Law School Books
After so much time in each of their company, I've come to think of my books as people.
Torts is preachy, really bad at math, and doesn't seem to have a full grasp of science, although this doesn't stop her from making the oh-so-popular horrible quantum or grand-unification-theory analogy. Her heart's in the right place, but she often presents a slanted perspective--it almost always seems that her hypos are geared to make your heart bleed for the plaintiff. I'm doing my best to put up with her in the professional sense, but we wouldn't spend time together unless it was required.
Contracts is very proper. He's got lots of old english, citations to the restatement and UCC immediately following the cases, sections on background and history, a very sober serif font on cream-colored textured paper (instead of the youthful glossy white of his fellow comrades). Plus, he has the propriety to put his own comments (rhetorical questions, things to think about, etc) in short, concise paragraphs, in italics. He seems to respect the tradition of the law more than my other books.
CivPro, well, she seems to be too busy to actually give me the time of day. She throws a ton of information at me and expects that I'll go elsewhere for elucidation if I'm confused. She seems experienced, a know-it-all, and very well aware that what she knows can not actually be taught in two short semesters.
Property is a geek. He's quirky. He's got all sorts of oddness and details that exist for good reasons but he's not interested in spelling it out for you. He'll show you the way he derived the solution, but he's certainly not going to just GIVE you the equation.
And that, my friends, is a quick look at my exciting social life these days.