By Jason Wilson
A brief should rarely, if ever, be a poem.
Smith, The Poetry of Persuasion: Early Literary Theory and Its Advice to Legal Writers, 6 Journal of the Association of Legal Writing Directors 55 (2009).
As writers, lawyers should be concerned, at all times, with the search for the right words and to employ a style of writing with varied elements. We must, as persuasive writers, be attuned to metaphor, metonymy, hyperbole, synecdoche, catachresis, and hyperbaton, and understand the use of devices, such as isocolon and antithesis, whether by name or notion.
Wait a second.
Okay, I’m just just screwing with you. There’s no way anyone reading this blog (including myself) even understands what all of these terms means, let alone how to employ them consistently. But if you read Stephen E. Smith’s excellent essay, The Poetry of Persuasion (cited supra), you will. At an unfortunately brief 19 pages, Smith’s essay provides you with a wonderful examination of the elements of good writing through the lens of post-Modernist literary theory (just quips though). And while the essay may sound a bit too erudite, it isn’t. Here’s an example:
When a fact is particularly good for your case, or you suspect it might be particularly resonant with a reader, it should be lingered upon and luxuriated in. Justice O’Connor used this device well in her dissent in the eminent domain case, Kelo v. City of New London. She could simply have written—”Petitioners are long-time owners of property in New London.” Instead, she amplified the point, lingering on the petitioners’ status:
‘Petitioners are nine resident or investment owners of 15 homes in the Fort Trumbull neighborhood of New London, Connecticut. Petitioner Wilhelmina Dery, for example, lives in a house on Walbach Street that has been in her family for over 100 years. She was born in the house in 1918; her husband, petitioner Charles Dery, moved into the house when they married in 1946. Their son lives next door with his family in the house he received as a wedding gift, and joins his parents in this suit. Two petitioners keep rental properties in the neighborhood.’
She gives petitioners names and their homes specific locations. She describes a history tied to the houses subject to eminent domain. She does not say ‘the relationship between these people and their homes is important,’ she demonstrates it.
It’s a terrific piece, and one that I highly recommend if you are at all interested in legal writing that is engaging and persuasive.
[Image (CC) by surrealmuse]
You must log in to post a comment.
{ 1 trackback }