About | HeinOnline Law Journal Library | HeinOnline Law Journal Library | HeinOnline
LOG IN
LOG IN

39 Alta. L. Rev. 616 (2001-2002)
Law Reviews as Cultural Narrative

handle is hein.journals/alblr39 and id is 626 raw text is: LAW REVIEWS AS CULTURAL NARRATIVE DONNA GRESCHNER* TABLE OF CONTENTS I. INTRODUCTION ..................................... 616 1I. EARLY CANADIAN LAW REVIEWS ........................ 618 A. A SHADOW OF THE AMERICAN STANDARD. .............. 618 B. EXISTENTIAL ANGST .............................. 620 Il1. CANADA'S UNIQUE EXPERIENCE ......................... 620 A. BILINGUALISM AND BIJURIDICALISM ................... 620 B. CONSTITUTIONAL REFORM .......................... 622 IV . CONCLUSIONS ...................................... 622 No one in this country needs to be reminded that the word Canadian is a difficult concept to describe.' I. INTRODUCTION When I received the invitation from the editors of the Alberta Law Review to reflect upon university-based law reviews, I thought immediately of the most famous critique published about American ones. I refer, of course, to Fred Rodell's diatribe, Goodbye to Law Reviews, published in 1936.2 1 read it many years ago, as a bored law student thirsting for a short and witty article to relieve the tedium of studying trusts. With the present occasion in mind, I dug it out of the library again. Many of you will be familiar with the essay. Rodell announces that he will no longer write for law reviews, and, in three infamous sentences, tells us why. Let me quote: There are two things wrong with almost all legal writing. One is its style. The other is its content.'3 With respect to style, Rodell castigates law reviews for long sentences, awkward constructions and fuzzy-wuzzy words.4 Thickets of footnotes spring like weeds around each sentence, and student editors apparently despise conviction and humour. With respect to content, Rodell launches an even more scathing attack. Although, he says, law is supposed to be a device to serve society... [with] a job to do in the world,5 he could find barely any evidence of this mission in law reviews. They did not discuss important problems of the day and contribute to solutions. Rather, law reviews stuffed their pages Professor, College of Law, University of Saskatchewan; Faculty Editor, Sask. L. Rev. (1997-2002). This paper was presented to the session The Role and Future of the Law Review at the Annual Meeting of the Canadian Association of Law Teachers, 28 May 2000, Edmonton, Alberta. Thanks to Dick Risk and David Schneiderman for nurturing my interest in legal history. G. Parker, Editorial (1978) 1 Can. J. Fain. L. I at I. 2 F. Rodell, Goodbye to Law Reviews (1936) 23 Va. L. Rev. 38. Ibid. Ibid. at 39. Ibid. at 42. ALBERTA LAW REVIEW VOL. 39(3) 2001

What Is HeinOnline?

HeinOnline is a subscription-based resource containing thousands of academic and legal journals from inception; complete coverage of government documents such as U.S. Statutes at Large, U.S. Code, Federal Register, Code of Federal Regulations, U.S. Reports, and much more. Documents are image-based, fully searchable PDFs with the authority of print combined with the accessibility of a user-friendly and powerful database. For more information, request a quote or trial for your organization below.



Short-term subscription options include 24 hours, 48 hours, or 1 week to HeinOnline.

Purchase Access

Contact us for annual subscription options:

Contact Us

Already a HeinOnline Subscriber?

Log In

profiles profiles most