1 of 1 people found the following review helpful
5.0 out of 5 stars
Probably the best short history of modern architecture, May 5 2001
This review is from: Modern Architecture: A Critical History (World of Art Series) (Paperback)
I'm surprised at some of the very negative reviews of this book. This
is probably the best short history of modern architecture, or history
of modern architecture of any length perhaps, and it succeeds quite
well as a "critical" history. Maybe some people think
Frampton overuses the word "critical," but he uses the term
in a meaningful way. He presents information but also systematically
analyses that information and draws reasoned conclusions. And the
rest of his language, supposedly impenetrable to some readers, is used
meaningfully also. It's not jargon. Yes, Frampton is well-educated
and he has an impressive vocabulary. Is that a problem? I would
expect as much from an architectural historian and critic. His style
is different from other writers and perhaps somewhat less accessible,
but he has many valuable things to say. Possibly more so than any
other historian of modern architecture that I've come across. He's
thought deeply about his subject matter and offers us his carefully
reasoned analyses. He does this while providing us with a wealth of
factual information in a concise format. It's an excellent book.
There have been many architectural writers in recent decades who've
abused us with meaningless archibabble but Frampton isn't one of them. I agree with one reviewer that Frampton assumes his readers are already familiar with the buildings (and architects, and 20th c. history in general), and I agree that more images and larger images would help. But there are a lot of images and the book is supposed to be concise. Maybe it's best to read a couple other histories first - Pevsner's "Pioneers of Modern Design" and Hitchcock's longer "Architecture: 19th and 20th Centuries," for example. ...
Help other customers find the most helpful reviews
Was this review helpful to you? Yes
No
4.0 out of 5 stars
A defense of Modern Architecture, Dec 15 2002
This review is from: Modern Architecture: A Critical History (World of Art Series) (Paperback)
Frampton makes no apologies for modern architecture, instead he makes one of the more arduous defenses of modern architecture, taking in the full sweep of this architectural movement, and critically examining some of the contemporary trends which have followed in its wake.
It is a very readable overview of modern architecture, beginning with the late 18th century and 19th century predecessors which led to a thorough re-examination of architecture in the early 20th century. Frampton divides his study into short thematic chapters which allow readers to focus on one movement at a time. There are various recurring figures such as Frank Lloyd Wright, Le Corbusier and Mies van der Rohe; but Frampton covers an exceedingly broad range of architectural ideas in the past century.
He has updated the book to include some of the more recent currents in architecture such as deconstruction and fragmentation, which he places in the context of the broader stream of architecture since 1962 in one of his more thought-provoking chapters, "Place, Production and Scenography." He notes how many of the recent ideas in architecture draw from the Russian avant-garde and Italian Futurism. He pans Post-Modernism for its pretension display of historicism, as exhibited in the work of Michael Graves, preferring the more rigorous historic views of neo-rationalists like Aldo Rossi. It is an insightful, illuminating book, which has been updated to include Modern Architecture to 1991.
Help other customers find the most helpful reviews
Was this review helpful to you? Yes
No
1.0 out of 5 stars
Exhausting!, Jun 30 2001
This review is from: Modern Architecture: A Critical History (World of Art Series) (Paperback)
Calculus textbooks read easier than this book. The content is probably concise but the communication is not. The writing is awkward and often incoherent.
Whatever happen to the simplistic yet skillful writing style of a Hemingway? His style was neither haughty nor indolent. He did not have to impress with fancy wordage. And his simplistic, flowing style took far more effort and thought than the rudimentary level of stringing out difficult sentences.
This book is okay for the intellectual or the elitist but for the real world it can be painful. Architects are not always known for their communication skills. This book does'nt help.
Help other customers find the most helpful reviews
Was this review helpful to you? Yes
No