Friday, February 15, 2008

Law Review Woes

Since I identified my board position as the root of all evil in my "I'm alive" post, I thought that I might expound a bit on the ridiculousness that is Law Review.

As a 2L doing copywork/cite checking, I hated Law Review. I hated the inanity of editing someone else's very clearly shit work. I thought it ridiculous that a professor would submit such a piece of shit and expect, as their due, little armies of law review plebes to fix all of their gross errors. And I'm not just talking about sloppy blue-booking. I'm talking about border-lined (or just over the line) plagiarism. Incorrect citations. General extreme laziness in citing anything. Do law profs have original thoughts? My conclusion was that, no, no they don't. All articles are merely regurgiations of other author's thoughts... and more often than not, while copyworking, i would discover it wasn't even the person my author cite's thoughts. It was some other egghead's long before.

So I came to the conclusion that
  1. Employers like law review on resumes because it shows that you are detail-oriented, know how to find needle in hay-stacks, know how to save your future senior partner's ass from looking stupid, and you are willing to do completely pointless, mind-numbingly dull tasks just because someone in authority asked (told) you to. So you do it to get a job.
  2. It makes you feel good about your research and writing skills, which are clearly superior to most of the stuff that you work on. If you only had their "connections," you could be just as cool as the authors think they are.
  3. It is a right of passage and simply must be endured.
What I don't like about being on the board, specifically being an editor, is that it is all of the things that I hated before and more because our lame 2Ls won't do their jobs properly. And because I'm just an editor, I don't have any carrot to take away from them. Most of my law review life these days is trying to patch together the half-assed job of my copyworkers and the author who wrote the damn article. I get nothing out of this process other than high blood-pressure.

And the part that makes me just sick about it: I RAN FOR THE STUPID THING! I asked for it. And I got it. Utter, total fucking moron.

3 comments:

Anonymous said...

Hi there: I'm a lurker but I wanted to say your post is scarily similar to my year as editor on law review. My summer job was a lot of work- not like the normal cushy wine-and-dine law firm job. My editor position has interfered with my marriage too. But when it's all said and done, I think we'll look back and realize it wasn't all for nothing. I've definitely learned a lot from the experience. Even though it's hard to see now when you're burnt out, one day I hope you find that being an editor was actually a rewarding experience. At least, that's the hope I have for myself too!

Joey said...

thanks for the comment. I think that's what I'm banking on: that some day I will think it was all worth it.

Lawyer Mama said...

LOL! That sounds familiar....

You hit the nail on the head with #1! Expect more of it in your future.... (Unless you start your own firm.)