I enjoyed Davis's "City of Quartz" about Los Angeles, and I thought I'd enjoy this collection of essays, edited by Davis. The problem with a collection of essays is that there is no common style and no common approach to the book's theme. On the positive side, there is always something that each person will like, and at least a few essays will strike a chord with anyone interested enough to open the book.
The theme - and it's a loose one - is that the world's nouveaux riches are creating poorly designed communities that isolate them from the broader society, and in the long run, these communities are not in anyone's self-interest, not even the self-interest of the people who live in them. For Americans, the archetype of this phenomenon is the gated suburban development in which McMansions sit on overly-spacious plots of land. Numerous countries, especially those with the worst income inequalities, are copying the phenomenon of the gated community, in which the well-to-do try to isolate themselves from their fellow citizens.
Here are the topics covered by these essays: New luxury suburbs in Egypt, Iran, Dubai, China, Hong Kong, South Africa, Nicaragua, Hungary, Columbia, and Brazil. Several essays are about the US from various angles, covering Minneapolis, Sun City (Arizona), Orange County (California), and Richmond (Virginia). There are essays about Ted Turner's rural landholdings in New Mexico and elsewhere, self-aggrandizing museums in the US, the fad of experiencing monastery life for brief visits, and an essay about planned "floating utopias" in international waters.
Some of the essays are excellent (e.g., the essay about Hong Kong, or the saga of of the man arrested for being on a "public" sidewalk in Richmond), while others are hodgepodges of leftist jargon. But as a totality, this book doesn't hang together as well as it might. Also, some of the authors wander far from the intended theme. It's fascinating to read about conflicts between the TV mogul, Ted Turner, and his rural neighbors, or to read about millionaires' museums as monuments to themselves, but the overall cohesiveness of the book is harmed.