Michigan Law Review's Annual Book Review Issue

I've been surprised that there hasn't been more commentary on the Michigan Law Review's most recent book review issue.  It's short--just over 200 pages.  Quite a change from the early 1990s, when the issue ran to more than 800 pages.  Last year there was a lot of commentary on the declining size of the book review issue.  

Great reviews in the most recent issue, of course--and a great collection of books (even if there are only eleven reviews--ten if you don't count the classic revisited), too. 

What are we to make of the smaller size of the issue?  Some time ago John Doyle studied the Michigan's book review issues and found that they are not as heavily cited as the rest of the Michigan Law Review--from which, I take it, one might conclude that Michigan would be better off spending its time on other publishing projects.  I don't know if that kind of thinking has had an influence on Michigan's move away from publishing book reviews.

Seems to me as though there may be an opportuity for enterprizing journals to fill this gap, though a very (emphasis here on very) rough estimate suggests that there are more books being reviewed in law journals than in the past.  My sense, however, is that journals seem generally to be moving away from essay reviews.  If you're thinking of writing a review, here's a list of law journals that still publish reviews.

Alfred L. Brophy

Comments

[Former MLR Editor]

While it might seem as though the smaller size of the Michigan Law Review's book review issue is a signal of significant change in the legal academic world or in the MLR itself, in fact the change in size was both an aberration and an artefact. For various reasons, MLR had a smaller Editorial Board for this year than it has had in the past, and than it has now. Accordingly, there was only one Book Review Editor - who did a great job - rather than the two we have had in previous years. This year there are again two Book Review editors for MLR, and the Book Review should be back to its normal size.

[Alfred]

Thanks for joining the conversation, FMLRE. And good to know the reason for the change. I'm looking forward to the next book reviews issue.