Author

Tay Kheng Soon
1987

1987
ON THE NECESSITY AND FEASIBILITY OF TEACHING AESTHETIC JUDGEMENT AND INTEGRITY IN ARCHITECTURAL DESIGN

This paper attempts to penetrate the difficulties of form making in design and the communication of subtle architectural ideas in a design team. The views are a reflection of the special problems encountered in the context of rapid development in an Asian context. The special aspects relate to the clash between poorly assimilated contemporary design ideas and the half-forgotten Asian design and value traditions. The grammatically and stylistically-confused architecture which abounds is evidence
of the state of affairs.

To put the problem clearly in context, the modern period can be said to be a period in which the individuality of design decisions has taken over from the ver-nacular. The vernacular is traditional design, it is when the overall design is an accepted half-conscious framework. Variations are always within the established theme and within the strict limits of technology and available materials. The situation today is radically different. Free-dom of choice has given rise to new problems.

The rapidity of change has exacerbated the situation. There is no time to digest ideas thoroughly. This factor overlays the cultural diversity and the different ethnic backgrounds as well as the linguistic and class-based factors. Over and above these factors, there is the homogenising effect of modern western designs spread by the western-dominated media. The sheer vitality and output of new designs are so seductively spread by the media that they leave Asian designers and clients breathless and wanting to "catch-up". In the catch-up process, the new idioms are not learnt well nor is the underlying philosophy consonant with the prevailing values. What we have is mostly a surface treatment of half-learnt ideas super-imposed on half-forgotten traditions.

Levels of aesthetic understanding vary greatly. There are also many different individual stances and with the general under-development of verbal and judgemental skills the differences are vast. Not only is visual judgement under-developed, human interaction and commu-nication is also under-developed. These are predominantly patterned by power relations and by exercise of authority. This is so especially in Asia. Designers tend to rely on design conventions and on authority rather than on sound personal judgements based on first principles. A free discourse will help to bridge the gap but is very rare and even difficult between persons of different roles and positions. People say what powerful people want to hear and powerful people's opinions are often inaccessible to debate. Thus an open critical discourse so essential for learning is almost impossible within the usual status structured hierarchical organisations.

This predominant structure widens the gaps and heightens the communi-cational difficulties even further. The only way to encourage and develop a freer flow of ideas and judgements is through less steep organisational pyramids where there is a better flow of ideas. Another way is to develop a critical and accurate language of discourse about form and its relationships at the primary level so that thinking about and sensing of architecture can be better. This is the educational programme.

THE SITUATION IN THE STUDIO
The situation experienced in architectural offices is that there are always only a few conceptua-lisers. These are the comprehensive designers and thinkers who gene-rate the basic ideas and design geometries which form the basis for designs to be developed usually by less experienced architects due to the pressures of time and job demands. The professional profile of many firms in developing countries lack the solid middle management and professional support capability. Especially in countries like Singapore and Malaysia, the process of rapid economic growth has eroded established organisations by giving scope to the more experienced or more ambitious to venture out on their own. Thus there are few experienced people in design teams. Most established architectural firms have insufficient core of experienced and able support staff to execute designs in depth and in detail. This is not only true of the architectural professional. Able personnel in general are spread very thin in every sector. Also, as is generally the case, most people prefer to deal with tangibles and concrete realities. Thus the number of conceptual designers with depth and developed judgements are rare indeed.

THE CREATIVE STANCE
For those few creative form givers there is another problem and that is the dilemma inherent in maintaining a creative stance. To cope with the gap between the conceptualiser and the support staff, the conceptualiser has to codify his concepts in order to communicate. But the codes inevitably limit and freeze the concepts. So while he wishes to maintain a freshness in his approach, he runs the risk of being difficult to understand, and yet to be understood he has to codify. This dilemma can only be eased by a long-term educational strategy to teach young architects the confidence of accurate visual judgement and to impart thinking and sensing skills to a much higher level than at present. New generations of architects have to
be trained to have the sensitivity, openness and confidence to freely interact, integrate and modify with consistency the concepts that they work with. There are no short-term answers here.

