population and high demand for housing, there are various approaches to developing residential properties. The primary goal of these projects is to maximize land use while providing housing options for individuals across different income levels. Housing development in New York City involves multiple entities, including government agencies like the New York City Housing Authority (NYCHA), established in 1934. Additionally, insurance companies, private developers, nonprofit organizations such as community development corporations (CDCs) and others play significant roles in the process [26]. These entities collaborate and form partnerships to address the diverse housing needs and challenges present in the city [27]. Through their collective efforts, their goal is to provide affordable, accessible, and sustainable housing options for the residents of New York City.

The examination of housing developments in New York, particularly those constructed between the 1950s and 1970s, reveals the incorporation of Brutalist characteristics, relying on Banham’s premise of Brutalism’s qualities and characteristics [18]. During this period, urban renewal programs aimed at revitalizing blighted areas led to the construction of large-scale housing projects, some of which were initiated under the Slum Clearance Housing Act of 1937 [28].

Two distinct approaches to Brutalist large-scale urban developments in New York were influenced by the New York Gridiron. The first approach involved urban planning that followed the grid orientation. This typically entailed a few high-density buildings arranged in parallel and perpendicular orientations within a consolidated lot. For example, the Manhattan House on East 65th Street, which spread along a whole block, designed by SOM (1950), Washington Square Village, designed by S. J. Kessler and Sons, with Paul Lester Weiner (1958) and Lincoln Towers Apartments (1962) [29].

The second approach encompassed off-grid housing developments, where buildings were situated in a non-grid layout, commonly called the ‘tower in the park’ concept. This concept involved surrounding high-rise residential towers with open green spaces or park-like settings. The design philosophy behind this concept was influenced by modernist urban planning and architectural principles, emphasizing functionalism, efficient land use, and improved living conditions. It emerged as a response to the perceived shortcomings of traditional urban housing, aiming to address overcrowding issues, poor living conditions, and lack of open spaces [30]. Therefore, housing initiatives in New York followed an off-grid/tower-in-the-park concept. As a result, the buildings themselves often possess a grid-like Brutalist structure within a non-grid layout, as part of the New York Gridiron.

One of the notable examples of the tower-in-the-park concept in Manhattan is Stuyvesant Town–Peter Cooper Village, designed by SOM (Figure 5). This extensive housing development is the largest in New York City, comprising multiple buildings and housing thousands of residents. Spanning approximately eighty acres of land, it comprises fifty-seven buildings with over 11,000 apartments. Stuyvesant Town–Peter Cooper Village was constructed between 1945 and 1947 in response to the post-World War II housing shortage and was developed by the Metropolitan Life Insurance Company (MetLife) as a middle-income housing project. The design aimed to provide residents with a suburban-like living experience within an urban environment. The buildings are repetitively arranged, and the area creates its own urban layout. Stuyvesant Town comprises thirty-five buildings in a combination of plus-shaped extensions, with eight buildings facing perpendicular to the center and twenty buildings -seven parallel to the urban grid. Cooper Village comprises twenty-two truncated plus-shaped, with most long façades facing northeast and southwest, except for five out of twenty-one buildings facing perpendicular to the inner oval open space.

Each housing development is arranged differently based on various factors, including lot conditions such as size, density, and shape. For example, Martin Luther King Towers in Harlem, inaugurated in 1954, consists of eight buildings arranged parallel or perpendicularly to the gridiron streets (Figure 6). The building layout is rectangular-shaped with six arms, four facing diagonally onto the streets. The advantage of an off-grid layout is that it provides different perspectives and views, deviating from the long perspective along the grid. The tower in the park planning can evoke associations with Baroque urban planning, as seen in cities like Rome, which prioritized drama, grandeur, and theatricality [31,32]. The tower in the park concept offers wandering paths and unexpected situations with expansive green spaces between the buildings, blurring the city grid and defining the urban space as a gap between the pathways and the buildings’ footprints. Robert Pluntz identified the planning of Battery Park City in 1979 as marking the symbolic end of the tower in the park era. The new plan for the last significant landfill in Manhattan emphasized the continuation of Lower Manhattan streets [33].

