Legal writing = lamest form of communication ever. Wait, I'll write that legally:
A court of me is very likely to find that legal writing is excessively lame. Under my law, writing is lame when it bores the reader and fails to efficiently inform. Me
. Sartre defines boredom as a state where there is simultaneously too much and not enough. Being and Nothingness
. Writing fails to efficiently inform when it follows a mindlessly rigid structure that requires redundancy. Me
. In legal writing there are simultaneously too many words and not enough interesting things to say. Likewise, the strict rules regarding word choice in legal writing require a writer to repeat words and phrases in a manner that does not effectively communicate actual meaning. Therefore, a court of me, very likely, will find that legal writing is lame.
End legal writing.
I should say, one of the professors at the University of Oregon helped write this book, and I really like her, so I'm not against the book, just legal writing. It's so much lamer than twitter, it's not even funny. That's another point: twitter is funny, legal writing is not. Maybe they'll let me break out of writing oppression soon. If not, there's always Canada. Student loans can't get me in Canada, right? That should be the first thing they tell you in law school.