COURAGE AND CONFIDENCE
I realise that, besides sensitivity, architects must have enough know-ledge but they have to have the correct attitudes too. They must not be cowed by the design situation encountered nor be too scared by the demands and thus run for ready-made answers. Standing one's ground whilst maintaining the open position allows the wit to function, while always seeing the part in relation to the whole sets things in perspective for grammatical design decisions. This is the key to successful design conception and design development. Ability to maintain the open position does not happen overnight, it has to be developed. To see the part and the whole requires a certain distance from favoured ideas. Clinging fervently to preferred ideas make for rigidity. Commitment can be deep but need not be tightly hung on to.
To maintain the open position, one must have confidence in one's own judgements, abilities and intuitions so that the senses are open all the time as the design changes and is adjusted. Confidence can be developed or destroyed in the teaching process.

It is the duty of teachers to develop confidence in students because courage comes from confidence. When there is courage, the open position is possible. The open position is not exclusive, rigid and heavy-handed. It does not rely on ready-made solutions, conventions and orthodox ideas.

ADMINISTRATIVE ARCHITECTS
We need administrative architects. But administrative architects are often blind to the aesthetic implications of decisions made necessary by various demands. How can administrative architects be trained to be sensitive? This is a most important task. Administrative architects readily and blithely com-promise designs usually without even knowing it. What is the nature of the deficiency in their training? How can we address this lack? We need to train sensitivity.

Given that we need different kinds of talents and skills in the profession and that students of architecture also display differences in their inclinations and capabilities, it has to be possible, through training and exposure, to give all architects a deep appreciation of the grammar and the aesthetics of architecture despite their personal preferences so that when they come out into practice, there can be a common working basis between architects of all types. Besides talent and sensing skills in architectural grammar, attitudes and personal stances have also to be developed.

GRAMMAR IN ARCHITECTURE
In order to develop sensing skills and sensitivity to architecture, we need to identify the key issue in design language. It is grammar. Let me just highlight some of the aesthetic issues of grammar. Design grammar affects all forms. Take the case of curves. Different curves have different signatures. They belong to different families. Their kinship is in the similarity and nature of their curvatures. One can be conscious of these particularities. This kind of consciousness can be developed, it is architectural or aesthetic intelligence. The possession of such intelligence is innate, it only needs to be awakened and sharpened. It is this same intelligence which interprets meaning even in subtle facial expressions. We all have it.

When an alien curve intrudes into a family of curves in any design, it should be detected straight away that it is out of character and should be rejected. Why is it that many architects are unable to sense such an intrusion or if they do, why do they accept it? The same can be said for wrong proportions, or clumsy juxtapositions, or about crude intersections, distended attenuations and other formal disorders. Design decisions must be based on judgements of great accuracy and precision. These can be trained. If architects have to rely
on design conventions and standard solutions, the chances of mistakes and misfits are very easy to make.

SENSITIVITY IS INNATE
I do not believe that aesthetic sensitivity is a special gift in the sense that some have it and some do not. All humans can detect very subtle differences in forms, proportions and other differentiating characteristics. That is how the human species had survived and evolved.

It is part of the human endowment for survival. It is part of man's cog-nitive ability. Aesthetic sensitivity and integrity can be trained. I use the term "train" in the widest possible sense. Schools are not doing it effectively because they adopt a tangential strategy towards it. The design studio is a hit-and-miss affair and critiques seldom deal with design language.
It mainly comments on functional and contextual matters. The quality of forms is not discussed for fear of imposing personal caprice.

TOWARDS A PEDAGOGY OF FORM
We need to develop a teaching method - indeed, a pedagogy of form. The other necessary aspects of an architect's training, in my opinion, are technical and contextual in nature. These subjects are amenable to systematic curricular and sequential instruction and can therefore be dealt with relatively easily. The pedagogy of form however is an experiential process of exposing students systematically to primary forms and their relationships. Cognition has to be transformed into consciousness through a process of experimentation and verbalisation. With these skills, they can appreciate style and architectural form in a critical and thorough way. In the pedagogy, students can be awakened to a sense of wholeness and integrity.

Despite their own personal specialisation or preferences for certain styles, they can be architecturally literate and intelligent about all styles. Having identified aesthetic judgement and integrity as the two principle problems to focus on, it would be useful to examine what these words mean. A proper and complete architectural critique is only possible with developed sensing skills and adequate words. The pedagogy must aim to develop these.

