Book Reviews Peter O. Muller, Book Review Editor From Chicago to L.A.: Making Sense of Urban Theory. Michael Dear, ed. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications, 2002. xi and 444 pp., maps, diags., photos, notes, and index. $89.95 cloth ((ISBN)-7619-2094-3) Reviewed by Brian Coffey, Urban Studies Program, University of Washington, Tacoma, Tacoma, WA. The drive from Chicago to Los Angeles takes about three days or, if flying is an option, the trip can be redu- ced to about four hours. For some, however, it is a jour- ney that has lasted 75 years, beginning with the rise of the Chicago School of urban sociology in the 1920s and ending with the emergence of an L.A. School of urbanism. As any student of urban theory knows, the Chicago School dominated urban studies for much of the 20th century. However, over the past 10 to 15 years, various scholars have begun to suggest that this dom- ination merits rethinking. In large part these calls for change have stemmed from the notion that the precepts of the Chicago School are no longer the best approach to understanding the contemporary city. What worked in Chicago some three-quarters of a century ago has, they charge, little applicability to present-day cities whose existence is based on vastly different technologies and values and whose form bears little resemblance to the relatively compact nature of the early-20th-century city. In short, Chicago is no longer a viable model for the study of urban growth and development. Los Angeles, on the other hand, is deemed ideal. Included among the advocates of an L.A. School of urban thought is Michael Dear, who argues that a new (and better) set of principles has been defined to study the city, principles that owe their origins to the rise of Los Angeles and the other cities that dot Southern Cali- fornia. As Dear puts it, ‘‘Los Angeles has . . . posited a different set of rules for understanding urban growth’’ (p. viii) and, he contends, it is this new set of rules that ty- pifies the growth and development of the American city. From Chicago to L.A. makes a strong argument for the legitimacy of an L. A. School of urbanism. It does so by whisking its readers away from early-20th-century Chi- cago and planting them firmly amid the social and cultur- al landscapes of early- 21st-century Southern California. Further, it is suggested that these are landscapes that the residents of virtually any U.S. metropolitan area might easily recognize. In other words, Los Angeles, long viewed as an urban anomaly, is now to be viewed as the norm. This volume, made up of 16 chapters dealing with various aspects of urban life in Southern California, is divided into four parts: ‘‘Los Angeles and the ‘L.A. School,’’’ ‘‘City of Industry,’’ ‘‘Reconsidering Community,’’ and ‘‘Revisioning Urban Theory.’’ At first glance the book seems to be an odd mix of essaysFindustry, home- lessness, immigrants, ecosystems, gay communities, the media, gangs, religion, and governance are among the topics included. Indeed, a scan of the table of con- tents may well leave one wondering how this me ´lange can serve as an important buttress in presenting the case for an L.A. School of urban thought. However, as one delves into the book, concerns of this sort begin to disappear. The work begins and ends with chapters by Michael Dear (the first is coauthored with Steven Flusty). Both chapters deal with the notion of an L. A. School of ur- banism. In Chapter 1 the rise of the L. A. School is explored, and a case is made that such a school does in fact exist. In the final chapter Dear briefly reviews all of the book’s chapters to identify insights that serve ‘‘as points of departure for a revised theoretical and empirical inquiry into the nature and significance of the city’’ (p. 423). He also uses these summaries to say that ‘‘a most emphatic yes!’’ is clearly the best answer to the question of whether or not an L.A. School exists (p. 423). However, it is what falls between these two chapters that best serves to define the L.A. School. Throughout, the book relies heavily on The City , the 1925 classic by Park, Burgess, and McKenzie. Each chapter of From Chicago to L.A. is prefaced with quotes from The City , and the authors of the various chapters make repeated reference to Park et al. in presenting their own ideas. It is a technique that works quite well. The quotes put each chapter into perspective and establish a framework for the work as a whole. In effect, The City is used to stitch together the chapters of From Chicago to L.A. The se- lected quotes, along with the authors’ own perspectives on their work vis-a `-vis writings in The City , give cause to accept the legitimacy of the L.A. School. In essence, the authors of From Chicago use The City as a tool to make the transition or leap from Illinois to California. It is fair to say that in each section of the book cri- ticism of the Chicago School can be found (e.g., it is Annals of the Association of American Geographers, 94(2), 2004, pp. 425–444 r 2004 by Association of American Geographers Published by Blackwell Publishing, 350 Main Street, Malden, MA 02148, and 9600 Garsington Road, Oxford OX4 2DQ, U.K.