by Jon Lackman | 7 April 2006 | Architecture, Journals
In the March 2006 issue of the Journal of the Society of Architectural Historians, twelve academics from outside the field of the history of architecture explain “what they have learned” from it and what directions they’d like to see it go in. Editor Nancy Stieber notes: “We are accused of looking at buildings too closely, neglecting what is happening in the streetscape … [others say] aesthetic fetishism prevents us from providing the insights they require. We are warned that as long as our focus remains only on styles, architects, and ‘pedigreed’ buildings, we have little to offer other fields.” The issue’s critics hail from social history, the history of science, urban history, landscape history, geography, visual studies, and other fields.
