In the world of architecture, modern post architecture shows on something of process or activity and can be classified as post-modern style symbols.

The appearance of modern post can not be separated from the previously applicable aspects of modern architecture. Modern architecture which has been running for over half a century began reaching saturation point. Concepts that are too logical and rational as well as the lack of attention to social values​​, environment and emotions that exist in society will have a variety of criticisms and responses means that modern architecture is more likely to pay attention to how humans should live and the lack of attention to actual human life (nature unilateral). His works were very stiff, boring and has no identity, because it has the same style on almost all types of buildings in various places.

A group then determined a new architect to establish a basic philosophy and the new wider format for design. In his quest for a new architectural vocabulary, then the architects of this new turn to the sources of diverse nature formerly avoided, as Rennisance-Italian, baroque-German, Las Vegas and others.

Post Modern is characterized by the reemergence of classical forms, traditional building process (the vernacular) and improve its function. The characteristics of the modern post include:
· Aspects of unification with the environment and history, is also adjusting to the situation around
· The elements included not only the function itself but also as an ornamental element
· The use of geometric elements, seen as a simple form that is not functional, but highlighted as enhancer elements in the composition or harmony of decor.
· The color tends bright and erotic, which is dominated not by color but by the color base mix is heavily influenced pastel, yellow, red and blue violet.
· Relying on a hybrid composition that justifies people to take the elements that exist to be modified as a rich college.

London Modern Architecture – Lloyd’s Building (1986)
Richard Rogers’ Lloyd’s building is a breath of fresh air in a city full of concrete commercial office blocks. The daring design places the stairs, elevators, power cables, air ducts and water pipes on the exterior, creating a clean uncluttered working space inside the tower. The services, things that other buildings try to conceal, thus proudly ornament the outside of the Lloyd’s building, creating its unique look.
The Lloyd’s building is located at 1 Lime Street and although not regularly open to the public the office does open each year as part of London Open House, when it’s free to visit.

London Modern Architecture – London Eye (1999)
Similarly to the Eiffel Tower, in Paris, the London Eye was originally intended only to be a temporary construction. However, due to its immense popularity, much like the Eiffel Tower, the wheel has become a permanent landmark, an instantly recognizable symbol of the city.
The Eye is located on the south bank of the River Thames opposite the houses of parliament. It is currently the most visited paid tourist attraction in country and the 30-minute ride will cost £17.50.

London Modern Architecture – 30 St Mary Axe: The Gherkin (2004)
30 St Mary Axe, affectionately known as The Gherkin (the British word for a pickle) due to its shape, is a welcome addition to the city skyline. This visually striking postmodern tower is an extremely good example of how modern architecture can enhance its local environment. The building is appreciated by both the public and professionals alike and won its architect, Sir Norman Foster, Britain’s most prestigious architectural award, the RIBA Stirling Prize.
Located, unsurprisingly, at 30 St Mary Axe, The Gherkin is only open to the public once a year as part of London Open House.

The glass and metal appeal of modern homes and commercial buildings came into popularity in the years following World War II. Originally, modern architecture was more a social movement rooted in political rhetoric; form and function were more statement than artistry. Amid the ruins of war torn Europe in the 1920s and 1930s, there came into being the Bauhaus, a school for artist that included architectural pursuits. The “school motto” was Start from Zero.

Such notables as Mies Van der Rohe and Walter Gropius came to represent the modern architectural movement. The politics behind the movement were a complex weave of anti-war sentiments, socialism and machine age glorification.

These sentiments were embodied in basic materials such as concrete and stone, glass and metal. The function of space was to function as space, providing only that which man needed. The styling of traditional architecture, from gabled roofs to corbels to stained glass windows were eschewed. Windows were designed to allow in light and heat. Roofs were designed to protect the inhabitants from the elements. Any ornamentation was superfluous. Basic spaces to meet basic needs.

After World War II, the basic rectangular form that functioned as modern architecture became more appealing to the populations of the now super industrialized West. All things modern were considered desirable, and modern architecture as seen today came into its own.

Though still lean in design, current forms of modern architecture have become more stylized, particularly in residential design. Roofs with one-sided slopes to encourage passive heat flow, rectangular structures with interior curved walls to encourage air distribution throughout, and honest materials of reclaimed wood, concrete and stone all find their way into modern architecture.

The form of the structure itself becomes the ornamentation of the style. Though originally boxy and cubicle in nature, modern design now follows the land’s contours while still retaining basic geometric structure. The results are decidedly non-traditional, yet are decidedly different from the intentions of the founders of Bauhaus.

