Unsupported browser

For a better experience please update your browser to its latest version.

Your browser appears to have cookies disabled. For the best experience of this website, please enable cookies in your browser

We'll assume we have your consent to use cookies, for example so you won't need to log in each time you visit our site.
Learn more

Research question

  • Comment

Unusually for a refereed journal, Architectural Research Quarterly has begun (possibly) a war of words over what it is that other architectural magazines should be publishing. The leader in its latest issue lambasts other (unnamed) editors for 'fighting to be first to publish this or that new building'. According to arq, this 'might be described as architectural vanity publishing', though two lines later it declares it is not vanity after all, but merely 'counterproductive' (I love it when Cambridge boys treat adjectives and nouns as antonyms). It adds that all this publishing- buildings-first stuff damages the image (back to vanity) and reputation of the profession, 'by contradicting our stated goals'. Who has stated them?

  • Comment

Have your say

You must sign in to make a comment

Please remember that the submission of any material is governed by our Terms and Conditions and by submitting material you confirm your agreement to these Terms and Conditions.

Links may be included in your comments but HTML is not permitted.