4.2. Building’s Grid and Multiplicity

Brutalist buildings in New York City often exhibit a strong connection to a grid, both in their exterior façades and interior spaces. While the city grid is dynamic and experienced through movement, the gridded façade of the Brutalist building is static and experienced through viewing. The building façade encompasses the deliberate arrangement of elements on the exterior, which significantly impacts the perception of space, both externally and internally. The precise placement of elements within the façade grid, such as windows, panels, or architectural details, can create an impression of scale and balanced proportions.

Two laws, among others, are elaborated in this paper to demonstrate their significant influence on shaping housing developments in New York in the 1950–1970s. These laws impact not only their architectural aspects but also their social infrastructures. The zoning plan in New York City has played an essential role in guiding the growth and development of the city. The outcome regulations for each zone is designed to balance various considerations, including preserving neighborhood character, promoting economic development, and ensuring the provision of adequate infrastructure. The city’s zoning districts have specific rules that dictate the types of buildings allowed, permitted uses, building heights, and other development parameters. One crucial component of the zoning plan is the floor area ratio, which assigns a maximum allowable space for each district, regulates building density, and controls the size of developments in relation to the lot size. The zoning plan affects the urban grid and influences the shapes, morphology, volume, materiality, and appearance of buildings in general [34]. Another housing program that has influenced the morphological aspects of housing in New York is the Mitchell–Lama affordable housing program for middle-income individuals, signed into law in 1955 [35]. This program has enabled education workers, cultural industry workers, and service providers to continue living in the city despite increasing housing prices.

These legislations were implemented during the tenure of New York urban planner and commissioner, Robert Moses, who significantly impacted the city’s development. Moses advocated for slum clearance as an urban renewal strategy, driven by his belief that slums were detrimental to the city. He implemented large-scale clearance and redevelopment efforts, demolishing deteriorated neighborhoods and displacing residents to make way for new housing projects and infrastructure. While Moses’s initiatives reshaped the city’s landscape, their long-term impact and effects on the affected communities remain subjects of ongoing debate [36].

In terms of architectural study, this research elaborates on the distinction between housing designed for low-income and middle-income residents. Despite variations in building footprints in low-income housing, the gridded façades typically exhibit similarities such as red brick coverage, minimalist–functional gridded windows extending from the ground level to the rooftop, and modest entrances with minimal-sized lobbies.

The grid system is evident in two densely populated housing projects designated for low-income residents. The first is the Confucius Plaza Apartments, designed by Horowitz & Chun, a limited-equity housing cooperative in Manhattan’s Chinatown (Figure 7). This 44-story brick tower complex, standing at 433 feet (132 m) tall, consists of 762 apartments and was completed in 1975, primarily serving the Chinese-American community. The second project is the Riverside Park Community, designed by Richard Dattner and Henri A. LeGendre at 3333 Broadway (Figure 8). This apartment complex comprises five buildings ranging in height from 11 to 35 stories. Completed in 1976, it held the distinction of being the largest residential structure in the United States at the time, housing a total of 1200 apartment units. In both projects, the buildings are characterized by their massive scale and feature numerous repetitive windows seemingly stretching endlessly.

In comparison, middle-income housing typically exhibits a more abundant design, offering spacious units and shared facilities and in many cases including terraces. Cadman Towers in Brooklyn Heights exemplifies refined Brutalist architecture in middle-income housing (Figure 9). Designed by Glass & Glass and Whittlesey & Conklin and inaugurated in 1971, the 30-story building features 420 apartments arranged on both sides of a northeast and southwest corridor. The lobby’s concrete walls are nearly entirely covered with corduroy concrete panels, with the building’s column structure protruding into the lobby space from above (Figure 10). The irregular, three-dimensional gridded façade is fragmented into a sequence of triangles and trapezoids, creating a dynamic interplay of light and shadows. Observing the building from a distance gives the perception of the grid undergoing changes, adding an element of playfulness to the overall experience.

