kenneth frampton's history of modern architecture

it's a little heavy on early modernism and a little lite on post-1968, but it's by far the most readable history out there (which maybe isn't saying much). i also guarantee you'll probably read it in you're first two years of school anyway.

sadly, there are very few good post-1968 primers out there. the hays book is very difficult.

a possible niche for you budding writers out there?

i don't think theory has disappeared, just changed. i have two answers for you.

1 - relax. you'll get what you need in school. have a good summer.

2 - keep it simple. pick up something like norberg-schultz 'meaning in arch' or kostof's 'history of arch' and you'll be pretty well grounded.

beyond those:
-'the education of an architect' is not a theory text, but will get you excited about what you might get to do in school.
-geoffrey baker's 'analysis of form' books are a good primer on formal issues.
-you'll probably use it in upper years, but frampton's 'history of modern arch' gives you the basic theoretical premise behind a lot of the modern work with which you'll be familiar, as well as the historic context.

newb, i agree with all posted above, and i'd emphasize that you're going to read these things anyway... better to wait and read them in the context of a class.

if you still can't hold your horses i'd suggest the introduction of kate nesbitt's theorizing a new agenda for architecture. a good analysis of theoretical developments 1965 - 95.

the hays book is better in the context of a class, but i think the nesbitt can be done independently [particularly the intro]

if you are shaky on the whole 20th century, definitely read the frampton first before diving into the 60's. alan colquhoun also has a modern architecture book that's not as good as the frampton but is a bit shorter and with more pics [depends on what you want- it's no sin to want a shorter version just to get a general view].

also i'm a fan of ulrich conrads' theories and manifestoes of 20th century architecture. read like you would a book of short stories.

thanks guys for the input, im not trying to be over anxious, i got thinking about it actually, after reading ashley schafer's theory after [after-theory] in perspecta. it peaked my interest and sort of threw a wrench in what was my previous basic understanding of the role of theory within the discipline.

so i figured getting that broad introduction would help me better digest how theory has changed as related to practice....'after-theory'

hey believe it or not there was architecture before the 20th century.

ah yes. post theory. not knockin' anyone, especially ashley schaefer who i admire very much, but the whole 'after theory' discussion seems like an attempt by some theorists to create a new avant-garde: in order to move to the next theory they seem to think they have to declare theory dead.

i don't think we suggested that there wasn't vado. both kostof and norberg-schultz start with the ancient.

i hear what you're saying steven, although there seems to be a lot of relevance to the economic/building boom she refers to. i don't think you have to be well read in theory to notice the production all around you, and how on the surface, that production seems to be devoid of intellectual stimulation.

i think it's great you're reading contemporary theory. perspecta is good as is a dutch publiction called hunch - i think put out by the berlage. the harvard design magazine also good. and i still love the low-brow stuff like dwell and metropolis. contemporary writing on architecture is actually quite a bit more readable than the post-1968 theory crowd and maybe a better introduction to the profession (at least more fun because you can immediately see its relevance), though i also believe you have to know the history of thought to fully appreciate what's being said now. i applaud your initiative.

there is an architecture reader that was just published this year by Krista Sykes that has excerpts of the main architectural thinkers from Vitruvius to Koolhaas. It can give you a broad perspective and lead into where you may want to look at more.

And the first suggestion of Frampton's book on Modern Architecture is the most compreshensive I know of Modernism.

thanks jafidler, here is a question for you or others...

take perspecta for instance, i tried yale's website, tried googling it....is there a way to get a "subscription" to that? i know you can buy individual issues, but im wondering if you can get them sent to you when they come out, much like DETAIL...anyone know?

I hereby declare the beginning of theory after [after[after[after-theory]]]. See, I'm more avant-garde than you.

For a beginning architecture theory text, I would suggest a nice big fat reader like Kate Nesbitt's Theorizing a New Agenda for Architecture or Neal Leach's Rethinking Architecture for an emphasis on late twentieth century theory.

