« July 2007 | Main | September 2007 »
August 31, 2007
The GOP's Manly Family Values
On June 22, 2004, Dick Cheney directed a most foul expletive at Democrat[ ] Senator Pat Leahy on the floor of the Senate . . . the "F-word" for those who forget. The GOP's response (and that would include the GOP's noise machine): putting Cheney front and center so he could tell the real men and women of our country that it "felt good" to say "F***-You" to an elected Democrat[ ] official. Almost as good as good, ol' fashion heterosexual sex, right?
Then there's the case of GOP Senator David Vitter who, we learned this past July, paid for sex via the DC Madame. Is there anything more anti-family then infidelity. (Or more humiliating to a US Senator that he was so lame he had to pay for it!!!)
Well, we've since learned that Vitter received an ovation from the GOP Senate caucus for paying for heterosexual sex. These are real men showing their appreciation for how a real man does it. [I wonder if Olympia Snowe and Susan Collins missed that meeting.]
So there it is. "Family values," we've finally learned, means manly men engaging in infidelity but only with the opposite sex, or using curse words but only when directed at member of the Democrat[ ] party, and -- most important -- the manliness to stand up and say that's what we in the GOP stand for.
Now, we've not exactly heard any of those manly GOPers come out of the closet yet and say this out loud. But I'll bet one of those manly men gets outed before November '08.
Posted by shertaugh at 12:44 PM
August 30, 2007
You've Got Questions? I've Got Answers.
Posted by Eric at 12:43 PM
August 28, 2007
Senator Craig and the Ubiquity of Rank-Pulling
I find that piece of the story pretty ordinary. Back when I was in a federal prosecutor's office, it was common for prosecutors pulled over by state cops for moving violations to hand over their driver's licenses tucked inside their DOJ/USAO identity cards, in the unspoken expectation that the credential might persuade the cop just to issue a warning rather than a ticket. I never did this myself; I got one ticket while at the USAO from a New Jersey State Trooper but was too chicken (or was it honorable?) to try the license-in-the-identity-card gambit. I recall people bragging that the trick had worked for them, though. So I suspect that versions of the "do you know who I am?" ploy happen all the time, and that they are often successful for some kinds of offenses.
Posted by Eric at 9:10 AM
August 26, 2007
Have I Mentioned That Glenn Tilbrook Is A Talented Fellow?
Posted by Eric at 10:48 PM
Wanna get away with murder?
Posted by Eric at 7:55 PM
August 25, 2007
Family Vacation, Part 7
Posted by Eric at 11:32 AM
August 23, 2007
Family Vacation, Part 6
Posted by Eric at 11:32 PM
Family Vacation, Part 5
Posted by Eric at 9:28 AM
August 22, 2007
Family Vacation, Part 4
Posted by Eric at 10:01 PM
Family Vacation, Part 3
Posted by Eric at 2:24 PM
August 21, 2007
Family Vacation, Part 2
Posted by Eric at 5:18 PM
Family Vacation, Part 1
Posted by Eric at 3:39 PM
August 20, 2007
Outtasite (Outta Mind)
You can always catch me at my main blog, Law and Letters. And for purely legal academic stuff, check me out at MoneyLaw.
Again, I apologize for not blogging daily--turns out the week before school is not as perfect timing as I had thought. But I've tried to make quota with yesterday's blogfest. Do scroll down for at least three long (and by that I mean looooooong) posts on legal academia (sort of) and a fun music video (or two).
And speaking of music videos--while I'm getting outta Eric's site, what better way than to post one of my favorite songs by my favorite band?
I'm Outtasite (and Outta Mind!):
Posted by Belle at 5:26 AM
Be Cool, Realize You're Old School
So does Dave Hoffman.
Of course, they are barely older than (and perhaps are younger than a few returning/double degree) their students. So I have to take that into account when calculating their Coolness Ratio.
I enjoy reading the pop culture posts by law prof bloggers. It helps me figure out where I'm situated relationally to my future colleagues. I'm not that old, being still under 30 (but in the "late 20s" era). But it's a vague age of quantum possibilities--I could still be wandering around in life, figuring out what to do (no, that is not called "grad school") while writing bad fiction and poetry and working a clerical job. I could be in the third year of my life-long career, instead of where I am currently--back in school. I could be married and mortgaged up. I could be exactly where I am--in between all of those states.
So I read the kids' movies review by Christine Hurt and Gordon Smith at the 'Glom. I read with interest what Orly Lobel does with her kids' drawings. I also like to check out the hipness quotient of my favorite bloggers. I'm surprised how cool some of them are--really, Dan Filler, you like Sufjan Stevens? Awesome! Dave Hoffman, you are not just puffing up your coolness cred with the White Stripes and Magnetic Fields? Snap!
