The Smithsons - the key architects referred to the original essay by Banham - had also written about Brutalism extensively, in 1957 the Smithson’s in a recorded conversation said “Brutalism tries to face up to a mass-production society, and drag a rough poetry out of the confused and powerful forces which are at work.”. The Smithson’s and Banham had differing opinions on the topic of Brutalism, as has been explored by Dirk van den Heuvel in his essay Between Brutalists: The Banham Hypothesis and the Smithson Way of Life, states that for the Smithson’s Brutalism was more “a way of life”, they were seeking to combine modern architecture with a multiplicity of tendencies within British culture, reaching back to Arts and Crafts”. This differed to Banham who was advocating “an integration between architecture and the latest technologies”. Discrepancies not only can be seen between authors, but are also present within Banham’s own accounts of Brutalism, in 1966 Banham was to revisit Brutalism in his book Brutalism An Ethic or Aesthetic? This time, he extends the taxonomy beyond just the Smithson’s to include James Stirling, Louis Kahn Atelier 5 and others developing the key points originally discussed in the first…