In analyzing the Naked City, and considering the spaces defined by it, McDonough illuminates an interesting topic concerning psycho and social geography. As virtual netowrking becomes ever more prevalent, one could argue that psycho and social geographical consideration is either of more or less importance. One, it is more important now to understand the proximity of things beyond your sight but within your physical abilities to reach and inhabit, or two it is less important as the virtual has seemingly overrun any need for understanding of the geographical relationships. My belief is that the better understanding of social geography, the more likely a city is able to work in a positive urban environment. Establishing that psycho and social geographic information within the city is another problem. Here architecture can play a greater role in landmarking and defining urban space. Clear boundaries are helpful for the eye to recognize as defining geographic conditions. As McDonough notes, it doesn’t have to be a wholly cognitive experience, but a desire to recall specific spaces can greatly inform the social context of urban areas. To what extent will architecture further this urban ideal whereby inhabitants may be greatly informed of their relationship to space? Can architecture redefine or reappropriate space within the urban context while maintaining that psycho geographical understanding?