My favorite sometimes-blogger, Hipster Law Prof, is extremely cool. But he could always use a little help. Listening to The Shins since way back in 2002 does not make you "so hip that you know bands that don't even exist yet" (real t-shirt slogan). I have younger friends who wish they had more social capital at their new firms. Why, oh why don't they know classic rock or old fogey pastimes? I imagine that sometimes profs want the reverse---to be able to relate more to their students, and pepper their lectures and exams with references that are more current and relatable. Social capital seems to go both ways. It is a fortunate thing that I can get most pop culture references from now back to 1930. I can talk to almost anyone. I imagine though that it takes more work to stay current though. Just what are these crazy kids listening to nowadays?
So that's what I'm here to do. Help you profs learn how to be cool. Don't try to be your students' friends (that is awkward for the most part, toes the line of appropriateness if you hang out, and they will always think of you as their professor--I can't help but laugh whenever I refer to my Brilliant Employment Discrimination Prof by his first name). Don't think that you'll ever be as cool as a 24 year old with enough time to check out the local music scene AND travel to music festivals AND listen to independent college radio. Give it up, dudes. You're past your coolness prime. Social security starts for you in five minutes, and I do believe that was your foot tapping to Genesis--the Phil Collins years.
I'm in a good position to help. I'm of the right age, being young enough to know other cool young people (your students) and close enough in age to them such that it is not weird and Mrs. Robinson-like. I'm also not very cool or hip. I'm the un-Hipster, much like how 7-Up is the un-Cola. It doesn't even try to pass. It accepts its zero-buzz, neutral taste. I got most of the jokes in my Hipster Haiku book only because I have hipster friends. I dress in business casual as a matter of course (even with my youth and in my casual environment), and can't for the life of me rock those clever graphic t-shirts or Converse shoes without looking like I'm trying very, very hard and spending too much money to look unemployed. I've had friends step on the white caps of my Converses to dirty them up a little. Every time I buy a jar of pomade to achieve that messy-on-purpose look, I give it away in resignation and accept that I like brushing my hair.
So I will never be cool. But I know cool people. And I think I've figured out how to be cool and relate to people my age.
Off the top of my head, only three tactics come to mind (I really am not that cool):
1. Join Facebook.
I will delete my profile when I go on the market and reemerge with a nothing profile, but for now it's fascinating to watch what my classmates (and sometimes I) do on social networking sites! I do research in social network theory, and it's seriously amazing how obsessed students are about these sites. You can see what Generation Y are up to, and their mass trends. Don't believe me? Read Danah Boyd.
2. Mine Facebook for information.
It's always funny to me to see students "friend" their professors, thereby alerting them to their status updates (often emotional states) and pictures of drunken revelry. Ignore that. It's interesting, but just confirms the generational gap. And you will feel even older when you hear yourself say "those kids today....". I like to check out the profiles of twee young emo hipsters for their music and movie picks. Somewhere buried in that list of 40 bands may be three or four that you can actually stand. The rest will make you want to slit your wrists or take an Advil at too much atonalist sound distortion. And the movies....ahhh, the hipster youth and their po-mo rejection of narrative.
3. If you have cool friends, keep them.
Social network theory taught me that my Bacon number is 3, and that weak ties are as important as strong ties. My strong tie to my Former College Radio DJ Lawyer friend (who has artistic, musical friends) makes me pretty close to cool. She sends me music suggestions and mix CDs all the time. I then pass this onto Hipster Law Prof. Hipster Law Prof is now only one degree away from cool.
Of course, it doesn't really matter that you are cool. It matters most that you teach well.
But it wouldn't hurt you to check out Wilco, American Analog Set, Blonde Redhead, Bloc Party, Shout Out Louds, Call and Response, Aislers Set, Futureheads, The Walkmen...
But if at the end of the day, you really can't relate to your students--it's okay. No one is expecting you to. I am bemused and amused by how many posts there are in the legal blogosphere about using pop culture or current events in exams. Staying current seems to be a concern of law profs. And the posts on pop culture speak volumes about how each professor views themselves situationally with respect to their students and colleagues. Law profs are as obsessed with pop culture as they are with gossip. You are all so busy, but you seem to want to make time for movies and music in your life, and then you want to blog your opinions about them. Maybe it's not to establish coolness--but it does speak to your desire to stay well-rounded, and have extra-legal interests. And that's the same goal as your concert-hopping, too-cool-for-school students. What appears to be an obsession with coolness and currency (and inane social networking sites) is the same other-life-building exercise for 22-25 year olds. I'm sure you can recall what it was like to be recently graduated from college and try to hang onto old hobbies like working out, arthouse/revival film watching, bass-playing, bar-hopping. You just can't do it anymore. And it's okay. No one expects you to, and I don't think you really want to. I wonder that anyone can keep all that up (and have a real job) past the age of 27.
