We had some lofty, idealized visions for this little book before we embarked on what became a three-year journey. To publish is to take a position, we said, to document a point of view in order to allow for further development and the generation of discussion. We put a certain amount of faith into the written word, convinced of a certain alchemy that occurs when soft, mushy ideas transform into crystallized concepts.

Despite this naïveté, for better or worse, the publication you hold in your hands has finally come into the world. On the level of the individual essay, writing is a methodology through which one can acquire a more precise and concrete framework to analyze architecture. And as a curatorial exercise, the journal can begin to examine and question the manner through which knowledge is constructed and disseminated.

The journal, as an idea and as an object, is an attempt to generate intellectual debate and promote a wider theoretical discourse within the school. In an effort to displace the normative discourse on parametricism, inter·punct decomposed the incredibly shiny word "parameter" into its constituent parts: We called for a reconceptualization of the term in response to its recent proliferation as a stand-in for grasshopper attractor points and voronoi aesthetics, looking for a return to substantive discourses involving the history of architecture and its broader context.

This is, finally, the response.

Editorial note in the inaugural issue "para·meter," written by founding Editor Talia.