Critical Legal Histories Revisited : A Response

It is of course very gratifying that anyone should think that an article written over twenty-five years ago might still be worth reading, and even organize a symposium around. (It is also rather discomfiting, since it is hard to say what one dreads most to find in the old stuff: evidence of youthful folly or, worse, evidence that one was wiser and better with words a long time ago.) I am moved beyond measure by the perceptiveness and seriousness of these comments from critics who are also friends