Editor's Corner: Research That Shakes Things Up

• DOI: http://doi.org/10.1111/ablj.12040
• Published date: 01 March 2015
• Date: 01 March 2015
• Author: Robert W. Emerson

Editor’s Corner: Research That Shakes Things Up

Why do we read law review articles? Theoretically, some persons may read

them purely for pleasure, but let us be sensible: professors and students

are no doubt the primary consumers of legal scholarship, and four reasons

for reading law journals, none of them being mainly joy, spring to mind:

1. To learn about a subject1;

2. To see how an author presents his or her scholarship2;

3. To gather ideas for further exploration3; and

4. To augment one’s teaching.4

Certainly, this list is not comprehensive, nor are these four reasons mutu-

ally exclusive. But it is difficult to imagine getting through a 20,000-word

article the reader deems as lacking any of these four characteristics: edu-

cation, craftsmanship, research utility, or pedagogical value.

Surely every reader will find much to appreciate—likely at least two

or three of the above elements—in each article for this initial issue of

Volume 52. Indeed, all three articles address discreet but highly topical

matters. Also, the authors deftly reply to the general questions that all

articles must answer: “Why does this matter?” and “What should be

done?” Regardless of whether a reader already is well versed on these

particular topics, the authors have produced formidable works furnishing

more than simply a primer; they have illustrated specific legal problems

and their potential solutions. That opens up possibilities for observing

1The reader’s rationale, “Now’s my chance to get the scoop on this vital, timely topic!”

2A professor’s take, “The theme is fine, but what I really like is how the author’s mind works!”

3The researcher’s conclusion, “The ideas here could also apply to things I care about!”

4The instructor’s hope for classroom nirvana, “The examples and the analysis inform,

provide context, and—who knows—might even provoke robust discussion!”

bs_bs_banner

v