AESTHETIC JUDGEMENT
Taste is the crude term drawn from ordinary conversation which encompasses a range of issues in which aesthetic judgement is involved. That there will always be cultural bias in judgement is not obvious but it is there. The core aspects of taste are: aesthetic preference and aesthetic consistency of judgement. Preference is a reflection of the aesthetic experiences which have come to be accepted by an individual within the specifics of his class and educational background and also a reflection of his cultural exposure consciously or unconsciously attained.

While it is true that repeated exposure can accustom anyone to most things, does it follow that everything has aesthetic consistency or integrity? No. The argument of familiarity may tend to undermine the proposition that aesthetic consistency has to do with intrinsic factors. There are two defences for the argument that aesthetic integrity is intrinsic, and they are that there could be conscious aesthetic consensus at any given time within a specific community. This determines broadly the criteria of preference of that community. While consensus broadens the basis of assessment, in itself it does not conclusively indicate the existence of the intrinsic. There is a second more substantial and yet subtle case in the concept of "Resonance" such as explained by Gaston Bachelard in "The Poetics of Space".

In his comment on Resonance, an aesthetic experience of importance is one in which in the depths of one's being, there occurs a sympathetic response or synchrony when an aesthetic experience of some magnitude is felt. That this occurs cross-culturally and goes beyond personal expe-rience indicates the existence of sensing capacities within the human fibre itself. This phenomenon alone gives sufficient encouragement to pursue a pedagogy of form, for without it, all is ultimately caprice, contrivance or conditioning. The universal and long- standing record of profound human spiritual experience is one such case of resonance. Great beauty or great art has a similar affect.

THE CULTURAL/EDUCATIONAL BACKGROUND
Before we speak of the grammar of form and our capacity to grasp it, let us pause to look at the cultural/educational situation in Singapore. In Singapore, we do notice that there is a difference between students or architects who come from a Chinese or dialect-speaking background and those who come from an English-speaking background. This observation is, of course, impressionistic in that the individual stance, the culture of the home background, the class position of the family, its exposure to international artistic influences, etc. all play important roles in modifying the attitudes, values and approaches towards design. In general, however, we find that those who come from long-standing well-to-do families with an English language background tend to be more in tune with the modes of thinking and the aesthetics of western contemporary arts. Some refer to the characteristics of this group as liberal, bourgeois and democratic.

Architecturally, this group tends to be more exploratory and perhaps even trendy. They could be facile too. At their best, their stylistics seek elegance and understatement. The Chinese language background group tends to be more conservative and stylis-tically-conventional.

The more conscientious of this group have a penchant for systematic and disciplined application. They have a tendency to prefer to seek refinement with stylistic adherence to well-acclaimed models rather than conceptual breakthroughs or try untried ideas. There is another group which is wildly expressive. Their architecture is characterised by great exuberance. They are the products of the bilingual policy and the economic boom situation of the last 20 years. They came late into the professional picture. They therefore have to try very hard to stand out. No value judgements on any group is necessary here. Their mention stems from the need to identify their characteristics in order to analyse the factors that underlie
the different form-making processes and the motivations. The differences between the groups identified will respond differently to any proposed pedagogy of form. The pedagogy may therefore have to be tailored to their special needs and perceptions.

THE CHINESE FACTOR
I think it is necessary to explore the implications of some aspects of the Chinese heritage which have an impact on the design attitudes of many of our architects whether of Chinese or English language backgrounds. Since the Singapore culture is so predominantly Chinese in its under-pinnings, it is necessary to infer the links from that heritage which affect aesthetics. Singapore Chinese education and traditional Chinese home background tends to emphasise disciplined rote-learning and memo-rising. It tends not to encourage questioning or discursive exploration without specified or socially legitimate boundaries, objectives or motives. It stresses responsible hierarchical relationships and emphasises respect for mastery and masters.

Most important is the tendency to submerge individual judgement and its replacement by proven conventions and consensual norms. In more general terms, the tangential role of
the Chinese naturalistic philosophical schools and the relative seclusion of Chinese Zen Buddhism and the retreat into mysticism of the Taoist organic schools of thought have left the Chinese heritage lop-sided. Faced with the pragmatics of day-to-day living under difficult conditions in China and represented, organised and ruled by a conservative elite of bureaucrat-Confucianists, the naturalistic and poetic sensibilities of the Chinese heritage are pushed to the side. Relegated to a marginal role in orthodox society, the naturalistic schools lost their creative impetus.

