It seems to me that architecture is very much something that causes us both pleasure and trouble. I live in the part of western London where I think many of the streets are, where I live are really ugly, and this distresses me every time I walk to a supermarket or walk to a tube. I think why did they built that and with terribly without architecture. It last so long, and if you write a bad book or do a bad play, you know, I will be shocked when it be showed and then no one would suffer. A bad building has a serious impact for, could be hundreds of years on the people around it. And suppose the book arose a little bit from the frustration, almost anger than there is so much bad architecture around. And then I realise if you talk about architecture, you will say why the building is not more beautiful. Then you will say I can use such word as "beauty", that's a really arrogant word. And no one knows what beautiful is. It's all in the eye of the beholder. I couldn't help but think that actually. Well, you know that we all attempt to agree that Rome is nice than Milky kings, and San Francisco has the edge of Frankfurt, so we can make that sort of generalisation, surely, they are something we can say about why a building work or why it doesn't. So, the book really attempts to suggest why architecture works when it does and what might be going to be wrong when it doesn't work.