You can try to bridge the generational gap, and it'll probably be easier to if you're close in age. But you can't, and shouldn't bridge the professional (professorial) gap. And some generational gapness is okay. It's okay to be olde school. You're still in school, but you're the professor. So teach your students to be lawyers, and they'll teach you how to stay cool (maybe).
Posted by Belle at 3:09 AM
August 19, 2007
I Fought The Law
And then the New Generation tried to Fight the Law, but the Law Still Won:
Posted by Belle at 9:26 PM
How To Write and Avoid Not-Writing
(Note to Eric and self: Figure out how to save drafts in MovableType to avoid losing another 1000+ word post)
It came from the comments over at my blog:
"Dude" asks:
Honestly, if you're a domestic LLM, chances are good you're mostly there to write - not to take more exam courses. Talking about how to do that (independant study options, thesis rules) would probably be extremely helpful.
I agree with you, Dude. Apart from the special topic LL.Ms (e.g. NYU's in tax, international law), academic-track LL.M programs vary widely in structure and rigorousness. I would say that Harvard is probably the most structured (all LL.Ms are required to write a thesis, and the S.J.D. program is relatively structured) while others, like Georgetown's, University of Wisconsin-Madison, and Boalt Hall's are the least structured, allowing you to design your own course list and concentrate on independent writing. Most domestic LL.Ms will probably be either "research-track" or "thesis-track." And these are almost entirely unstructured programs, because the point is to not get a concentration in some subject--the point is to write.
The thing to do is actually write and avoid not-writing. While these programs are unstructured, they do have requirements and certain parameters. Most writing-track programs require academic aspirant LL.Ms to take a certain number of course units. They are about half the units required for general or special-topic LL.Ms, but they are still courses that will take time away from writing your monograph. So what to take for those courses?
Again, it probably depends on the structuredness of your program. At most schools there are no special courses just for academic-track LL.Ms and S.J.Ds. You will be choosing from the standard 2L/3L fare--and at this point, after your three-year J.D., what's there left to take? Whatever serves the monograph. At this point, you'll have most of the foundational courses taken cared of (this is why they're foundational). If you haven't taken Statutory Interpretation yet, I guess this that the do-over 4L year is as good as any to remedy that. And I'm not entirely opposed to exam courses--if they're useful for your monograph, then there's no reason not to take them. And the quick Vulcan-death-grip blow of the final frees you up for spending your writing energy on your monograph.
The thing to do is to make sure your courses serve your monograph. Depending on the program, there's lots of ways of going about this. Most schools will assign you/let you pick a faculty advisor to supervise your written work if they require a thesis/monograph. Depending on how much feedback you need/want, this can be a very interactive or completely detached relationship. Choose your advisor carefully, and don't be afraid to change advisors (but try not to change half-way--try to pick wisely and quickly in the first three weeks of school). But that faculty advisor will be the one supervising your independent study units (for which you will receive a grade upon completion of the monograph, most likely, so you'll get an "In-Progress" one semester and a final retroactive grade at the very end). Because your monograph is already graded, and you are already taking independent study units, your course units have to be efficient uses of your time.
Again, if you need some background knowledge, take those courses. For instance, since I never took it before and because I'm doing a project on the FMLA, I'm taking Employee Benefits this semester. But in general, my approach is to take courses that serve the monograph as much as possible. Depending on your school, you may be able to take courses from other departments. I'm taking a Research Methods Design course from a graduate department, and that will be useful for helping me design my management questionnaires and will give me feedback in the early stages my dissertation project design. I also plan on taking Organizations and Institutions from another department here on campus. I also take seminar courses from the law school that either 1) become a chapter of my monograph or 2) work as an independent paper in my field that I can publish while I'm working on the Big Project Monograph.
I don't mind spending 5-6 months writing a smaller article on a very particular topic in my field as I'm working on my 200 page monograph. Because I'm spending the first year of the S.J.D. doing field work, collecting data, and analyzing the data, I want to write as much as possible and workshop those articles on the conference circuit. Carefully chosen seminar topics/papers are ideal for this. Ever had a professor tell you that if you cleaned up a paper you could publish it? Well, at this stage, you definitely should. I would caution you to stick to your intended hedgehog specialization field though, so that when you do go on the market you have 2-3 articles (in addition to your dissertation) that look like a good package displaying your particular toolkit. As of now, I'm interdisciplinary but getting more focused: sociological perspectives on employment discrimination law.
