Is "Good Design" enough? The recent emergence of design criticism and writing programs at a number of design schools suggests that the answer might just be, "no." This past fall New York City's School of Visual Arts (SVA) added an MFA in Design Criticism to their range of studio-based MFAs, in October of this year the University of the Arts London will launch its new MA in Design Writing Criticism, and in March 2009 Victoria University of Wellington's School of Design (NZ) will debut a new undergraduate degree program in design criticism. These programs and others like them represent a much needed response from within the design community to the growing presence of design across popular media, from mainstream news stories on Target's latest design conquests to the proliferation of lifestyle magazines promoting a popular (if watered down) kind of design literacy. Alice Twemlow, co-chair of SVA's D-Crit program, said in a recent interview for subtraction.com:

To me it's clear there's momentum gathering around the need to clarify design criticism's purposes and processes. D-Crit will work alongside these other initiatives to improve the quality of public discussion about design. Our specific goal is to help provide a new generation of critics with the tools to generate writing and thinking that is imaginative, historically informed and socially accountable.

While architecture and the fine arts have a long tradition of theoretical and critical discourse, the comparatively young design disciplines are just beginning to establish a supporting body of critical writing. The slow development of criticism within design may in fact be related to the very concept of "Good Design," which traditionally has prioritized rationalism, functionalism, and aesthetics over a deeper recognition of the broader cultural and contextual implications of design. But the reign of "Good Design" may be coming to a close as the discursive floodgates open, fueled by design criticism graduates with new ways of thinking and writing about design.