November 15, 2007

"Blogs are walking up to legal scholarship and slapping it in the face. Blogs say to legal scholarship: 'How dare you! Evolve or Die!'"

The Bloggership Symposium.

I slap legal scholarship in the face — PDF — with "Why a Narrowly Defined Legal Scholarship Blog Is Not What I Want."

16 comments:

Doyle said...

Hmmm. Is it because a narrowly defined legal scholarship blog wouldn't afford you the opportunity to comment extensively on every Hillary Clinton story that appears on Drudge?

Is it the constant sniping at the liberal blogosphere (especially the ones with breasts) that you'd really miss?

Or is it just that you'd have to stop writing as much about yourself, and maybe spend some time dealing with constitutional questions that you'd rather leave to Eugene Volokh?

That people take you seriously enough to have you at these things astounds me.

christopher said...

Have you ever noticed that Ann's prose style is suspiciously reminiscent of these gals?


http://www.therulesbook.com/topten.html

Simon said...

Direct link to the MP3 of Ann's panel.

tc said...

Women love conversation...words even more than actual sex, many times. Men are the opposite...that orgasm is the key. Appropos of that, I re-post a previous post:

"breast-beating hysteria" ? I love all womens breasts -and,of course,vaginas, for that is where the real pleasure/elevation to "God" lies. But I am, unavoidably, first attracted to big natural breasts (and I can tell the difference with near unerring accuracy...especially when I see them swing -or not- when she bends over...). But all women's breasts always have something fascinating about them...even the little ones.
9:45 PM
tc said... I got so excited thinking about women's breasts, I forgot to post this:
jewsyonkersislam # 440 Address on Yonkers schools to Yonkers Board of Education and supporting newspaper documentation (see jewsyonkersislamiii-tc.blogspot.com

John Stodder said...

Barry Bonds indicted for perjury.

Just in case a lawyer here wants to know.

Maxine Weiss said...

"My readers know....."---Althouse

"Maxine knows...."--Althouse

Althouse reads minds. She knows what you know. But, what if she's wrong?

What if her readers don't believe a word she says?

In her paper, Althouse doesn't discuss the trust factor, and the idea that if you think she lies, repeatedly, how that colors the reading experience.

Not that I read her article, or ever read any of her links.....

Fondly,

rhhardin said...

Reading comments .

jeff said...

"Barry Bonds indicted for perjury."

No problem. I saw the Costas interview. All he has to do is get the Britney Spears lawyer to come to court and say "Hey, have any of YOU ever played major league baseball? Then you have no idea."
Boom. Case dismissed.

"Althouse doesn't discuss the trust factor, and the idea that if you think she lies, repeatedly, how that colors the reading experience."
That's kind of weird. Why would you continue to read under those conditions? OTOH, people keep buying the NYT.

Trooper York said...

(outside the federal courthouse as Barry Bonds walks up the Steps)
PeeWee: Say it ain't so, Barry. Say it ain't so.
Barry Bonds: Fuck off kid.
(Eight Vials In, 2007)

Zeb Quinn said...

Kinda like becoming a code pleading master only to have the court adopt and mandate check box forms.

Maxine Weiss said...

There's a marked difference between Althouse 2004, when she first started....and had no comments, and now.

When she had no comments Althouse wasn't nearly as intentionally provocative and cutsey.

It was more organic writing, personal, and distinctive.

The best of Althouse is back in 2004---the early days.

Once she got commenters, then she started pandering, and playing to page-views, and very transparent writing.

Simon said...

Maxine - not so much.

amba said...

"PDF!" sort of is the sound of a slap in the face. Imagine it in a comic strip . . .

rhhardin said...

Curiously, Ann has the shrill Hillary voice overtone in the .mp3. I think voice training is probably necessary for a woman to speak to a room.

On the other hand, being screamed at may be what raises the male sensitivity to that particular audio characteristic in the first place, and it's the association that does it, with sort of a normal acoustic effect of the raised female voice. It may be evolution's way of letting women get their way.

At least it's not a really big room here.

Probably operatic training could diminish it.

Freder Frederson said...

I’ve been scolded with the phrase “you, a law professor” enough times to make it a running joke on my blog.

I don't think this phrase means what you think it means Ann. We are not worried about you being frivolous--we just can't believe that some of the idiocy you write comes from a professor at a major law school.

And you certainly have slapped legal scholarship in the face. It is amazing that a law review would publish such drivel.

Lawgiver said...

We are not worried about you being frivolous.....

Speak for yourself. I constantly worry about Ann being frivolous. If she is frivolous in a post it just ruins my whole day.

we just can't believe that some of the idiocy you write comes from a professor at a major law school

That's how I feel about most of the legislation Congress writes but we keep voting for them. Go figure.