I would write as much as possible, but by that I mean spend the bulk of your time writing 1-2 good articles. Try to get your coursework and writing projects to overlap and dovetail as much as possible. Make sure the things you write are good and publishable--so don't sweat it taking so many paper requirements that you end up writing 4 things badly. If you talk to the professor, most seminars will let you write research proposals in lieu of an independent paper. That's what I did last spring for one course--I wrote my dissertation proposal as I was finishing my independent study thesis, and with my third being an exam course, I got everything done. And now I have a dissertation proposal ready to go for this Fall (which I have spent the past week cleaning up for my new faculty advisor and other members of my dissertation committee, which is why I've been such a bad guest-blogger).
Try to write and avoid not-writing---so just keep writing. Of course it sucks. It always sucks. But you might be able to clean it up in the end. You might toss a lot, but at least some of what you write will be publishable. So just keep writing. If you're going to go on the market after the LL.M/VAP/Fellowship, you'd better write something publishable. If you're already on the market, then you probably have a few things under your belt. But if you are intending to go on the market very soon, you'd better be shopping your articles and getting a lot of eyes on those drafts. If you only have one year to do all of this, make it a productive year. I hate to say this, but don't sweat it trying to get too much balance. You'll fail at both--your productivity will suffer and your fun will not be all that fun if you feel guilt over not-working and are trying to cram fun into your busy schedule. Maybe you'll come back to this city as a tourist one day, but for now, work hard and play later.
I have more time to stretch now with three years to file my dissertation, but I'm still spending a fair amount of time reading and typing. As my advisor said, I have to hit the ground running with the amount of field work and data analysis I have to do--not to mention waiting for IRB approval. So the work started last year, and it's already raging right now. I know I've campaigned for balance before--but that doesn't mean I am slacking off of work or thinking of these years as party years.
"Balance" means that I am adding exercise to my regimen, but I definitely have a regimen. I get to do things that serve my mental, physical, and emotional health, but I don't get to slack off or over-commit myself to things that are inefficient uses of time. You're not a J.D. anymore. Don't join a law journal or law school organization. Don't decide that your do-over LL.M or S.J.D. years are the time to learn everything you didn't in law school. Write the monograph. And then spend whatever free time you have on things that make you happy so that you can have the energy to write when you plunk yourself down for a 8-10 hour day (and yes, you should create such a work/writing schedule on the weekdays even if you have class), as if you had a "real job").
In my personal quest for balance, I'm just trying to travel less (there was a time when I traveled almost every month for work or personal reasons), which means I get to spend weekends catching up on sleep, work, and the people in my life. Balance doesn't mean hitting the bars or being a tourist every weekend or going to every party--it means spending time more productively and healthily. I am making sure I get sleep. I get to cook, run, and have a hobby (choose your own adventure). I see a movie every couple of weeks or so, and try to find something to do one day (or both) a weekend that makes me happy and diverted. When I have such off-time, I spend it with loved ones, and that's the best balance to me. The rest of the time, yeah, I'm working. It's easy to forget this when you go back to the "student" life. Don't go to the bars every night with those crazy J.D.s! Set that alarm! You're not in college (or law school proper) anymore.
It's easy to forget your purpose as a domestic LL.M surrounded by J.D.s who are just barely out of college. Worse yet, you're surrounded by international LL.Ms who are here to get their American credential (sometimes on their firm's dime, their parents' dime, or a Fulbright dime) and lots of touring and partying before they go back to a salary bonus. You are not one of them. You are here to work. You are not 22 years old anymore (thank goodness). It sucks to be you.
But it will be awesome to be you in a few years (or so I hope), when you (and I) get that tenure track job--the best job in the world! Teaching a great subject to a new generation of law students.
Just make sure you write and avoid not-writing. It's easier said than done.
Posted by Belle at 8:00 PM
I Choose Sleep
The welcome was the same exact welcome as last year. Our Charismatic Dean welcomed us all, and remarked on how international a group we were, and how many countries--nay, continents--we represented. He told us to take advantage of that internationalness. He said the exact same thing last year. It's true though--until last year, I don't think I was ever exposed to so many people from so many different countries. I learned a lot from my colleagues through their presentations on the law in their jurisdictions. I also learned a lot about the different customs and cultural differences. I got used to cheek-kissing. Bises for Belle! It makes you immune to the intimacy of the gesture. With so much cheek-kissing hello and goodbye or as a thank you, it just ruins it in some ways. I used to blush and feel thrilled at such a gesture. Now it's like shaking hands. Le sigh.
