Does everything really deserve to be published and preserved? Or perhaps we publish out of an anxiety to insert ourselves into a larger history, with the vague hope that the future will take notice of what we do today? The excess of publications must be weighed against the mathematical impossibility that everything is worthwhile. Naturally, this includes us. In this age of suspicion, as defined by Boris Groys, criticism—and above all, self-criticism—is an intellectual duty. This is the spirit that frames this 100th issue of ARQ. For despite the urge to celebrate, we could not help but ask ourselves: what are we celebrating? Mere survival?
Clearly, that is not the case, and that is what motivates us. The worst thing that can happen to an architecture magazine is for the reader to flip through it only to confirm that everything remains the same. That is to say, that its pages echo common sense or current trends, and after flipping through it, the reader leaves it right where they found it. Just as for Bourdieu the role of science was to challenge common sense, ARQ must move beyond commonplaces and enter uncharted territory.
Given that (among other things) we are a scientific journal, we have a duty to advance knowledge. That path entails risks and errors, but it is certainly more refreshing than the path of comfort. The impossibility of knowing whether what we do will matter in the future allows us to look at the present without anxiety. One hundred issues ago, no one knew how far the magazine would go. Today, we still do not know. That is the beauty of it.
