Rubble?
My thought is that many of the structures we are building today will be gone in 50 to 100 years. we’re not building with stone blocks, and unless it’s a concrete shell, it will probably be ready to be torn down in less than a century, unlike the sturdy structures from past centuries.
The big solid concrete ones from the 70’s and 80’s are already being called “brutalist”.
If by that you mean the heyday of “brutalism” was the 70s and 80s, I’m not aware of many famous unfinished concrete structures in the 80s although I do think I have seen some: to me it seems more of a 50s through the mid-70s thing although I have seen some unpainted concrete buildings in Charleston WV from the late 70s.
Although the larger point stands in that they didn’t call themselves Brutalist besides a handful of people in the 50s.
You are underestimating how durable wood framing is. As long as the house is properly sided and roofed, and insect-proofed, it will last a long time. Think about how many wooden Victorian houses are still standing.
I wouldn’t call it contemporary, in fact I’d call it traditional. It’s not any particular style beyond that. It’s basically a McMansion in detailing and massing, if not scale, and those are almost always this sort of nondescript traditional look dialed up to 11. The word contemporary (used interchangeably with modern) evokes images of flat roofs, funky geometry, large windows, and a lack of formality, not the double-hung windows, gable roofs, and siding on display here. It may qualify as contemporary in the sense that it’s “what all builders are doing right now” but that’s not how the term is generally applied. You could maybe say it’s contemporary vernacular, today’s equivalent of the non-architect-designed house from a plan book or the builder’s minimally trained staff. However, vernacular is also characterized by the use of local materials and knowledge, and responding to local conditions. Today’s production homes are none of those things beyond the broadest of strokes (houses in the southwest are stucco with clay tile roofs, whereas they are brick or siding with shingle roofs in the rest of the country). So I’d just stick with generic traditional, since explaining contemporary vernacular requires too many asterisks.
That’s … not what Brutalistmeans. And you’re late by several decades.
While historically, architectural styles were mostly given names in retrospect, as I described upthread; there’s a different phenomenon at work in recent decades. Certain architectural movements that have a close linkage to academia—by which I mean more talking than building—have names almost from the beginning, because of course journal articles must be published. In that category, I’d put “International Style,” Brutalism, Deconstructivism, Post-Modernism, and Neo-Futurism. But as these terms come into use among a broader public, they lose their theoretical rigor and start to encompass knockoffs, camp followers, and buildings that are only vaguely reminiscent.
So Brutalism now to most people just refers to 1970s era structural concrete buildings, rather than the artistic possibilities of unfinished concrete (béton brut in French). And Post-Modernism, or PoMo, has become an epithet used by fans of modern styles to dismiss anything that uses traditional materials or any hint of ornament.
I admit I use postmodern freely because I would feel rigorously entitled to use it if the architect deliberately used contrasting mashups of styles, but a lot of the time it’s difficult to tell if it was deliberate or just an ugly choice of themes so I don’t take the time to do so. Most of the time I use it lately I apply it to the style of convenience stores / restaurants that have been popping up over the past 4 or so years which incorporate the sleek lines of Modernism but where each “panel” or post is a different traditional/nontraditional style.
In the case of the OP it’s not contrasting enough for me to immediately jump to that label. With regards to Craftsman, I couldn’t get a good look at the door but from afar it did remind me of Arts and Crafts so there is that.
I know, but the English interpretation seems appropriate.
Those are likely the few types of buildings from the 20th century that seem build to last - although so many are just concrete cast element facings on steel frames, that are fragile and leaky and prone to spontaneous detachment as they age.