This is what it's like to be one of the few Americans in a predominantly international program. A vague feeling of not belonging in your own country. Surrounded by internationals--but wait, there's a Wal-MART!"--in your own country, you at once see how you do or don't fit in with your native land. And you definitely can observe how they do or don't fit in. I got a lot of "but you don't seem American" last year due to the fact that I dressed with some style, did not wear "trainers" (sneakers) all the time and knew a great amount about Western art, literature, and culture. I had actually read almost as much Russian literature as my Favorite Russian Dude, and knew more ancient Greek mythology than some of the Greek Girl's friends. Knowing chanson and French symbolist poetry only pushed me over the edge of un-Americanness. Since when did not being "Typically American" mean being well-educated and cultured? That sucks! I was frequently offended by their surprise at my not being a dumb f**k. Or by strange compliment-insults to the effect of "wow, your shoes aren't ugly."
Actually, for domestic LL.Ms, the LL.M year can be a year of being constantly offended and offending. It just happens, and I can't explain how to avoid it. It's supposed to be hands-across-the-world-uniting, but it's more like a series of missed hi-fives and left-handed compliments that border on insults. Or else actual insults. Maybe it was just the crowd I hung out with last year. There was a lot of complaining by the oblige-free noblesse about the coarseness of middle-class America, how we cook our meat, what kinds of clothes and shoes we wear....yes, there were a lot of times where I wanted to flash dexter hands appaumy. By the end of the year I became oddly more jingoistic and less-inclined to cosmopolitanism, and almost wanted to utter xenophobic statements like "if you don't like our Nike sneakers, go back to ____!"
I wish the Dean had told us how to avoid culture clash. There are more types of kulturkampf than previously thought.
Instead, the Dean told us to sleep less.
Seriously.
He said that this year will go by incredibly fast (and it is true, last year's went by--there is no other way to say it, as "very" doesn't do the trick--incredibly fast). So "drink it in, drink it up." He said that no one ever finishes the one-year LL.M program wishing they had slept more. Don't waste this year, he cautions. Make friends with your colleagues. Integrate yourself with the J.Ds, the law school, and the wider campus community. Take advantage of living in one of the best parts of the country. See the surrounding area and the rest of the state. Take advantage of being at one of the best universities in America--heck, the world. Take advantage of the other departments and lectures (nevermind that you can't get credit for outside courses and so you'd be auditing on top of your law school load). Explore the arts scene. See things. Live. He said the exact same thing last year.
You know what?
I choose sleep.
Seriously.
It is true that this is an awesome part of the country. And I am glad to have three more years to enjoy it and explore it in greater depth and breadth. But for that one year, it's damn near impossible to live as much as the Dean suggests (seriously, he sounded like Thoreau, and I was half-expecting him to hand out straws as physical metaphors of how we are to suck the marrow out of life) and get all your work done (well) and maintain balance in other ways. I think there's already enough of a party-hearty culture among the international students (the 1Ls are too freaked out, and the 2Ls and 3Ls here are quite serious). I think he should have said "work hard and get good grades!" Maybe that goes without speaking, but it should have been said. I'm all for working hard and playing hard, but I argue that one should laze just as hard.
Get some sleep! I definitely didn't sleep enough last year. I was working too much and was way too overscheduled. Again, maybe it's just me and the crowd I hung out with last year (it is trial and error after all, and with only one year in which you are the misfit in a crowd of misfits, more than enough opportunity for error). Most of the experiences from last year I would like to spit out. You sometimes order the wrong drink. Over and over again.
So I would change the advice a bit. I would indeed say out loud "work hard and get good grades." I would also say:
"Sip cautiously as you drink it all in...take your time to settle in and acculturate yourself. Take a step back and look at your new home for what it reallly is after your eyes adjust to its newness and after you have acquired the perspective of an adoptive son or daughter. Think of what it can be for you. Forge the bonds of friendship carefully but strongly. Do your work, but pay attention to your health needs and social needs, and don't let one set of needs crowd out the other. And get some sleep. Sleep as much as you can very night, and more on the weekends if necessary."
Yeah, I choose sleep.
Posted by Belle at 7:25 PM
Law Like Love
Law Like Love
Law, say the gardeners, is the sun,
Law is the one
All gardeners obey
To-morrow, yesterday, to-day.
