Manila’s Architectural Heritage 1571-1960. Volume 1 The Center: Intramuros, Binondo, San Nicolas, Tondo

gence of history and traditional knowledge. Mehaffy then embarks on a genuinely ambitious philosophical digression, which somewhat distracts from the main purpose of the book (section III), followed by arguments on the link between the New Urban Agenda and the principles of Jacobs and Alexander (section IV). Finally, in section V he recapitulates around five key lessons with corresponding ‘hopeful examples’: the first, connectivity, is illustrated by the city of Portland, Oregon; the second, opportunities for all, by the exceptional experience of Medellín/Colombia; the third, adaptation, by Alexander’s own project for the Eishin School in Tokyo; the fourth, environmental sustainability, by Freiburg/Germany; and the fifth, system reformwith the example of the plans for the recovery of New Orleans after Hurricane Katrina, in which the author was involved. Despite the scepticism and mistrust that may be aroused by some superficial readings or those that seek to apply Jacobs’ or Alexander’s principles literally to current urban realities, re-reading them, as Mehaffy acknowledges, allows us to test their ideas, verify them, modify them, combine them with others and, if they seem useful, proceed to apply them constructively or, failing that, revise them as convenient.