(1) Submitting an article, then within 15 minutes frantically clicking refresh on your email despite the fact that any news that comes in the first 15 minutes could not possibly be good.
(2) Getting that first rejection three hours after the initial submission ("after careful review ....").
(3) Submitting two articles at around the same time (we'll call them "A" and "B"). A is clearly a better article than B. B gets three offers immediately and ends up placing in a solid journal. A languishes and isn't touched by anyone.
(4) Obsessing over comparisons between US News law school rankings versus Washington & Lee law review rankings (hint: if you're at the point where it's not obvious on face which journal you should pick, it doesn't matter).
(5) Obsessing over comparisons between flagship journals and speciality journals (hint: this comparison is impossible, but it's as impossible for tenure and/or hiring committees as it is for you).
(6) Getting your article rejected after you've already withdrawn it from a given journal ("you can't reject me, I reject you!").
(7) Getting your article accepted after you've already withdrawn it from a given journal (far more tragic than #6).
(8) Submitting an article, having it rejected, resubmitting next cycle with the single change of deleting "originalism" from the title, having it accepted by a top journal (technically this didn't happen to me. It happened by me, and my articles editor team, when I was a law review editor).
(9) Once the piece is accepted, being asked for a citation for "the law of supply and demand." Don't forget a parenthetical!
(10) It all turning out okay in the end.
You are truly a brave man to be so open about your identity, especially when (unlike most African-Americans, say) you have the option of non-disclosure. So I don't count it against you when you hedge by disclosing your Carletoness only to those who speak Hebrew. It's a half-step -- but a half-step further than I would take.
ReplyDelete(Go Yeomen!)