Another significant figure in moderate-income cooperative housing projects was Herman Jessor (1894–1990), who played a pivotal role in designing over 40,000 cooperative housing units in New York City. Among his notable projects are Mutual Redevelopment Houses (known as Penn South), inaugurated in 1963, and Co-op City, in 1973. Mutual Redevelopment Houses is a complex located in Chelsea and sponsored by the International Ladies’ Garment Workers Union, with 2820 apartments arranged in nine buildings, each twenty-two stories high. Co-op City is a housing development in The Bronx, known as the largest residential development in the United States, encompassing 15,372 units. Co-op City stands out with its prominent grid appearance in its architectural layout, comprising different building shapes, including plus shapes and arch-shaped footprints. The arrangement of buildings creates a visually gridded wall that encircles the area, giving it a distinct aesthetic and character. On the other hand, the Mutual Redevelopment Houses project is situated within the Manhattan grid integrates partially with the existing urban fabric. The layout also includes two curved streets (24th and 28th), which diminish the perception of the grid and overlook the distance by creating a continuous grid façade (Figure 11 and Figure 12).

M. Pei and the Multiplicity of Repetitive Gridded Façade

Ieoh Ming Pei (I. M. Pei) is a renowned architect who worked both in urban design and building architecture. Pei outlined significant urban plans for Philadelphia (Society Hill, 1957-64), Boston (City Hall Plaza, 1960s), and Washington (L’Enfant Plaza, 1968). Pei adapted his formal theories of urban aesthetics to the exigencies of modern real-estate practice [37]. Pei studied architecture at Harvard under German émigré architects Walter Gropius and Marcel Breuer and probably was influenced by minimalistic artists who taught at Harvard, such as Sol LeWitt, who developed a structural modular configuration [38].

Pei’s Brutalist Grid appears in a significant amount of his projects, composed of precast exposed concrete or steel frames, creating three-dimensional plasticity. For example, Mile High Center, Denver, Colorado (1952-6); Society Hill, Philadelphia (1960s); Town Center Plaza, Washington DC (1961-2); University Gardens, Hyde Park, Chicago (1956-61); Place Ville Marie, Montreal (1958-62); Kips Bay, New York (1960-65); East-West Center, the University of Hawaii Manoa, Hawaii (1960-63; Washington Plaza, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania (1958-64); Cecil and Ida Green Center for Earth Sciences, MIT (1959-64); University Plaza, New York University (1965); L’Enfant Plaza, Washington, D.C. (1968); Camille Edouard Dreyfus Chemistry Building, MIT (1964-70); Bushnell Tower (formerly Hartford, Connecticut Bushnell Plaza) (1961-70); Christian Science Center, Boston (1964-70); Harbor Towers, Boston (1971); Third Church of Christ, Scientist (Washington, D.C.) (1971).

In these projects, the grid design varies; in some, the grid extends across the façade, while in others, it is framed. In certain projects, the grid begins from ground level and elevates above the ground, with the vertical support columns reaching down to the ground. This creates an intriguing interplay between the grid and the ground, emphasizing the figure–ground relationship and enhancing the overall aesthetic.

