The District Chronicles

Issue date: 6/21/09 Section: Cover

Media Credit: grammarpolice.net

Harvey Jones, a tourist from Atlanta, was not prepared for what he saw at 16th and I streets, NW, just two blocks north of the White House - Third Church of Christ, Scientist, a classic Brutalism piece of architecture.

It is a bare, bold and brash exposed concrete that Jones fails to understand how anyone could have ever thought was attractive architecture. The word Brutalism originates from the translation of "raw concrete" from French.

After a Yuk, Jones declared the Brutalism concrete bunker the ugliest church he's ever seen. It looks more like a utility building than a church, he said.

"I thought it was a utility building until I saw the sign," said Jones, pointing to the sign in the middle of one slab of concrete. "It definitely doesn't invoke images of worship."

Students of Brutalism architecture say that it distinctly evokes strong responses, ranging from harsh criticism to skepticism to careful curiosity. It's too cold and inhuman.

"It really is a grey spot on an otherwise pleasant block," said Joli Sims, who works in one of the nearby buildings. "This is a busy street and I think it's an odd building to pass in the shadow of the White House.

The saga of the ugly church started in 1991, when without the knowledge or consent of church members, a group of zealous DC preservationists filed a petition seeking designation of Third Church of Christ Scientist building as a historic landmark.

The Historic Preservation Review Board granted the petition precisely because of the building's Brutalism style. From that time on, the Third Street congregations was unable to altar or demolish the building.

The DuPont Circle Advisory Neighborhood Commission (ANC) unanimously opposed the building's designation as a Historic Landmark, and requested that the Historic Preservation Review Board deny the claim.

For a year now, the 120-member congregation of Third Church of Christ Scientist has yearned to bulldoze their church because it was uninviting, crumbling and too expensive for the small downtown flock to maintain. The crumbling concrete walls encase an unnecessarily large sanctuary that can hold 400 people. They wanted to replace it with a revenue-generating office building that would also include space for the church. But District architectural conservationists objected because the building was a historic landmark.

Continued...

Page 1 of 2 next >

Article Tools