As a neglected force, it concerned itself with the performance of mystical rituals and the placation of cosmic forces in the vicissitudes of human fortune. The role has become negative rather than stimulate the creative and artistic initiatives of society in the joyful acts of artistic invention. Except for outcast or drunken poets and artists, naturalism is not a major force in Chinese orthodox culture. I may be wrong, but while there has been a tremendous output of objects of very high aesthetic appeal in terms of craftsmanship, there is very little art. Art in the sense of a direct appeal to the senses and the intellectual without the aid of conventions and standard formulations
is rare.

Could it also be that the Confucianist penchant for ritual, rationalism and orderly social conventions have been brought about by a systematic codification of all matters including aesthetics? Where sense has been replaced by convention and everything is ideological and ultimately drawn into the justification of social and moral order, invention is killed. Authorities feel justified to pronounce on every aspect of life and art. Even art is brought into the ambit of governance. The senses are mistrusted just as nature is mistrusted. Those values and attitudes survive in many of the more traditional dialect and Chinese-speaking families. These values are passed on in early childhood. The under-development of sensing skill and the substitution of it by conventions is thus very common. Since nature is unreliable, that which cannot be anticipated has to be placated or controlled. The unpredictable nature in man must therefore be controlled and constrained. Such is the philosophy of the Confucianist state in practice.

SENSING ORDERS
With the codification of the senses, primary responses are relegated to a low priority. In discussions on design, we often come across the phenomenon whereby designers are unable to refer to the direct quali-ties of the design elements being discussed. They have become so used to using secondary or ideological descriptions. Of course all societies conventionalise their experiences - it is the necessary precondition for the transmittal of information and the establishment of consensus on issues that are not easily reduced to numbers or facts. It is when this process pre-vents a free discourse or exploration of more direct sensing responses and therefore design at the level of principles that it becomes a problem. For ordinary living, it is not a problem; but for designers and creative activity, it is a big problem.First order sense responses to stimulus has been substituted by second and third order responses in most societies. In monolithic or traditional societies, this is more pervasive.

In plural societies, the sense is freer. The aesthetic response gets increasingly rarefied as social conventions and official or authoritative sanctions impinge on sensibilities. To design authentically, the designer must be able to freely and easily return to first order responses in order to check his bearings. Otherwise, he allows prejudices or biases to take control. Worst, if he relies on third order responses, he allows his own intelligence to be subordinated to conventional ideas unquestioningly. He becomes a mere tool. The diagram below illustrates the differences in the order of responses with a few examples.

SUBJECT EXAMPLE

1ST COLOUR RESPONSE (IDEOLOGICAL BIASES)

From the above examples, it can be seen clearly that if a design problem uses only third order responses, the design will be very generalised and lack real qualities. Second order responses are personal biases or ideological positions taken. If these condition a design, the open position becomes difficult. A designer closes off other alter-natives and his own primary responses.

A solid grounding in first order responses is necessary in order to be able to examine more closely personal biases and accepted conventions and thus free the individual creative judgement thereby establishing the basis of the self in design. In modern Asian societies, emphasis is on the group rather than on the individual. The indi-vidual's position must be restored. For an authentic design approach, according to David Viscott, a psychiatrist, the open position or creative position of an individual is just in front of memory and just behind perception. It is a special position that is not swallowed up by all that has happened nor indulges in the sensations of the present. It is an intensely personal position. The group's interest need not be lost in this act but the group cannot substitute for the individual's solitary judgemental role in art. No individual, no art.

THE RECOVERY OF THE SENSES
Taste, touch, sight, sound and smell are not accep-ted as values in them-selves in the Confucianist tradition. Even in the West, the restoration of the natural truth of the senses is relatively new. It is about 200 years old. Recall the modern art movements in painting and sculpture. Recall the Bauhaus design course -all of these movements were intended to liberate the senses from bourgeois morality, sensibility, taste and conventions which have conspired to displace aesthetic judgement from its anchor in the truth of the senses. Creativity became coma-tose, its resuscitation was brought about by the modern art and architecture movement.