Law is the wisdom of the old,
The impotent grandfathers feebly scold;
The grandchildren put out a treble tongue,
Law is the senses of the young.
Law, says the priest with a priestly look,
Expounding to an unpriestly people,
Law is the words in my priestly book,
Law is my pulpit and my steeple.
Law, says the judge as he looks down his nose,
Speaking clearly and most severely,
Law is as I've told you before,
Law is as you know I suppose,
Law is but let me explain it once more,
Law is The Law.
Yet law-abiding scholars write:
Law is neither wrong nor right,
Law is only crimes
Punished by places and by times,
Law is the clothes men wear
Anytime, anywhere,
Law is Good morning and Good night.
Others say, Law is our Fate;
Others say, Law is our State;
Others say, others say
Law is no more,
Law has gone away.
And always the loud angry crowd,
Very angry and very loud,
Law is We,
And always the soft idiot softly Me.
If we, dear, know we know no more
Than they about the Law,
If I no more than you
Know what we should and should not do
Except that all agree
Gladly or miserably
That the Law is
And that all know this
If therefore thinking it absurd
To identify Law with some other word,
Unlike so many men
I cannot say Law is again,
No more than they can we suppress
The universal wish to guess
Or slip out of our own position
Into an unconcerned condition.
Although I can at least confine
Your vanity and mine
To stating timidly
A timid similarity,
We shall boast anyvay:
Like love I say.
Like love we don't know where or why,
Like love we can't compel or fly,
Like love we often weep,
Like love we seldom keep.
--W.H. Auden
Posted by Belle at 1:44 PM
August 16, 2007
Out With The Old...
A stack of books: Understanding Criminal Law; the 2006 supplement for Evidence, Cases and Materials; Gilbert on Contracts.
I'm guessing a law student lives/d at the house.
And I'm guessing that s/he is pretty much done with those books and those courses.
I know lots of people who sell their old books on Amazon, and still others who just donate old books to their journal/org offices. Some, like me, keep their books, with the thought that maybe one day it'll be useful to have the 12th edition of Gunther and Sullivan. Of course, it's that type of thinking that gets me two copies--the 8th edition from my college years, and of course my 12th means that I'm three editions behind by now. I dunno. I like to keep my books. I like to have the ones in my area of concentration. I mine the notes for reading suggestions and find them useful for quick touch ups. I just like having books around me. It's a small feeling of accomplishment to look at all the courses I've taken and the subjects I've read and learned. It is a very, very small feeling of accomplishment mind you, but I'll take what I can get.
So it was kind of sad to see that pile of books tossed with--with what? Nonchalance? Weary resignation? Anger? Disdain? I don't know. It was just sad to see. You can toss the books, but you can't toss that grade or the headaches or (hopefully) the knowledge. You shouldn't anyway. I always hear my classmates wish that they could take back that paper, grade, class, year. Everyone's drowning in a sea of regret. Everyone over-commits to orgs and loads up on courses or takes the wrong course or the wrong professor. Everyone who runs for the co-chair of an organization or the EIC of a journal usually lives to regret it.
But it's not so easy to toss aside your mistakes. I guess books might be the proxy.
Posted by Belle at 9:26 PM
August 15, 2007
Summertime (And The Livin' Ain't Easy)
For some it may be though. I will tell you that right now, while you profs are scrambling to edit course readers and get syllabi out and are deluging your administrative assistants with photocopy requests, your students are trying to cram in as much fun as possible before the term starts. The 1Ls are of course freaked out, and are overwhelmed with welcome week activities. They are overcome with eagerness and vague trepidation over this new adventure. They will buy every book that they're advised to, including "Plain English For Lawyers" and every, and I mean every, hornbook in the bookstore. Right now, they are in their new apartments and looking over their two-feet stack of books and rigid course schedules and wondering what the hell they got themselves into. Only two months ago, they were English literature majors. Life was good. Reading was fun.
Right now, the incoming 1Ls sit in apartments furnished by Ikea and the kitchen-in-a-box from Target, awkwardly chatting with new roomates found via Craigslist or the law school list-serv, wondering at what have they done and are they really expected to learn the Rule Against Perpetuities?
Right now, the 2Ls and 3Ls are in Vegas or Hawaii.
But eventually all the 1Ls, 2Ls and 3Ls will meet up this weekend to cram in some fun in the city, at the beach, and most definitely in the bars. One (not really last, given the drinking culture and Bar Review) hurrah, and will try to cram in the first reading sometime on Sunday night, when they are bleary eyed and already exhausted from the pre-school fun. Good morning to you, Professor.
