The Volokh Conspiracy
Mostly law professors | Sometimes contrarian | Often libertarian | Always independent
Judge David Weinzweig (Ariz. Ct. App.) Guest-Blogging About "Zen and the Art of Persuasive Writing "

I'm delighted to report that Judge David Weinzweig will be guest-blogging this coming week about his new book. From the publisher's description:
Why is legal prose so hard to read?
One reason is obvious: Legal writers rarely think about their audience. When legal writers account for the preferences and expectations of their readers, legal writing can be sublime. Lucid. Easy to navigate and simple to understand. This species of legal writing leaps from the page to grab its readers by the collar, holding their interest and attention to the very last word. It is comfortably understood, employs concrete words and concrete grammar, shows—not tells—with concrete facts and concrete arguments. And this motivates the reader forward.
Zen and the Art of Persuasive Writing tackles abstract questions in fresh and relatable ways, imbuing the dharma of mindfulness and cognitive science into the conversation on persuasive and legal writing. It dissects persuasive writing into 9 mantras:
- Be aware of the audience. Persuasive writers understand that readers and writers are separated by time and distance, so they channel the readers to prognosticate and answer questions.
- Be less categorical. Persuasive writers know that few rules are absolute.
- Be clear and concrete. Persuasive prose conveys hard facts and ideas in plain and simple words.
- Be concise. A persuasive writer severs the meaningful from the meaningless. He is focused and assured.
- Be cohesive and coherent. Persuasive prose is easy on the eyes and simple to navigate.
- Be compelling. A persuasive writer holds the attention and interest of his readers for long enough to move their hearts and minds.
- Be credible. A persuasive writer earns his reputation with colleagues and the courts, knowing a fine reputation is not purchased or invoked.
- Be a reader and writer. A persuasive writer reads and reverse-engineers the language, style and approach of stuff he likes.
- Be meticulous and rewrite. A persuasive writer toils to ensure the audience will understand the point. He knows that persuasive prose is the end product of many drafts and myriad decisions.
And the blurbs:
"If 'the law is a profession of words,' it's not carried out very professionally, as anyone who has struggled through the legalese in a statute, a contract, or a brief will attest. To the rescue comes Appellate Judge David Weinzweig and an enjoyable book filled with charm, actionable advice, and yes, good writing. —Steven Pinker, Johnstone Professor Psychology, Harvard University, Author of The Sense of Style: The Thinking Person's Guide to Writing in the 21st Century
"An excellent tool for any aspiring legal writer - informative, specific, and enlightening, and fun to read to boot. Highly recommended." —Eugene Volokh, Gary T. Schwartz Distinguished Professor of Law, UCLA Law School, Author of Academic Legal Writing
Editor's Note: We invite comments and request that they be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of Reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time. Comments may only be edited within 5 minutes of posting. Report abuses.
Please to post comments
Great advice!
Sadly, I think 99% of writing these days, legal or otherwise, it to signal to and motivate the tribe. Persuade? Nah. On the other side of the aisle there be monsters to attack, not people with a different frame of reference.
Time again for Mencken:
“All the extravagance and incompetence of our present Government is due, in the main, to lawyers, and, in part at least, to good ones. They are responsible for nine-tenths of the useless and vicious laws that now clutter the statute-books, and for all the evils that go with the vain attempt to enforce them. Every Federal judge is a lawyer. So are most Congressmen. Every invasion of the plain rights of the citizens has a lawyer behind it. If all lawyers were hanged tomorrow, and their bones sold to a mah jong factory, we’d be freer and safer, and our taxes would be reduced by almost a half.”
—H.L. Mencken (1880-1956), “Breathing Space”, The Baltimore Evening Sun, 1924-08-04. Reprinted in A Carnival of Buncombe.
“Legal writers rarely think about their audience” - why would that be ?
I would not wish to be accused of having a good word to say about lawyers but have y’all read a mathematical paper ? I submit, that although incomprehensible to normal people, mathematical papers are written for their intended audience - mathematical folk who naturally follow the equations and do not want the paper clogged up with a lot of unnecessary chatter*.
Likewise lots of lawyerly writing is intended to be read by lawyers, ie folk who understand the weird jargon and unexplained section numbers and do not want to have to read an extra eight pages of unnecessary fluff. Statutes do not read like dialog in a good novel because - they are not dialog in a good novel. They are aimed at a different audience.
As a confirmed and proud NAL I read opinions and legal arguments for amusement, but I don’t expect them to be as amusing as Seinfeld or even SpongeBob.
No doubt there are some excellent lawyers who can write an opinion or an analysis that is comprehensible to lawyers and to humans. But being comprehensible to humans is icing. The basic cake is being comprehensible to lawyers.
The talent that lawyers need which seems quite often to be lacking is not so much communication but logic. But of course that may often be deliberate. If the logic is not on your side, obfuscation is the way to go.
* I am forced to mention though that the French mathematician Paul Levy said he hated reading other mathematicians’ papers- they made his head hurt.