Two notable examples of Pei’s housing designs in New York City are characterized by their Brutalist multiple-grid structures. The University Village (known as the Silver Towers, 1966) at the NYU University Village consists of three identical 30-story towers centered around a 100-by-100-foot lawn (Figure 13). The second project is Kips Bay (1965), occupying a ten-acre superblock site with two buildings, each twenty-one stories tall, and was meant to serve the middle income (Figure 14) [39]. The project is arranged with two immense and minimalistic apartment blocks positioned on an expansive open platform, surrounded by open space (Figure 15). The development boasts a grand scale, with the apartment blocks extending an impressive length of 600 feet. While the Silver Towers exhibit a taller and slender profile, the buildings in Kips Bay exhibit a longer and shorter silhouette. Pei’s architectural designs in New York City were influenced by the urban perspective and the dynamic interactions of people in close proximity to the buildings. He greatly emphasized spatial perception and the visual impact of his designs from a distance. This perspective and point of view were crucial to his creative process. In particular, Pei’s grid design in these projects showcases a harmonious relationship with human proportions, allowing the floor height to be perceptible from the exterior. The buildings’ exterior grid is meticulously constructed using precast concrete members, with glass panels installed within the framework. This careful attention to detail results in a distinctive exterior wall grid that defines the visual character of the structures.

James Fitch strongly criticized Kips Bay as a striking example of Pei’s quest for a dramatic urban landscape and his inclination towards artistic expression, rather than prioritizing strict functional considerations in shaping the land and designing buildings. Fitch claimed that Pei’s work clearly reflects a blend of sculptural and painterly influences. According to Fitch, although the apartment layouts themselves adhere to conventional plans, Kips Bay exhibits certain characteristics reminiscent of the elevated piano nobile concept [37]. Fitch asserted that the construction system, which eliminates the necessity for beams and columns, often leads to awkward interior spaces. However, this design element, combined with the deeply recessed continuous window walls in the façade, establishes a feeling of openness and safety within the primary rooms. The structural system’s deep embrasures, an essential component, not only offer improved safeguarding against glare and heat but also contribute to the overall sense of spaciousness. This innovative approach sets Pei’s design apart from conventional high-rise towers.

Robert Stern praised and criticized the Kips Bay large-scale development as a significant reconstruction of East Midtown. Stern referred to Pei’s project as having imaginatively arranged unit plans, but with dauntingly long interior corridors and elegantly detailed exposed concrete grid framing on the large recessed plate-glass windows that made up the façades. Stern referred to the project as aesthetic banalities of typical postwar apartment house construction, which was influenced by the work of Mies van der Rohe in Chicago. Pei’s firm worked within a design philosophy in which ‘a disciplined column spacing was mandatory’, but not achieved at the expense of rooms inferior to those produced by the scatter column system. The repeated use of formwork in reinforced concrete construction primarily created the grided façade, essentially forming a load-bearing wall with a column at each window. According to Stern, this effect was only softened by incorporating radiused corners at the window heads, exploiting concrete’s inherent plasticity [40].

Moreover, Kips Bay’s construction system and appearance can be compared to the RNA Housing project, which features dominant precast Brutalist grids and extensive window façades. The RNA Housing project is a Mitchel–Lama Cooperative designed by Edelbaum & Webster, located on 96th Street, and was completed in 1967 (Figure 16). The building consists of 13 residential floors above a commercial/office floor at ground level. The grid extends across the façade, dividing it into 74 horizontal rectangles (13/74). At RNA, the concrete grid functions as a curtain wall, and the structural columns are recessed, resulting in their non-exposure (Figure 17). In contrast, Pei’s grid façade in Kips Bay demonstrates an authentic Brutalist approach, where the construction elements protrude outward on the façade. This design choice creates a total, cohesive Brutalist building grid structure. Therefore, Pei’s design for Kips Bay showcases a distinct and cohesive Brutalist aesthetic, with the grid serving as a prominent feature of the building’s overall design.

The grid’s influence extends to various aspects of planning, encompassing social, aesthetic, and structural considerations. At the urban level, the grid serves as a net-like system, an element without mass that defines the spaces between buildings. It allows for an unobstructed perspective, drawing the gaze towards distant views.

