This book will be a classic. It is not so much a history of American architecture as it is a sociology, and not so much a sociology as it is a subtle and invigorating study of the social relations and social dynamics of American buildings and the people who make and use them. The book's views can be startling---see the comments on Jefferson's Monticello, on Buckminster Fuller, on Richard Meier's Getty Center in Los Angeles. It is beautifully written and the photographs are often dazzling. It even tackles the American suburb and shopping malls. Its views of the development of architecture as a profession and the status of architecture in the history of art are provocative and incisive. Highly recommended.

This collection of essays and articles is essential reading for anyone interested in America's architectural history. Classic articles on ways to examine architecture in relation to cultural geography are featured prominently in this volume. There are also important pieces of work that link architecture to the history of various ethnic groups, and I especially enjoyed articles that deal with contemporary forms of vernacular expression. This is an important book for anyone interested in the study of folklore, history, art history, and architecture. It could also be useful for practicing architects to read the essays for ideas to inspire their own designs.

Dell Upton's book does for the eighteenth century Virginia parish Church what Addleshaw's 'The Architectural Setting of Anglican Worship' did for its English and Irish counterpart half a century ago by high lighting and exploring a unique church architecture and the society that produced it.Upton explores the architectural, historical, and sociological aspects of Anglicanism in Colonial Virginia as expressed in the church buildings. However it isn't just an architectural study. Upton's awareness of the social context of Virginia Anglicanism as an Established Church enables him to look at the buildings as an expression of the society that produced them. He raises awareness of the unique nature of the parishes, and the need to accomodate the scattered population and hierarchical social order of the colony. He also compares the church architecture of the Old Dominion to other formal structures such as courthouses and mansions, and vernacular homes illustrating the construction techniques and conventions common to all buildings in Georgian Virginia. If I have one minor criticism it is that Upton does not seem to have any great familiarity with the history of 17th & 18th century Anglicanism. For example, he states that the Rev. Devereux Jarrett (1732-1801) was a Methodist when in fact he was an Evangelical Anglican sharply critical of the separatists. Upton also seems to have only limited familiarity with the Anglican Book of Common Prayer and its demands on the worshipping space. However these are very minor blemishes in what is primarily a study of an architecture in its context. This is a very interesting and valuble book for anyone interested in colonial church architecture, the history of Anglicanism or Virginia history.

'Way too many things Mr. Upton does wrong here. For him, Madaline had one appeal: she was alive in a city he was studying, during the period he was studying. She's actually a more interesting 'case' than he makes of her, though--as presented here--not a particularly interesting woman nor one particulary revealing of her times or situation.

As for being a 'case': here's a woman who'd already birthed multiple children, who you'd think would know better, abusing those around her with the notion that she's been pregnant for OVER TWO YEARS with the current biscuit-in-the-oven. Just a tad psycho, no?

I suggest that Madaline was so emotionally damaged and mentally handicapped that most of what she commits to her diary is suspect. Meanwhile, the author is so busy milking the diary for 'place-ness' references that he reveals zilch understanding of her, and only a shallow, voyeuristic interest in her circumstances.

A stone cold, major waste of time. A different kind of academic could have done something useful with these pages.

The editorial "blurb" indicates that this book proves the inequality forced on women in the Antebellum South. I disagree! This pair of diaries proves that teenage foolishness did NOT begin in the mid-20th century! This woman married at 14 to a man who was obviously disapproved by her family and friends; forced him to leave her; did not obtain a divorce; married as a bigamist to a man who was also a bigamist; left him to be "kept" by a married man whose moral credentials one has no choice but to doubt -- and, the editor would like us to believe that these choices were "forced on her"?! I think not! There is nothing that indicates that her first marriage was "forced on her" -- and that is the starting point of all the rest of her troubles. No sympathy here.