Because I am straddling the line between student and academic, this has been a mixed summer for me. I spent a week at Con Law Camp--a conference that required considerable preparation, all on the heels of finishing my master's thesis and moving into a new house. I had out of town guests every other week. I visited my family for a week and a half this summer as well, greeting a new nephew. Between settling into a new house, catching up on the much-neglected personal life, and working every spare moment on editing old articles--this summer has flown by!
If you're used to an academic calendar, it's the summer that's the season of change. It's the most dynamic. Every year the stores herald January 1st as the pivotal date of change. That's when the new calendars come out, and the new date books are available. Well, not if you buy the 18 month academic calendars that I do. When I think of "next year" I think "next Fall term." This is a sign that you've been going to school for too long, and that you're a born-and-bred academic. Summer is always a transition time for me--one academic year has ended, and in two and a half months another will will begin. I imagine, for the 1Ls, this season marks an even greater transition. For many of them, it marks their new status as graduate students. They have chosen a profession, and they are committing to careers. Even if many go to law school because they don't know what else to do (avoiding real life, as it were), this is probably the first really grown up thing that they're doing. No more dorms, no more parental safety nets, no more lax professors and fudging their way through. Welcome to the Bell curve of life and law school. And they will find all this change occurs within one change of seasons, from the summer of youth to the fall of young adulthood.
Summer's date hath all too short a lease--just two months ago, I finished my thesis and graduated with an LL.M. Yesterday I had my first meeting with my new dissertation advisor (which accounts for my not blogging over the weekend). It was a good and productive meeting. She likes my proposal, and has given me advice regarding courses, project design, and has given me a deadline of the end of September for a draft of my questionnaire and human subjects IRB proposal. By the end of the term, I should have a bibliography (and a chunk of it read) for my literature review. The plan is to hit the ground running by next summer so that I can really go out and do the field work and data collection. You see what I mean by summer being a season of change? I'm really happy with all this change though. I'm really excited about my project, and I really like my advisor.
This summer, I finished one program and began another. I changed houses and neighborhoods (trading up). I got a new advisor. Lots of good change. It's a good feeling. It's an exhausting feeling too. I don't know how you professors do it all during the summer--research, write, go to conferences, catch up on life. And I don't know how you deal with so many successive years of change, with the great turnover of students. There is a new class for you all to teach and mentor, and there will be new adventures in academia for all come Monday.
There are those that accuse academics of static indolence and laziness--armchair academics, are we not? I don't know about that. I think academics are pretty good at handling the sea changes of life and helping students manage such big transitions--we do it every year, after all.
Posted by Belle at 1:56 AM
August 9, 2007
Bush's Imposes Largest Tax Increase in Decades
On the tax front, the president has recently threatened to use his veto pen to prevent any tax increases on anyone, and to harp about more tax cuts for corporations. He wants Americans to believe they are better off with lower taxes across the board for everyone.
Not so fast.
One thing you'll never hear this president, or anyone in his administration, discuss is the collapse -- yes, COLLAPSE! -- of the Dollar against the world's other currencies during the past five years.
For example, since August 2002, the Dollar has fallen 30% against the Euro. Look at this graph for a visual..
That fall in the Dollar is, I believe, the equivalent of a tax increase. Why? Well, it is true American-made goods have become cheaper abroad, so those lucky corporations keep their workers working. And American services -- like Disney World -- have become cheaper for Europeans to purchase, so those service workers wearing Mickey Mouse outfits keep wearing.
But in relative terms . . . in relative terms . . . the cost for Americans to enjoy Disney World has gone up 30% in five years. The cost for Americans to buy European goods and services has gone up 30% in five years. Now if you make a $1 million per year, that 30% increase hurts, but it doesn't stop you from buying. If you make, say, $50,000 per year year, well, now that's a different story altogether.
This administration made the short-sighted, and I would submit (surprise!) political decision to devalue the Dollar by borrowing from our nation's competitors to do what?
To finance its tax cuts, corporate welfare for drug companies and health insurers, and -- worst of all -- to pay for our national security.
That's all very pain-free for Americans on the surface because who really feels the slow, progressive fall of the Dollar anyway?
But Americans, across the board and relative to the global economy on which we depend so much now for our basic goods and services, have been subjected to the largest tax increase under the Bush Administration since, well, World War II maybe.
Of course, something so complicated as a 30% drop in the dollar against the rest of the world, and the relative increase by 30% of key foreign goods and services purchased by every-day, average Americans, is just so un-newsworthy and hard to say in 30 seconds that no one talks about it.