In Asia, we are still very constrained by con-vention and orthodoxy. Given this situation, can there be development in real aesthetic appreciation and judgement that is accurately sense-based? There can be no judgement if there is no consciousness of the self. In Asia and in Singapore, this is of particular relevance. The recovery of the senses is undoubtedly a total societal process. The ability to produce breakthrough qualities depend on this. But we have to start somewhere. It should start in the schools. Only when the senses are liberated from preconceived filters can real judgement come about in art and design and only then can true confidence, in indivi-duals be developed. All substitute gods become unnecessary.

THE COMMERCIAL IMPACT ON THE DEVELOPMENT OF AESTHETIC JUDGEMENT
Commercial considera-tions drive architects to exaggerated architectural expressions in order to distinguish their work from others and thus to attract attention to themselves. Many buildings are distorted by the need for the exuberant juxtaposition of latest forms and design themes for this reason. Architectural students are bewildered by this and they des-perately want to have a deeper and truer basis for judgement. I believe their quest is not only to satisfy examiner's requirements. They genuinely want to be able to have or develop deeper convictions in their own aesthetic judgements. They are passionately concerned with developing their own sense of self-worth. Authentic and real personal confidence is bound up with the pos-session of a developed aesthetic judgement.
The over-defensive and easily-offended postures of architects reflect a deep insecurity which stems from the under-development of their own aesthetic and sensing skills. Strong egos are necessary for clear and accurate judgement in aesthetics. Strong egos can take criticism. It is the fragile ego that easily resorts to 2nd or 3rd order considerations. Weak egos need to deny others space for expression, take offence easily and sulk in hurt retreat nursing revenge. They poison the atmosphere.

THE NEED FOR CONSCIOUSNESS OF AESTHETICS
Traditional societies operate on the basis of conventions. Vernacular architecture is the product of traditional societies. Vernacular design is a semi-conscious process. It is restricted to making small incremental changes to an overall conventionally-agreed format. There has been no need for a high level of consciousness. It is totally different in the modern situation. Choices have to be made - consciousness is inevitable.
Given the complex linguistic/cultural background, aesthetic choices are mostly erratic and inconsistent in the modern situation. If consistent choices are to be made, the individual must first be clear and conscious of his own aesthetic preferences.

He must declare to himself where he stands. Only then can he take steps to know the grammar of his aesthetic preferences. It is important for an architect to verbally express his aesthetics ideas, otherwise he cannot be fully conscious of them and he cannot therefore handle his aesthetic or intuitive ideas developmentally. If he is not fully conscious, he cannot be consistent nor can he have control. The intuition remains as vague urgings. If he wants to design innovatively or transformatively, he has to become aesthetically intelligent. Aesthetics is not static. It should not be assumed that aesthe-tics is only about the qualities of things that have existed. Intelligent aesthetic judgement is grammar-like as in speech. Knowing grammar does not restrict expression. On the contrary, expression is impossible without grammar. Grammar gives structure to vocabulary and produces intelligi-bility. Understanding the grammar of form leads to mastery. With mastery and confidence, points of departure can be identified and the discovery of new aesthetics and therefore new aesthetic grammars become possible.

The intuitive idea can be grammatically analysed and recomposed. It can be developed. If it is not developed, it remains a raw and crude statement. The concept of "aesthetic intelligence" therefore gives to the idea of the grammar of aesthetics, the quality of comprehension and releases the potential for discovery, articulation, development and refinement. If aesthetics is only about what has been, then there can be nothing new. This is definitely not so.

In conclusion, the idea of taste has therefore to do with conscious identification of the aesthetic characteristics of things and the grammar that structures it. It involves the use of verbal language and sensing so that there is the ability to categorise, classify and identify formal properties and be able to manipulate and develop intuitions flexi-bly, with ease and in new directions to create form. This kind of knowledge has to be maintained as an active judgemental framework in an individual. It is both the process and the product of acquiring sensing skills. The intelligent designer is able "to constantly elaborate on a theme with total aesthetic control and be alert to points of departure and subtle inflections. New design languages, new stylistic formulations and therefore new grammars can and are being evolved all the time.

AESTHETIC INTEGRITY
For the purpose of this essay, I will distinguish artistic integrity from personal or professional integrity. While the latter two aspects of integrity are crucial in the development of the artistic conscience and stance, I will put these two aspects aside for the time being and focus on artistic integrity only. Artistic integrity has to do with that sense of wholeness which an indivi-dual architect or artist has awakened in himself in order to decide the extent of compromise or departure he can tolerate in the handling of the numerous contradictions involved in architecture or in design. It decides also when to change the concept and start all over again when he realises that the current concept cannot encompass the problems faced.