Of course, like vado points out, there is a lot more to arch theory than just the last hundred years. But something like these is probably a good start. There are lots of essays to look at, and you can get a feel for the scope of issues involved. Read them with picture books nearby.

forget the last hundred years,
read alberti.de re aedificatoria.
then work your way through to now.

Peter Zumthor's 'Thinking Architecture'

David Leatherbarrow 'On Weathering'

I believe Krista Sykes' book on Theory (from Taschen) is merely summaries of the theories rather than the (preferable) texts themselves. It could be a good overview for someone starting out though.

I would suggest trying to read a couple seminal works rather than an overview/anthology:

Ruskin's Seven Lamps of Architecture
Sullivan and Loos on Ornament
Le Corbusier's Towards a New Architecture
Venturi's Complexity and Contradiction

(pretty much that's a good start / solid foundation...
though I'm also sure it will start a fight here)

mdler, I think I might buy "Thinking Architecture". Can you tell me a bit more about it?

Archis is one of my favorite publications, as for a "textbook" I recommend 'theories and manifestoes of contemporary architecture' by charles jencks and someone else, as a supplement to the frampton. read it with a grain of salt.

Robin Evans - i would recommend his collection of essays called "Translations from Drawings to Buildings"

anyone that might be interested in the post theory stuff, I'd recommend sylvia lavin's ‘The uses and abuses of theory’. you'll have to dig it out of in Progressive Architecture vol.71

mdler, is Zumthor's book really worth it? I skimmed through it a while ago and it didn't seem to have substance much to it. Also, as to the print and aesthetics of the actual book it doesn't seem to live up to his previous standard.

first things first.

My reading list would include:

How Buildings learn - Stewart Brand
Top of my list...its not avant guard architecture theory...so its not as full of shit as a lot of this stuff.
Learning from Las Vegas
towards a new architecture
Hans Iblings Super Modernism
Invisible Cities (your going to read it at some point, and its a great book)
The Image of the City Kevin Lynch
(only cause its one the Pre design exam I am studying for and I never read it, so perhaps it has some value)

Lots more, and I would also look at some visual representation theory...its more interesting, and more applicable to the process of the education. check out Tufte ...save the digital theory stuff for next summer...

i second the iblings book - supermodernism. that's a great mini history that covers contemporary stuff. maybe even start there.

In my view, Thinking Architecture and Atmospheres are fairly light. They are very interesting as accounts of how Zumthor thinks about his work. There is a little bit of Bachelard and some Norberg-Schultz in there, plus a fair bit of intuitive working. Zumthor's architecture is much more eloquent.

For a student that will be entering their first year (undergrad) of architecture school in the fall I would forget about trying to get a jump on theory.

Take a figure drawing class, or something else fun. Or better yet, get a job swinging a hammer. School will be rigorous enough and whatever you read this summer will probably be fairly worthless to you in a year or so. And the risk is that you will read some sort of survey on Arch Theory and then think (or pretend) that you know more than you do.

Relax, have fun this summer.

Another suggestion to newb:

don't spend the summer reading. Travel, sketch, explore the things you like. Later in my (architecture school) career I felt it was good to go back and think about what really lead you to studying and excited you about architecture.

I think some reading can be a good thing, the education of an architect has a lot less to do with building things, and a lot more to do with thoughts and ideas, and your ability to express then....I also thing that most people coming into the profession dont know how to get beyond the "how to" which is why we make space for the first semester, not buildings. Understanding that architecture is not "flip that house" is theory.
My # one advice to someone starting in architecture is leave all your preconceptions of what architecture is at the door....you will do a lot better. The people who are often the most successfull are the ones who never swing a hammer...the highest drop out rate is those who have...
Newb: any book that you read this summer you should read again..you will see it very differently even in 6 months...

Be careful about people's recommendations regarding your primer in architectural theory. Anyone advancing an "overview of architectural theory" or a "grounding" is advancing a doctrine - dogmatic to be sure, and you will learn to play that game in architecture school. Bettor to soak it up when you are in an environment that will give the readings a context.