The idea behind their rally cry of Start from Zero was one of a deconstructionist ideal. The founders wanted to take apart all that had come before and reconstruct architecture, and indeed societies, to suit a leaner, more streamlined way of living.

The simplification of living spaces by eliminating ornamentation and making no effort to hide the origins of materials and craftsmanship was, and remains, the primary characteristic of modern architecture. But that modern architecture has become a stylish and exclusive design for those who can afford such homes would surely disturb the socialist thinking of Walter Gropius and the followers of Bauhaus design.

As the population of Singapore is drawn from many ethnic origins, and the island has been ruled by a succession of foreign powers, the country has struggled to find its identity since gaining independence in 1965. First the city’s banks and then the government have actively aimed to develop high-quality landmark buildings with the aim of not only defining a sense of national identity, but also to boosting business and tourism. For this reason the city is full of high quality architecture.

Singapore’s Modern Architecture: Skyscrapers
In the late seventies and eighties Singapore’s businesses and hotels drew attention to themselves by constructing high-quality skyscrapers. The city became synonymous with the high-rise as buildings by some of the world’s leading architects, including Pritzker Prize winners, I.M. Pei and Kenzo Tange, rose in the city. In 1986 Singapore was the focus of the world’s attention, as the 280-meter Overseas Union Bank Centre became the tallest building outside of North America. This building would start a trend as Asian cities constructed higher and higher buildings.

First Kuala Lumpur (Petronas Towers), then Taipei (Taipei 101) and most recently Dubai (Burj Dubai) have all constructed visually interesting “world’s tallest”, skyscrapers that have focused the world’s attention on the host city. However, Singapore’s could not follow this route due to a height restriction imposed by the downtown’s proximity to the airport.

Singapore’s Modern Architecture: Municipal Buildings
Denied the chance to increase it’s exposure through the construction of the “world’s tallest building”, Singapore has tried to find other ways to distinguish itself and increase people’s awareness of the city through its architecture. City officials knew this could be achieved by creating an iconic landmark building, an Eiffel Tower or a Sydney Opera House, which would become synonymous with the city’s prosperity.

Since the beginning of the millennium three extremely high quality municipal buildings designed by internationally famous architects have been constructed in the city. First Michael Wilford and DP Architects’ Esplanade Theatre in 2002, followed by T.R. Hamzah & Yeang’s National Library of Singapore in 2005, and most recently Stirling Prize winner Norman Foster’s Supreme Law Court of Singapore in 2006. All three are examples of excellent modern architecture that Singapore can be proud of.

These buildings, and the recently completed Singapore Flyer, (which like the London Eye has become a major attraction) have drawn business and tourists to the city, however, although each building is a striking and successful addition to the city none has become the iconic symbol of Singapore.

The exact characteristics and origins of Modern architecture are still open to interpretation and debate.

Some historians see the evolution of Modern architecture as a social matter, closely tied to the project of Modernity and hence to the Enlightenment, a result of social and political revolutions.

Others see Modern architecture as primarily driven by technological and engineering developments, and it is true that the availability of new building materials such as iron, steel, concrete and glass drove the invention of new building techniques as part of the Industrial Revolution. In 1796, Shrewsbury mill owner Charles Bage first used his ‘fireproof’ design, which relied on cast iron and brick with flag stone floors. Such construction greatly strengthened the structure of mills, which enabled them to accommodate much bigger machines. Due to poor knowledge of iron’s properties as a construction material, a number of early mills collapsed. It was not until the early 1830s that Eaton Hodgkinson introduced the section beam, leading to widespread use of iron construction, this kind of austere industrial architecture utterly transformed the landscape of northern Britain, leading to the description, “Dark satanic mills” of places like Manchester and parts of West Yorkshire. The Crystal Palace by Joseph Paxton at the Great Exhibition of 1851 was an early example of iron and glass construction; possibly the best example is the development of the tall steel skyscraper in Chicago around 1890 by William Le Baron Jenney and Louis Sullivan. Early structures to employ concrete as the chief means of architectural expression (rather than for purely utilitarian structure) include Frank Lloyd Wright’s Unity Temple, built in 1906 near Chicago, and Rudolf Steiner’s Second Goetheanum, built from 1926 near Basel, Switzerland.

Other historians regard Modernism as a matter of taste, a reaction against eclecticism and the lavish stylistic excesses of Victorian Era and Edwardian Art Nouveau.
Whatever the cause, around 1900 a number of architects around the world began developing new architectural solutions to integrate traditional precedents (Gothic, for instance) with new technological possibilities. The work of Louis Sullivan and Frank Lloyd Wright in Chicago, Victor Horta in Brussels, Antoni Gaudi in Barcelona, Otto Wagner in Vienna and Charles Rennie Mackintosh in Glasgow, among many others, can be seen as a common struggle between old and new.