THE ACID TEST OF AESTHETIC INTEGRITY
We must, at this juncture, clearly distinguish false self-assuredness which we come across very often amongst architects. This is a pretense at the possession of a developed sense of judgement in order to imply the possession of a developed sense of artistic integrity. How to distinguish? The acid test of the integrity of an idea is its generative and integrative qualities. If a concept has integrity, it will generate and make possible the resolution of related and even unanticipated problems within its ambit. In personal relationships as in architectural strategies, the good idea will generate solutions within its path. False ideas will generate problems and difficulties within its path. Every effective conceptual designer knows this because it is experienced. He thus knows when to change and when to let go of his ideas.

Ultimately, it is a mystery where the sense of integrity comes from, but the development of aesthetic judgement will sharpen the sense of wholeness. Without the sense of generative and integrative powers, the approach to problems is bookkeeper-like: by subtraction, substitution or simple addition. It is mechanical. Because of the sense of integrity, an architectural synthesis satisfies only when, as a whole, it seems more than the sum of its parts. Integrity is sensed also when it animates all the constituent parts as well as the whole design. It gives the whole design and all its parts the quality of aliveness. It produces simultaneous meanings and has delightful effects at many different levels of perception. It produces beneficial and wonderful consequences even though some of them were totally unanticipated. When a solution has integrity, in short, it has come alive!

THE PROBLEM OF CONSISTENCY AND AESTHETIC INTEGRITY Gyorgy Doczi, in his book "The Power of Limits: proportional harmonies in nature, art and architecture" gives powerful evidence of wholeness and internal organic and mathematical consistency of formal organisations in nature. It seems so obvious and true. Why is it so few architects appreciate the inherent correctness in natural forms and are unable to translate this into buildings? Is it because their own natures have become so violated by circumstances as well as by their own inadequacies that they have become insulated from nature within themselves? If this is true, then the prescription is simple, live a natural life, return to the nature within man. This, of course, is not easy to do. For as Lao Tzu says, wholeness is replaced ever more by ideologies, doctrines and conventions.

"Therefore, only when Tao is lost does the doctrine of virtue arise.
When virtue is lost, only then does the doctrine of humanity arise.
When humanity is lost, only then does the doctrine of righteousness arise.Now, propriety is a superficial expression of loyalty and faithfulness, and the beginning of disorder.
Those who are the first to know have the flowers (appearance)
of Tao but are the beginning of ignorance.
For this reason, the great man dwells in the thick (substantial) and does not rest with the thin (superficial).
He dwells in the fruit (reality), and does not rest with the flower (appearance).
Therefore, he rejects the one, and accepts
the other."

Lao Tzu

CAN SENSE OF WHOLENESS BE TAUGHT: TOWARDS A CRITICAL AESTHETIC DISCOURSE
The answer to this crucial question constitutes the core issue of what architectural education is about. If we come to the conclusion that the core issue of design cannot be taught, i.e. no critical discourse is possible, then we are obliged to conclude that architectural education is primarily technical including the learning of style. We may also have to conclude that the present concept of a formal five-year course of architectural instruction within a university is inappropriate because, as a discipline, it gives nothing to a university in terms of a relevant discourse. To be relevant to itself and to a university, it must have a core discipline, ie. it must have a discourse on aesthetics of which the pedagogy of form forms a part.

The elaboration of a discourse on aesthetics is what is relevant to a University. The exploration of aesthetics as a process and not only as a product in an on-going discourse is worthy of a seat of higher learning. A pedagogy of form has to be devised and developed. This pedagogy has to overcome the verbal barrier and the special problems of multi-lingual students. To develop consciousness of form, words must be attached to experience and visual judgement.

The pedagogy of form must be sustained individually as a systematic discourse. It must be imbibed and sustained by the individual as an on-going internal discourse of increasing accuracy, scope and consciousness. It is to serve as the counterpoint to externally-defined needs of a society or culture in terms of meanings, symbols and functions. Without the essentially- tensile relationship between the internal and the external, architecture will easily degenerate into a propagandistic and shallow pastiche. In the increasing range of choice produced by material and informational growth, the need for integrity is very real and urgent indeed.

back to articles index