5. Brutalism Morphology and the Grid: Order and Disorder

Brutalism within structuralism introduces analytical methods, including diagramming, mapping, and notation, to reveal the underlying structures of architecture. Architects used these tools to dissect and represent architectural systems, hierarchies and relationships, helping them identify and communicate design principles.

Brutalist buildings are often found within larger urban contexts, reflecting their urban planning period and design philosophies. Their massive scale and geometric forms can expose the ideals and ideologies of modernist urban planning, such as functionalism and the rational organization of space. While both urban and façade grid designs utilize grids, they serve different purposes within the broader context of architecture and urban planning. Urban grid design deals with the organization and layout of streets and blocks at a city or neighborhood scale, while façade grid design focuses on the arrangement of elements on the exterior of individual buildings. Both approaches aim to provide functional and visual coherence but operate at different levels of scale and detail. The impact of the Brutalist grid in New York City is analyzed through three distinct lenses: first, its effect on urban dynamics; second, the examination of individual buildings, and third, its implications for social matters. These categories shed light on both the perception of the grid and the potential negative effects it may generate. That said, Brutalism has the potential to expose and reflect aesthetic choices that can expose the structural elements and construction methods, highlighting the industrial and practical aspects of society.

5.1. Social Relations and the Grid

Societies or social systems are organized and structured in a conceptual framework. One common way to represent social structure is through hierarchical models, where individuals or groups are organized linearly, with clear levels of authority and power [41]. However, the grid structure diminishes the hierarchy, as the position can go in two directions and even three in three-dimensional space.

The grid’s influence on human behavior extends beyond physical movement [42]. It can contribute to a sense of place and identity by defining the character and structure of a neighborhood or city. The grid can shape social interactions, community dynamics, and the formation of collective memory. While the grid often implies a rigid structure, it can also offer flexibility and adaptability. It is important to note that the relationship between the grid and human behavior is complex and multifaceted, and its impact can vary depending on cultural, social, and historical contexts.

The grid can influence both individual and collective behavior. At an individual level, the regularity and predictability of the grid can provide a sense of stability and order. By clearly delineating spaces and defining boundaries, the grid helps individuals make sense of their environment and understand their place within it [43]. This structured layout fosters a sense of coherence and clarity, facilitating efficient movement and communication. On a collective level, the grid can foster social cohesion and facilitate interactions by creating shared spaces and common references. Additionally, the grid diminishes hierarchy, equalizing society and its assets as part of the whole. The private frame within the overall grid creates a sense of affiliation.

New York Social Grid

The social–architectural grid in New York is examined on two levels: the urban grid and non-grid layout and the gridded façades. The gridiron pattern in New York provides a structured framework that enhances connectivity. In architecture, the social grid often emphasizes mixed-use development, integrating residential, commercial and recreational spaces within the same neighborhood or building complex. This approach creates spaces with a similar overall appearance and accommodates various functions. The social grid also recognizes the significance of well-designed public spaces and social nodes strategically placed within the urban fabric to encourage gathering and social interaction among residents.

In contrast, off-grid housing presents two contrasting issues compared to the grid layout. Housing developments often have a centralized structure with social facilities such as daycare or community centers. The center is often integrated into the layout by arranging paths, as seen in examples like Stuyvesant Town, Lincoln Houses, George Washington Houses, and Frederick Douglass Houses. However, some off-grid layouts do not have a center, and instead, the community center is a separate part of the different local grid arrangement, as seen in Robert F. Wagner Houses, Peter Cooper Village, and Wald Houses. The centralized structure of housing projects and their enclosed boundaries differ from the open-ended nature of the grid, limiting their potential for growth and flexibility. Therefore, the presence of a specific center within the community emphasizes the dominant influence of distances and spatial relationships.

