How could your otherwise fine magazine allow…” Thus begins a lament, an actual complaint about a writer’s point of view. We get letters like this all the time from readers who want to tangle with a writer expressing a strong opinion in print. We exult in these arguments, even the hyperbolic ones, since few publications share such a committed, vital constituency as ARCHITECTURAL RECORD. You always tell us what you think, as if the future of the architectural profession depended on it. In a sense, it does, and we treat your opinions with that same concern.

Ironically, the challenge to integrate more critical writing into these pages has come both from our editors and from you, who have continually asked, like Oliver Twist with his porridge, for more. Your desire for a critical voice reflects shared years of academic conditioning, where we regularly face scrutiny (sometimes withering, sometimes cruel, sometimes enlightened) of professors, practitioners, and fellow students. In the design studio and jury, we learned to question and debate, to take nothing for granted. Then at graduation, the clouds parted; suddenly, our clientele seemed too accepting of our work, prompting us to yearn for those tougher early crits. Can’t a magazine provide the equivalent of a splash of cold water?