Greetings from Hell

Abstract

It is common advice to take criticism in the spirit in which it was intended. In this instance, however, it might be better to take Professor Lindgren's essay in some spirit other than that in which it was intended. Professor Lindgren makes some fine points about the pitfalls of student editing, and it would be a shame for them to be obscured by the bitterness with which they were presented and by a response that tried to keep pace. In fairness, though, perhaps the phenomenon of the student-governed law review is to blame even for the vitriolic tone of Professor Lindgren's essay. Fear of Writing is obviously a piece written very much with an eye to its publication prospects, and Professor Lindgren did not misjudge his audience; we doubt that a more objective and careful piece would have catapulted over the stacks of other submissions for a quick acceptance at a prominent review. Professor Lindgren does his readers the courtesy of announcing in the first paragraph his conclusion about the two books being discussed.1 Therefore, we should perhaps announce at the outset that one thing this Response will not do is dispute the relative merits of the Texas Law Review Manual on Style and Webster's Dictionary of English Usage. Professor Lindgren's conclusion that Webster's book is vastly superior to the Manual on Style is assailable only for its obviousness and for its absurdity as the premise of a book review. However, there is a great deal objectionable about Professor Lindgren's essay, and the fact that he felt compelled to write the essay at all (not to mention write it in the tone that he did) is a telling and perhaps worthwhile comment on today's law review editing climate. In making this comment, however, Professor Lindgren badly mischaracterizes the Manual on Style and fails to give a fair portrayal of the debate he tries to join. This Response will provide some initial clarifications about the nature and purpose of the Manual on Style and will try to place Professor Lindgren's attack in a larger context. The real problems