I've emerged from law-review article submission season reasonably unscathed, and with a result I'm happy with. I plan over the next few days to write a series of posts on the mad, mad, mad, mad, mad law review world. Having 1) worked at a peer-reviewed journal in the humanities before I went to law school; 2) served as an articles editor while in law school; 3) participated in the process as a hopeful and now "forthcoming" author, I think I'm about as well positioned as anyone to comment on what works and what doesn't.
(And to my handful of patient readers: I really am back now, to stay.)