Social housing residents are often compelled to reside in these buildings, thus lacking the freedom to choose their place of residence. The grid’s physical presence and sensory aspects are beginning to be recognized as integral components of the social structure interface. New York, being a capital city, adopts an approach to social housing not mostly from ideological social concern, but to facilitate the proximity of service providers and ‘blue-collar workers’ to their workplaces. The sense of belonging may be heightened by the gridded façade and social equality in a physical sense. However, the off-grid urban layout, although it offers opportunities for developing social hubs, also creates hidden areas, albeit observed from apartments. These hidden areas can evoke a feeling of intimidation, while losing the ability to see afar in the distance. In contrast, the ability to see into the distance in a gridded layout, where the gaze extends over vast distances, might create a sense of protected space.

In addition to the urban grid, the gridded façade of housing developments has two primary characteristics. First, it commonly features repetitive elements that help save construction costs. Second, it can evoke a sense of collectivity, reflecting a society where everyone can access proportionally similar spaces. In housing developments in New York, the grid is occasionally interrupted by vertical or horizontal elements to deviate from its rigid structure. However, the overall appearance of the building remains focused on the grid.

5.2. Grid and Perception of Space

The physical grid structure reflects interior divisions, framing the building and defining its boundaries. The grid perception stretches beyond the façade and formalism, exploring different aspects of architecture and emphasizing buildings’ aesthetic and expressive qualities.

The relationship between the structural grid composition and the representation of order in architecture is a robust topic studied in the context of spatial cognition and perception. Our perception of space involves comprehensively studying objects, making it easier to grasp an object as a whole (gestalt) and its subdivision into forms and morphology.

The grid, as a spatial arrangement, can be produced by the structural system and plays a significant role in promoting a sense of order and aiding the eye in navigating through a controlled environment. In the 20th century, the grid became a dominant feature for expressing architectural order. In Washington, D.C., for example, Brutalist architecture prominently featured developments with gridded façades. The influence of the grid in American architecture can be traced back to Daniel Patrick Moynihan, who established the Guiding Principles for Federal Architecture in 1962 [44]. These principles emphasized the need for efficient and economical government facilities that also visually showcased the dignity, enterprise, vigor, and stability of the American government [45]. As a result, Brutalism was employed in government buildings, such as Pei’s projects at L’Enfant Plaza and the main government compound south of The Mall in Washington D.C., replacing classical architectural styles (Figure 18) [46]. In L’Enfant Plaza, the grid is heavily present both on the main three buildings’ façades and in the layout of the plaza, influencing accessibility for pedestrians and vehicles. The grid and the framing of the building’s façade both contribute to creating a sense of order and visual coherence. Moreover, the grid façade design expanded beyond federal buildings and found its way into other building typologies, including apartment buildings. Overall, the relationship between the structural grid, the representation of order, and the use of gridded façades in architecture illustrates the impact of spatial arrangement on our perception of space and the visual expression of order in the built environment.

The urban arrangement of housing, combined with repetitiveness, creates contrasting experiences as one approaches and explores an area. It goes beyond just the change in the city gridiron and includes factors such as path patterns, curves, and other built environment elements. The repetitiveness of housing units or the uniformity of their layout may give a sense of coherence and order from a distance or initial approach. However, the variations in urban arrangement and design elements influence movement flow, space perception, and overall ambiance, providing opportunities for unique encounters and interactions within the built environment and contributing to a rich and diverse urban experience.

Regarding the urban gridiron, Jane Jacobs appreciated the combination of a basic grid system with strategically added irregular streets to enhance city functionality. She considered this approach a distinctive and valuable American contribution to city design, introducing necessary irregularities and visual interruptions even within the grid streets [47]. However, Jacobs was hesitant about the gridiron, as European visitors often remark that the ugliness of American cities is due to their gridiron street systems [47]. She further claimed that places like Union Square in San Francisco, with changes in ground level resembling Dali’s painting of wet watches, appear remarkably diverse due to transformations within the straight, regular gridiron street patterns tumbling up and down the hills [47]. Unlike hilly San Francisco, New York is flatter, so the grid is not dictated by changes in topography. The main avenues and streets take on greater significance as they can be seen continuing into the distance. Due to this flatten topography, the grid is naturally more prominent.

