Abstract
Last April, Professors Daniel Farber and Suzanna Sherry published a critique in these pages of the legal storytelling movement. Their legal position has been the subject of several responses, including an essay by Professor William Eskridge in this issue. In reply, Professors Farber and Sherry challenge their critics' reliance on postmodern views such as social constructionism. Social constructionism, according to Farber and Sherry, embraces forms of community that would be destructive to the scholarly enterprise. It also risks conflating scholarship with politics in ways harmful to both. More generally, Farber and Sherry contend, postmodernism lacks any clear lessons for legal scholarship and possesses at best a contingent connection with progressive change.
Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Free) 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a call