Modernism as dominant style
By the 1920s the most important figures in Modern architecture had established their reputations. The big three are commonly recognized as Le Corbusier in France, and Ludwig Mies van der Rohe and Walter Gropius in Germany. Mies van der Rohe and Gropius were both directors of the Bauhaus, one of a number of European schools and associations concerned with reconciling craft tradition and industrial technology.
Frank Lloyd Wright’s career parallels and influences the work of the European modernists, particularly via the Wasmuth Portfolio, but he refused to be categorized with them. Wright was a major influence on both Gropius and van der Rohe, however, as well as on the whole of organic architecture.

In 1932 came the important MOMA exhibition, the International Exhibition of Modern Architecture, curated by Philip Johnson. Johnson and collaborator Henry-Russell Hitchcock drew together many distinct threads and trends, identified them as stylistically similar and having a common purpose, and consolidated them into the International Style.
This was an important turning point. With World War II the important figures of the Bauhaus fled to the United States, to Chicago, to the Harvard Graduate School of Design, and to Black Mountain College. While Modern architectural design never became a dominant style in single-dwelling residential buildings, in institutional and commercial architecture Modernism became the pre-eminent, and in the schools (for leaders of the profession) the only acceptable, design solution from about 1932 to about 1984.

Architects who worked in the international style wanted to break with architectural tradition and design simple, unornamented buildings. The most commonly used materials are glass for the facade, steel for exterior support, and concrete for the floors and interior supports; floor plans were functional and logical. The style became most evident in the design of skyscrapers. Perhaps its most famous manifestations include the United Nations headquarters (Le Corbusier, Oscar Niemeyer, Sir Howard Robertson), the Seagram Building (Ludwig Mies van der Rohe), and Lever House (Skidmore, Owings, and Merrill), all in New York. A prominent residential example is the Lovell House (Richard Neutra) in Los Angeles.

Detractors of the international style claim that its stark, uncompromisingly rectangular geometry is dehumanising. Le Corbusier once described buildings as “machines for living”, but people are not machines and it was suggested that they do not want to live in machines. Even Philip Johnson admitted he was “bored with the box.” Since the early 1980s many architects have deliberately sought to move away from rectilinear designs, towards more eclectic styles. During the middle of the century, some architects began experimenting in organic forms that they felt were more human and accessible. Mid-century modernism, or organic modernism, was very popular, due to its democratic and playful nature. Alvar Aalto and Eero Saarinen were two of the most prolific architects and designers in this movement, which has influenced contemporary modernism.

Although there is debate as to when and why the decline of the modern movement occurred, criticism of Modern architecture began in the 1960s on the grounds that it was universal, sterile, elitist and lacked meaning. Its approach had become ossified in a “style” that threatened to degenerate into a set of mannerisms. Siegfried Giedion in the 1961 introduction to his evolving text, Space, Time and Architecture (first written in 1941), could begin “At the moment a certain confusion exists in contemporary architecture, as in painting; a kind of pause, even a kind of exhaustion.” At the Metropolitan Museum of Art, a 1961 symposium discussed the question “Modern Architecture: Death or Metamorphosis?” In New York, the coup d’état appeared to materialize in controversy around the Pan Am Building that loomed over Grand Central Station, taking advantage of the modernist real estate concept of “air rights”, In criticism by Ada Louise Huxtable and Douglas Haskell it was seen to “sever” the Park Avenue streetscape and “tarnish” the reputations of its consortium of architects: Walter Gropius, Pietro Belluschi and the builders Emery Roth & Sons. The rise of postmodernism was attributed to disenchantment with Modern architecture. By the 1980s, postmodern architecture appeared triumphant over modernism, including the temple of the Light of the World, a futuristic design for its time Guadalajara Jalisco La Luz del Mundo Sede International; however, postmodern aesthetics lacked traction and by the mid-1990s, a neo-modern (or hypermodern) architecture had once again established international pre-eminence. As part of this revival, much of the criticism of the modernists has been revisited, refuted, and re-evaluated; and a modernistic idiom once again dominates in institutional and commercial contemporary practice, but must now compete with the revival of traditional architectural design in commercial and institutional architecture; residential design continues to be dominated by a traditional aesthetic.

Characteristics
Modern architecture is usually characterized by:
• a rejection of historical styles as a source of architectural form (historicism)
• an adoption of the principle that the materials and functional requirements determine the result
• an adoption of the machine aesthetic
• a rejection of ornament
• a simplification of form and elimination of “unnecessary detail”
• an adoption of expressed structure
• Form follows function