The following review of the new Harvard Critic was written for the CRIMSON by B. F. Wright, assistant professor of government. The first issue of the Critic will appear upon the newstands today. The sheet will appear monthly for an indefinite time.

"In this, the first number of The Harvard Critic, the editors give as the principal reason for the establishment of a new medium of student expression in Harvard the existence of too much genteel self-granulation and too little self-examination. The Critic is intended to be critical, but not sensational. It is to deal primarily, although not exclusively, with problems of education. Above all, it is to strive to dispel 'the dismal pall of apathy' which hangs over us.

"Aside from this statement of purpose, there are, in this four-page, small newspaper size journal, two editorials, three articles on educational theory and policy, a statement on the closing of Widener by the National Student League together with a brief criticism of this statement by the Critic, a 'model' re- view of History 1, a satirical fable, four communications from well known persons dealing with the relations between college and public life, an essay on Marx, and a review of Mr. James M. Beck's 'Wonderland of Democracy.'

"With the exception of Dr. Elsbree's book review, a clear and effective analysis of the confusions in Representative Beck's political thinking, the contributions are all from students. As might be expected, they are of uneven quality. To the present reviewer, Mr. John P. Coolidge's 'Muddled Objectives' is the most interesting. Mr. James W. Fessler's 'Eliot and Lowell' is a survey of well-known developments in Harvard since 1869 without much critical examination of the problem which he suggests, the special needs of the more mature and interested students. Mr. Norton E. Long's 'Humanist Critique of Harvard' defends the thesis that undergraduates should be required to concentrate in 'something central' that is to say, humanistic, Mr. Edward M. Barnet's 'Utopia on Golden Crutches' is rather trife and ineffective.

"The style of most of the contributions is commonplace and the proof-reading is lamentable, but there is promising evidence of a sincerely critical attitude toward the theory and practice of Harvard College. As usual, the graduate schools are not brought into the picture except for the customary reference to Ph.D. specialization. If is to be hoped that some of the problems raised in this first number will be further examined. If the Critic's criticism is to penetrate beneath the surface, it will do well to concentrate rather than scatter its fire. Such problems as those suggested by Mr. Coolidge the value of tutorial work, the policy with regard to House admissions, and the possibility of a pass degree for those students desiring nothing more, have not been here disposed of. If the Critic can stimulate serious discussion of such questions it will have more than justified its existence.