That said, I would read Dave Hickey's "Air Guitar" - it'll give you a laugh and an attitude toward your work, which are worthwhile summer endeavors, and critical factors toward success in architecture school.

is a good intro look at theory from the dawn of western civilsation to today.

mark sees theory of architecture as a historically oscillating swing between the objective and the subjective, but he don't make much fuss about it or douse it in over-florid rhetoric. very easy read. good as a primer.

frampton is always a good reference. not sure if he is good for theory, but great for history. text is a bit dense but doesn't have too much archi-babble in it.

read your school's brochure for the business school

try reading Rafael Moneo's Theoretical Anxiety and Design Strategies - its a light easy read but should place you in the right shape of mind

Lots of good suggestions, but for someone about to enter an undergraduate program, you might want to think about reading some basic theory first -- what we used to call philosophy. for a freshman, I reccomend (In order):

Descartes, Meditations on First Philosophy
David Hume, a Treatise on Human Nature
Immanuel Kant, Foundations of a Metaphysics of Morals

Then something applied, like:
Adam Smith, The Wealth of Nations
or
Albert Camus, The Myth of Sysaphus

Start with that, or pick something classoc that you can find good online discussions of it. Theory in a vacum is the reason most architects don't get theory.

If you want the whole century, in easily digestible chunks, there are two compendiums of essay:

1. Architecture Culture 1943-1968: A Documentary Anthology (Columbia Books of Architecture) by Joan Ockman and Edward Eigen

This is a collection of essays and articles from the post war period. It looks at how architecture was being thought through after the heroic modern era. Deals with incorporation of network theory, seminology, gestalt ...etc.

2. Architecture Theory since 1968 by K. Michael Hays

This is the companion that looks at theory after 1968. In many ways, these are the writings that set the stage for the current debate - in the sense that this is what contemporary theorists are reacting to. It deals a with criticality, autonomy, deconstruction ..etc.

can't believe i forgot it. i second this one:

Theories and Manifestoes of Modern Arcitecture, edited by Charles Jencks. Has a fair amount of quality writing in digestible (and quotable) chunks. Skimming it could make you look well-read for years to come.

There's a very inexpensive Taschen volume on Architectural Theory. It sits on my shelf looking authoritative though rather unread.

Go browse in a design/arch bookshop. pick up the pretty ones, take them for coffee, talk about the books you intend to read. Rut. because it's summer and she likes it like that.

Really though, when you get there, at the end of summer, what is your angle of approach:

I did well at school and now I'm doing some more school
or
Get out of my way, I was born to build
or
Whatever I do, it has to thrill and engross me, I think Architecture will do that, but over the summer I went to Barbados and worked as a beach gigolo/went to Paris and washed pots in a restaurant/went to Moscow in a private jet/ went to London and rode as a bicycle messenger/learnt to surf/got a great body so that the girls swoon and faint/shot my neighbours dog/knocked up my neighbours' daughter. All of which were brilliant.

Put down the books.

Pick up your life.

Don't listen to me.

That Ockman reference j-turn gave is also a good reader.

it really is. I prefer it to the Hays one. I just think the thinking so much further "out there" in the 60's.

i will do this 3 books and then i will recommend u to go into any Architecture list in amazon.com

"The Death and Life of Great American Cities" by Jane Jacobs

The Society of Mind by Marvin Minsky

and the book that for me changed the way i thought about architecture after my first year of school:
Radical Reconstruction by Lebbeus Woods

wow, thanks everyone, much appreciated

good luck - you have a lot to get through.

forget theory, it'll take me all summer to read this post ;)

apart from all of the other wonderful books mentioned in this thread, try "The Culture of Building" by Howard Davis.
it tells the story of how architecture is embedded in society/economics/culture/everything, and thus is a lot more accessible than most theory. it'll tell you why theory is needed, though.
Davis is close to Christopher Alexander, so expect some "mud is good" coziness- not as much as to damage the otherwise really interesting thoughts he comes up with.

also, read Wabi-Sabi by Leonard Koren for a really refreshing take on all things incomplete.

i recommend harold and the purple crayon by crockett johnson



it's the only book i read in graduate school...and they still gave me a m.arch. degree