April 21, 2005
Day Four: By the Numbers
April 21, 2005 10:45 AM
An alum of PG's law school and current professor at Nick Morgan's lists five positive aspects of law review, and JCA follows up yesterday's post with a Top Ten of reasons to write-on. Seth Wood reminisces fairly happily about Virginia Law Review, Professor Eric Goldman notes that law review can provide surprisingly helpful, and Ming Shui joins Amber Taylor in advocating for specialty journals.
Let it never be said that De Novo is too high brow, or (heaven forfend!) pretentious, as along with all this seriously written advice, we recommend WittySexKitten's remarks: "Can you bend over while I shove internet sources up your ass to figure out how to cite? Yes please, give it to me again."
I'm surprised at the tone of the articles extolling the benefits of Law Review - they're so "rah rah let me tell YOU why LR is GREAT!" I felt like I was reading admissions brochures. Maybe it's just me, but I didn't realize that anyone needed to be persuaded that LR is something to aspire to. Most future law students have at least heard of it. You're not in school for a month before you are aware of The Big Three - Moot Court, Law Review, and "who CALI'd what class". Not only are you aware of LR, you also have a good idea of your chances of getting on it. (Well, probably not at the larger law schools; my class has 142 students, and we all knew after first semester who was LR-bound.) The articles are interesting, sure, and entertaining, but I keep thinking "Duh. Of course Law Review opens doors. Of course Law Review is beneficial to your career and looks good on the resume. Yes, it helps build skills, yadda yadda. Tell me something new." I was much more interested in the articles on the specialty journals; I wish there had been more of them.