The other day I visited the book's Amazon site to use the Look Inside feature to check a citation. I also browsed the reviews, where I was surprised to find a "customer review" by the author. She seems to agree with me and other critics.
I am the author of this book and I would like to agree with the gist of many of the reviews here. The first half of the book - which traces the cultural history of Western concepts of space - is the real meat of the text and is by far the strongest part. The final part of the book, which deals with cyberspace, is weak by comparison. Actually when I wrote the book, I only wanted to write the first part, with a final short and tentative reflection on the then emerging realm of cyberspace. But the publisher - who thought cyberspace was a hip topic - pressed me to make cyberspace a bigger part of the exercise. I too feel that these final chapters have to a large degree been superceded by the development of the Net since 2000. But the real story of the book is the first 5 chapters which trace a critical transition in Western culture's conception of what it means to be a human embedded in a wider spatial scheme. It is this part of the book - which the European reviewers especially praised - that stands as the real achievement and that I would still urge apon readers.She's right. I'd urge the book upon readers too, especially if they're interested in the history of Western religion, science and art and how they relate to each other. Just pass over the cyberspace stuff.