Rating: 
Summary: More pictures please.
Review: A cannonical book, but sadly only really educational if you know all about these buildings. If you didn't, the black & white, thumbnail size pictures doesn't help. Could someone republish this book with full-size photos and diagrams? I'll read it all over again!
Rating: 
Summary: basic history of modern architecture textbook
Review: Although his writing style and references to European literary culture may be confusing for some readers, this book is the best short introduction to the development of modern architecture.
Rating: 
Summary: Exhausting!
Review: 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.
Rating:
Summary: A defense of Modern Architecture
Review: 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.
Rating:
Summary: A classic, abrangent and atualized
Review: I think it is one of, or maybe the best books of modern architecture since its first edition. Maybe it is not too didatic, so lay people about architecture could have some dificulty on understanding some facts, but this book is, like the title says, very critical and not just throws the facts, but explains very well the reasons why and the associations between mankind history, the artistic movements and the modern architecture. And the last edition bring the history of the last 30/20 years of architecture, what is someway hard to find in other books about architecture history. A must read for architecture students.(Sorry if my english is not well).
Rating: 
Summary: uhh... only good for graduate students
Review: I took the first year architecture history in community college. Frampton's book is extreme. This book is absolutely not a choice for beginers in architecture history. It is not the pleasant experience to read Frampton's book. I doubt whether it is necessary for the author to use such not understandable writing style. In average, I read about three times in order to understand what he is talking about VAGUELY! However, it is no doubt that this book is considered as the classic (or the Bible) of architecture history. Frampton made a lot (A LOT!) comparison of enormous archtiects from different eras and different parts of the world. According most practicing architects, it is the best arch history book you could read (only if you are knowledgable enough in the field) By the way, if you are interested in a visual architecture history book, this is not you choice. All the illustration in this book is all white & black, small. Hope this commend help!
Rating:
Summary: Probably the best short history of modern architecture
Review: 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. ...
Rating:
Summary: Probably the best short history of modern architecture
Review: I'm surprised at some of the very negative reviews of this book. Thisis probably the best short history of modern architecture, or historyof modern architecture of any length perhaps, and it succeeds quitewell as a "critical" history. Maybe some people thinkFrampton overuses the word "critical," but he uses the termin a meaningful way. He presents information but also systematicallyanalyses that information and draws reasoned conclusions. And therest of his language, supposedly impenetrable to some readers, is usedmeaningfully also. It's not jargon. Yes, Frampton is well-educatedand he has an impressive vocabulary. Is that a problem? I wouldexpect as much from an architectural historian and critic. His styleis different from other writers and perhaps somewhat less accessible,but he has many valuable things to say. Possibly more so than anyother historian of modern architecture that I've come across. He'sthought deeply about his subject matter and offers us his carefullyreasoned analyses. He does this while providing us with a wealth offactual information in a concise format. It's an excellent book.There have been many architectural writers in recent decades who'veabused 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. ...
Rating:
Summary: Excellent, concise text: Yet not for beginners.
Review: Kenneth Frampton's history of modern architecture is a terrific and scholarly book, highlighting all the important architects and styles of this century. Yet this book is not recommended as a beginner's guide to architecture. Frampton relates the various works to other architects and artists of the past and in recent years. His deep knowledge of art/architectual history is expressed throughout the book and can scare of readers without the background. I, myself, who has studied a good deal of art/architectual history, find myself befuddled now and then. Basically, I understand about 2/3 of the references and the other 1/3 I either have to pass on, or due further reasearch. It takes effort, but what you learn along the way is fascinating!
Rating: 
Summary: Let's Chew Paper!
Review: The theory's not bad, and, unlike Robert Venturi, Frapton can string together four or more sentences without self-contradiction. HOWEVER. The text here is so dry you'd almost rather eat it than read it. Of interest to students and serious scholars only.
| 
