In my view, our Law School's tradition of scholarly preeminence is due first and foremost to a shared conviction, passed on from one generation of faculty to the next, that legal scholarship is important and that it makes a difference. Law School faculty without being actively engaged in the scholarly enterprise. Such a consensus about the value of scholarly research is essential if the scholarly enterprise is to succeed, for original, cutting-edge scholarship is difficult, even painful work. The terror of the would-be scholar is the empty desk. One can fill the desk in desperation with class notes, committee reports, judicial opinions, and colleagues' articles, but the desk remains empty.
Scholarly research requires self-discipline, imagination, confidence and persistence.
The scholarly enterprise is most likely to thrive in a collegial environment, for the very best scholarship usually reflects both the author's own ideas and the shared comments and criticisms of others. The University of Chicago Law School is unique in this regard. Our whole is, and always has been, greater than the sum of its parts. The result is a true university law school. Well, scholarly research does matter.