Introduction This paper analyzes arguments against modern architecture. These arguments are based on the book “the language of Post-modern architecture” by Jencks 1 . This paper explains the central argument and structure of the points presented in the book. This analysis is aimed at explaining the justifications of the points analyzed. Secondly, this paper discusses these arguments relative to the period which the arguments were put forward. Such issues will be analyzed in this subsection to establish if the author was advancing some common agenda, or if there was a specific issue that the author was speaking against, or supporting. Finally, this paper investigates if the arguments are sustainable or not. This will be an indication of if this paper agrees with the author’s arguments or not. Central Argument and Structure The central argument advanced by Jencks is that, modern architect is proving to be irrelevant in present-day society which is characterized by extreme commercial interests. The author indicates that modern architecture was developed to uphold certain universal agendas which fail to reflect what present-day societies believe in 2 . In this regard, the author explains that modern architect seems to be more elicitist and tends to lack meaning as well. Jencks further explains that modern architect was based on traditional structures which do not resonate with new modernist construction. Examining the main role for which modern architecture was founded, Jencks notes that, modern architecture plays a silent role of a ‘social utopian’ 3 . According to him, this is a deflection from the original purpose to which modern architecture was founded. He further notes that during the inception of the concept of modern architecture, the main agenda voiced at the time was upholding social morality but further down history lane, the motivation behind modern architecture was social transformation. According to Jencks, this conflict of task formed the framework for continued misunderstandings of modern architecture because initially, it was marred by challenges of practice. However, as time went by, it was marred by challenges to do with acceptance. Here, he notes that the pioneers of modern architecture abandoned their role of architects in the society and instead pursued the agenda of advancing a new social paradigm 4 . However, Jencks questions the creation of the new social paradigm advocated by these architects. Jencks’s structure of this argument is based on the analysis of international exhibitions and world fairs. In this segment of the study, Jencks notes that there was no clear understanding of how buildings which were designed in the context of mass exhibitions (and world culture) could be comprehended in the context of mass culture alone. He notes that this observation was evident because most people only concentrated on observing the spatial and optical qualities of various buildings. He also notes that mass media overlooked the authentic content of these architectural works by focusing on the blatant nationalism and ersatz ambience which characterized most of the world’s trade fairs. In the same context, he also notes that, because most people overlooked the content of these architectural works, they also failed to notice the pro