Grid Façade—A State of Mind

Manipulating the elements within the façade grid can influence people’s perception of the building’s comprehension. Aesthetics studies suggest that humans tend to favor symmetrical and balanced designs, qualities that can be achieved by carefully considering the arrangement within the façade grid [48]. However, introducing excessive complexity within the grid can have a contrasting effect. Extending the grid divisions beyond a countable number may lead to confusion and disorientation. Organized multiplicity within the grid can make it difficult for individuals to find their bearings or establish a clear sense of direction, as Camillio Sitte opposed the arrangement of the grid in urban planning [14]. In such cases, the intended orderliness of the grid may be disrupted, and people may feel lost or uncertain within the space.

Housing developments usually feature square and rectangular windows, creating the grid composition. In developments such as Stuyvesant Town (1947), Alfred E. Smith Houses (1953), Ebbat Field Apartments (1962), and Co-op City (1973), the proximity between the buildings makes them appear from a distance as one unit or even as a monolith, while the grid of windows makes it even more robust (Figure 19).

Pei’s projects exhibit a prominent grid that features a thinner lattice structure, making it the dominant characteristic. It appears that Pei considered the gridded façade an ornament in his designs. Kips Bay features repetitive rectangles, countless to the human eye. Each long façade comprises 1452 window units (66 × 22) stretched across the entire façade, recessed in a way that minimizes the view from certain angles. The grid is situated above ground, while the vertical elements of the lattice extend all the way to the ground level. The buildings’ horizontality allows for a comprehensive view of the entire structure from a distance, but it becomes challenging to count the individual windows due to their abundance [49]. In contrast, at Silver Towers, the verticality of the building makes it more challenging to grasp the entire structure at once. The grid is framed by sealed windowless walls at the corners, adding a distinctive element to the composition. The arrangement and design of the grid, as observed through the façades of different buildings, contribute to the varied experiences and visual perceptions of the structures.

5.3. The Brutalist Uncanny Grid

The grid can be comprehended as a mediator between the physical structure and the image it produces as a concept. Therefore, the grid virtue of organizing space might lead to its manipulation. The familiarity can become unfamiliar, leading to disorientation and an uncanny situation. The uncanny is a term used in psychology, and it was first explored in depth by Sigmund Freud in his 1919 essay ‘Das Unheimliche (Uncanny). Freud suggested that this feeling is often triggered by things that are related to our primitive or infantile fears, such as death, the loss of a body part, or the return of the repressed. Freud defined the uncanny as a feeling of something being both familiar and unfamiliar at the same time, which can create a sense of discomfort or unease. Anthony Vidler explored the uncanny in architecture by how certain elements or designs can evoke feelings of eeriness, strangeness, or unfamiliarity. In recent years, the concept of the uncanny has been applied to various fields beyond psychology, including art, literature, and architecture [50]. Therefore, this paper suggests using the uncanny in the field of Brutalism as an example of how this concept has been utilized in architectural design, with the familiarity being related to orientation and the role of the Brutalist grid.

The order and disorder of the grid are examined using the perception of the figure–ground phenomenon. In Brutalist architecture, the figure–ground relationship can take on various forms, illustrations or approaches. For example, the building itself can be considered the figure, while its surroundings constitute the ground. Similarly, on an urban scale, the buildings’ footprints, silhouette and density serve as the figures, while the overall layout, including the configuration of building footprints in space, forms as the ground. The ability to distinguish between the figure and the ground depends on individual experience and the focal point or point of view. When standing adjacent to a grid façade, the perception of the whole may be missing, as one is unable to fully grasp the extent of the grid without seeing its edges. Similarly, when perceiving the urban layout, one’s view may be obstructed by different components or limited by distance.

