The Avery Review is a new online journal dedicated to thinking about books, buildings, and other architectural media. We see the genres of the review and the critical essay as vital but still underutilized ways of exploring the ideas and problems that animate the field of architecture, and we hope to push these genres beyond their most familiar forms, whether journalistic or academic. Our aim is to explore the broader implications of a given object of discourse (whether text, film, exhibition, building, project, or urban environment). We are interested in reviews that test and expand the reviewer’s own intellectual commitments—theoretical, architectural, and political—through the work of others. The Avery Review will publish new content monthly during the academic year.

In the public sphere of the Internet, isn’t everyone a critic? Aren’t we already flooded by opinion? We believe not. Architecture’s digital realm is too often comprised of conventional wisdom, fast-twitch reactions, credulously paraphrased press releases, and a privileging of image over argument. There is valuable work being done by a number of professional architectural critics, but the demands of format and intended audience place certain limits on the scope and style of their work. The most nuanced articles of scholarly criticism, meanwhile—the reviews of record that take stock of the vital contributions of historians, theorists, and curators—are modestly sited in the back pages of the house journals, where their potential for public engagement is curtailed by self-selecting readerships. Nor are we simply “over” criticism. Architecture operates within overlapping frameworks of precedent, adaptation, context, politics, and circumstance, and understanding these interactions is as important as ever. Is there a critical opening between these different models, where we might explore the stakes of academia and practice through thoughtful, informed, and lively reviewing? Is there room within the field of architecture for a digital culture of criticism and commentary like those that have arisen in other disciplines? We believe so.

The Avery Review seeks out reviews and critical essays on books, buildings, and other architectural media, broadly defined. We envision a typical length of 1,500-3,000 words. We like stylish, concise, and accessible writing, and we invite our contributors to experiment with tone and format as suits their topic. Most of all, we hope to publish pieces that are consequential and earnestly felt. We also welcome responses to the essays that have already been published.

Whether a pitch for a review or a long-form think piece, we welcome your thoughts—with the simple request that they critically engage the work of someone else. Please send all submissions, queries, and comments to editors[at]averyreview.com

We’re eager to hear what our readers are thinking about, and in the spirit of spurring public conversation, here are a few things that have been on the editors’ minds (and which we’d enjoy receiving pieces about):

  • Real Estates: Life Without Debt
  • Imagined Globalization: Latin American in Translation by Nestor García Canclini
  • SQM the Quantified Home edited by Joseph Grima and Space Caviar
  • Renovations to the national stadium in Brasilia
  • MoMA's "Uneven Growth" 
  • The proposed QueensWay 
  • Hudson Yards 
  • The Mecca Royal Hotel 
  • Michael Maltzan's Star Apartments in L.A.'s Skid Row
  • "The Nature of the Image: Architecture, Humans, and History in the Anthropocene" lecture at the Courtauld Institute in London 
  • ... among others.

All essays published in the Avery Review represent the opinions of their authors, and we welcome your responses and contributions. The editors1 can be reached at editors[at]averyreview.com

  • 1.
    • James Graham, Editor
    • Caitlin Blanchfield, Managing Editor
    • Jordan Carver & Jacob Moore, Contributing Editors
    • A project of the Office of Publications at the Columbia University Graduate School of Architecture, Planning and Preservation.