I have to believe that there came a critical tipping point for the economy of the Great Roman Empire when its currency flowed out to purchase foreign goods and services at progressively growing, irreversible rates that it ultimately destroyed the Empire's ability to sustain itself . . . militarily, socially, and culturally.
Posted by shertaugh at 8:59 AM
August 8, 2007
Thanks, Folks! I'll Be Here Till (Next) Saturday! Try The Special!
I am indeed a quirky blogger, and my tendency is to blog on mundane topics in an idiosyncratic manner--in particular bringing in some of my own experiences and reflections on the matter at hand. With lots of pop cultural references and occasional wit.
I plan to blog on what it's like being a 5L; how my S.J.D. orientation went and what it signifies; how to do lots of independent writing during your advanced law degree or fellowship; what it's like being one of the few Americans in your heavily international program; and the errant book or movie review.
I hope that you enjoy the posts!
Posted by Belle at 5:50 PM
Introducing Guest-Blogger Belle
For reasons that escape me, she promised she'd keep the "weirdness" on her on blog and not spread it here. I hope she reneges on that promise.
Posted by Eric at 8:13 AM
August 5, 2007
Squeeze in Atlantic City
The band I saw was "Squeeze" because it was the reunion of the band's songwriting team, Glenn Tilbrook and Chris Difford. The only other quasi-original band member in the lineup is bassist John Bentley. He isn't a true "original"; he was the band's second bassist (around '79 to '82 or so, if memory serves). Rounding out the band were two member's of Glenn Tilbrook's new-ish band the Fluffers -- Simon Hanson on drums and Stephen Large on keyboards.
Fans of the band will want the playlist. Here it is:
Take Me I'm Yours
Slightly Drunk
Piccadilly
Up the Junction
I Think I'm Go Go
Electric Trains
Some Fantastic Place
Another Nail for My Heart
Messed Around
Slaughtered, Gutted, and Heartbroken
Goodbye Girl
If I Didn't Love You (I'd Hate You)
Footprints
Slap and Tickle
Pulling Mussels (from the Shell)
Cool for Cats
Tempted (encore)
Black Coffee in Bed (encore)
The show was great fun, though the band were far from the top of their game. The main problem was lead singer Glenn Tilbrook, who'd come down with a case of laryngitis and who was singing without the upper quarter of his vocal range. The band's sound is so dependent on Glenn's pipes that this was a nearly impossible setback to recover from. One thing the band might have done was to intersperse a few more of the songs that Chris Difford sings -- His Heart Her Home, for example, or Someone Else's Heart, or Love Circles. Of course, they'd probably not rehearsed these tunes -- and one of the problems that comes along with playing with a band with a constantly shifting roster is that you can't be sure everyone in the band will know everything from the band's whole career (which in this case is quite a long one). In any case, they didn't do this, so Glenn had to slog away at song after song, with the predictable effect on his already strained voice.
Also disappointing was that Chris Difford did not step into the role of band leader (in terms of establishing rapport with the audience) in Glenn's voice-impaired absence. Difford's been at this game since the 70s, and has performed for a while now as a solo act. Surely he could have stepped to the microphone a bit and shared a few connecting words and a witticism or two to take the pressure off of Tilbrook. But he hung back and said little. The result was a concert with almost no "patter" from the band at all, and the little there was, from Glenn Tilbrook, was nearly impossible to hear because of his laryngitis.
Tilbrook and Difford had been estranged for quite a few years before this reunion tour. It's said their relationship is now quite cordial, but there was little evidence of that on stage. In fact, there was little energy between the two songwriters. It's impossible to know what's going on off stage, but to my eye it looked as though Chris Difford was only barely in the room for the show. He made eye contact with and smiled at the audience only once, that I saw, and otherwise seemed a bit stiff and uncomfortable. The same was more or less true for bassist John Bentley, who also seemed to be in his own little world over at extreme stage left. Most of the energy came from the two youngsters in the band, Hanson and Large, and from the vocally impaired Tilbrook. Maybe this is because Tilbrook, Hanson, and Large have been recording and touring together (and playing a good chunk of the Squeeze catalogue) for the last several years.
Tilbrook's singing was impaired, but his guitar work was marvelous, as always. When Difford sang, he sang well. And with a songbook like Squeeze's, it's damn near impossible to play a bad show. So I had fun, and appreciated Tilbrook's obvious effort to soldier on and give us a good show despite his discomfort. Not a great show, but certainly not a bad one either.
Posted by Eric at 8:12 PM
August 3, 2007
If I Didn't Love Them, ...
Posted by Eric at 10:23 PM