The grid may lead to disorientation on the urban scale because it is endless and all nodes spatially resemble one another [51]. Therefore, the New York gridiron’s orientation becomes familiar only when it is accompanied by architectural elements or street signs and directions. Moreover, these elements indicate the location but do not face the direction. The same uncanny feeling can occur in the tower-in-the-park layouts. Exiting from the gridded street into a different path pattern, encountering irregular streets and experiencing the excessive unity of buildings and their similarity to each other can create a sense of disorientation and discomfort [52].

The Brutalist grid, especially on the façade, may evoke unease when the grid’s division number is beyond count; it might become blurry if one cannot count the amount. In reference to the subject, James Fitch described Kips Bay: The architect’s commendable ambition to replace squalor and confusion with serene and noble order, however, paradoxically works against itself. While visual coherence and organizational clarity are crucial in successful environments, their significance seems exaggerated in this case. The concrete work at Kips Bay demonstrates how the architect’s large and well-staffed office has mobilized its resources to address specific challenges in the material’s physical and aesthetic properties [37].

6. Summary and Conclusions

The Brutalist grid plays a significant role in shaping the perception, construction and interpretation of spaces, allowing for diverse understandings of architectural order and control. It is particularly characteristic of Brutalism more than any other architectural discourse, as its construction enables the use of precast and repetitive materials. Therefore, Brutalist buildings generally embrace the repetitive grid structure over morphologically unique complex shapes due to their simplicity of design and cost-effectiveness in construction. This paper explores the correlation between figure–ground perception and the awareness of the grid in Brutalist architecture. The grid can take on dual significance, serving as both figure and ground, depending on the observer’s point of view in relation to its physical presence in space and its perspective. Factors such as proximity to the grid and its size influence this perception. When one stands far from a building, the grid can be comprehended as a whole, appearing as a distinct figure. However, standing in close proximity to the grid obscures its edges, making it difficult to perceive its size solely by sight. This principle extends to urban planning: junction points in grided layout offer distant perspectives within the grid, whereas off-grid arrangements often obscure the horizon. Therefore, the physical manifestation of the grid directly impacts one’s cognitive perception and spatial awareness.

Housing development projects in New York, particularly those built during the 1950s–1970s, are often considered Brutalist. The premise relies on Banham’s statements defining Brutalism and the architectural discourse after WWII. This discourse emphasized exposing construction and using exposed bricks for their inherent qualities ‘as found’. These developments frequently deviated from the regularity of the New York gridiron layout, aiming to create zones of playfulness and a sense of seclusion from the surrounding environment, often achieved through the tower in the park concept. By intentionally deviating from the main axes of the grid, the orientation of spaces changes, resulting in diverse and unique places with different characteristics and experiences. While the Brutalist grid offers numerous advantages, implementing it in existing cities may pose challenges. Retrofitting an established urban area with a grid pattern can be logistically complex and disruptive. Additionally, the strict adherence to grid-based layouts may limit the flexibility required for organic growth and adaptation.

Different expressions of the grid, such as in art, society (social justice), and architecture, are valued for their ability to assist in orientation within urban areas. The suitability of a grid or alternative urban planning approach depends on the city’s specific context, scale and desired character. The mixed-use zones of designing public spaces of off-grid layouts foster a strong sense of community. However, they can also lead to congestion and centralization, or on the other hand, a sense of looseness and diversity.

Beyond their structural function, grids in architecture can also have aesthetic and conceptual significance. They can create visual rhythm, highlight patterns, and contribute to the overall composition of a building or urban environment. Grids can convey a sense of order, discipline, and rationality or be subverted and challenged to introduce complexity and dynamism into the design.

Therefore, the grid is a tool for volumetric comprehension but can also create a misleading appearance that leads to confusion. The Brutalist grid’s influence extends beyond the realm of structure and form. It can provoke a sense of disorientation, disorder, and an uncanny perception of volumes and spatial control, evoking a unique and often controversial experience for those interacting with spaces.