My attention has been turning to the third edition of A Manual of Style for Contract Drafting, and I’d appreciate your input on a vital issue: What should I call it?
The current title is fine, but it’s generic. And it’s not conducive to being shortened—MSCD leaves something to be desired as a moniker.
The obvious thing to do would be to following in the footsteps of, you guessed it, Bryan Garner. For example, his A Dictionary of Modern Legal Usage morphed into Garner’s Dictionary of Legal Usage. But Adams’s is awkward, making The Adams the likeliest option for grafting my identity on to the title. That would allow people to say, “What does Adams say?” I’d refer to the book as TAM. But the title wasn’t exactly short to begin with. And do I risk looking like a raging egomaniac?
Readers, you can have your say in the comments and in the following poll.
Updated 8:30 a.m. EDT, August 11, 2012: It’s fun to consider alternatives, but realistically, my only options, aside from keeping the current title, are the first three listed in the poll. Using a title too different from the current one could result in people thinking that I’ve written an entirely new book.
The Contract Style Manual is short and descriptive. Another idea is to follow the tradition of using the book’s color in the name. Seeing that Harvard has dibs on the color blue, you could go with The Royal Blue Book, since you’ve had a brush with royalty. Of course, that might play into the egomaniac theme also.
Know all men by these presents, your suggestion amuses us. But who knows what the color might be. I might have to go with The Flaming Pink Book.
I second Brian’s suggested title. I also like that the acronym has three letters rather than four. The title could also be lengthened to Adams’s Contract Style Manual but still be referred to as the CSM.
Alternatively, I also like Adams’s Manual of Contract Style (MCS).
Ken, I can’t see the poll but I suggest Adams on Contract Drafting.
Mark: The poll has been acting up, but it has now elected to reappear. I revised the options to include your choice. Ken
I’m with Mark on this one. Clean, classic interface. Right up there with Williston.
And then you can bequeath it! “Throckmorton’s Adams on Contract Drafting”!
Please DON’T update the book so frequently. Our world is not changing so quickly.
By the time the third edition comes out sometime next year, it will have been more than four years since the second edition. That’s a respectable interlude.
And sure, the world of contract drafting changes at a glacial pace. But my understanding of it has been evolving a good deal faster.
“The Adams Manual” variations made me think of The Addams Family ….
I like Adams on Contract Drafting, but even if you left the title unchanged, eventually your readers will probably just refer to it as “Adams,” in the same way as lawyers (well, litigators) and law students refer to Wright & Miller, and IP lawyers refer to Chisum (patents) and Nimmer (copyrights) and McCarthy (trademarks).
As to Bryan Garner, while new lawyers and law students might refer to his version as “Garner’s,” I suspect we old geezers will continue refer to it as “Black’s.”
Garner’s Dictionary of Legal Usage is actually different from Black’s, although there seems to be some overlap.
Ken:
Adams’s Contract Drafting Compendium: AC/DC.
Chris
Ken:
Adams Manual on Contracts: AMoC.
I’m in favor of bad puns.
Chris
I’m sure the ABA would respond very well to these suggestions.
I like the wordplay, but “compendium” means “abridgment.” “Compilation” would fail to credit originality. Perhaps “companion”?
And there’s always the possibility of calling it “The Adams Enchiridion” and telling the ABA to go pound sand.
How about Ken’s Manual etc.?
That would work well, particularly as I’ve given two thumbs up to etc. as a contract usage.
Adams on Contract Drafting easily gets my vote Ken.
If the practical choices for change are the top three, and you rule out “Adams’s,” the practical choices are numbers 1 and 3, which differ in mentioning or not mentioning “style.”
The benefit of #1 is that it maintains more continuity with the earlier editions, but since you are determined to send the initialism MSCD to the boneyard in favor of TAM, then prefer the shorter title, #3, although you might prefer the preposition “of,” as in “Chicago Manual of [not “for”] Style.”
Final answer: one vote for “The Adams Manual of Contract Drafting.”
As for egomania, I think the inclusion of the author’s name in the title is fitting for the man whose largest contribution is to point out that the emperor has no clothes, that is, that continuation of traditional contract usages is not rationally justified. Maybe the next largest contribution is the idea that contract usages should and can be largely standardized. Much that is fruitful has followed and will follow from both insights. Putting his name on his own pathbreaking book is a very small thing for getting a movement rolling. Kudos to the ABA, too, for publishing the book.
Isaac Asimov referred to his own ego situation as “cheerful self-appreciation.”
If anything goes, my favorite is “Adams on Contract Drafting.”
Here’s another thought: since TAM is likely to be more than 400 pages, why not also publish a mini-TAM of, say, 99 pages, modeled on the Dummies’ “Quick Reference” series? That would offer a chance for a whole new round of naming choices: “Adams’s Sparse Advice on Contract Drafting.”
AWB: Thank you for indulging me! And regarding your “Dummies” suggestion, I expect that will come to pass. Ken
Contract Drafting in a Nutshell?
3rd Edition
-.-
“Drafting Felonies and Misdemeanors”