This Article includes four parts: (1) a defense of the real property/personal property distinction for a post-deconstructionist legal world, (2) a review of difficulties common law courts have encountered when applying real property concepts to disputes over money and personalty, (3) an exploration of the "rhetorical mismatch" typified by Justice Sandra Day O'Connor's opinion in Eastern Enterprises, and (4) a respectful request for judges to resist the temptation to collapse categories and instead to maintain, or even erect, meaningful distinctions.