As a student of Politics and Philosophy at the LSE, a combination that sends shivers of distrust through many spines and a university that tends to do the same, I have often wondered what jurisdiction I have when writing about art and wider cultural topics in general. Although my personal background has meant that gatekeeping has never been an issue, it appeared obvious to me that I could not approach art criticism without recognising my relatively disparate position. This was not to say I expected some arbitrary limits on what I could write, but rather that my education in empirical political science and analytic philosophy suggested that there was potential to develop a unique kind of writing and analysis.

Free Exchange Magazine attempts to be a platform for an open, interdisciplinary discussion of art. This includes criticism of exhibitions, as well as more general essays in our journal. We are primarily based in the United Kingdom, but we look forward to welcoming contributions from across the world from various perspectives. How meaningful can this ‘interdisciplinary’ approach be? Of course, art writing will always be art writing. However, it is undeniable that the art world features sociological peculiarities unlike those seen in any other industry or field of interest, and that art has constantly been in tandem with the vanguard of technology, science, literature, philosophy, mass culture, politics, and more. This is the premise of Free Exchange Magazine.