| |
ElizabethBrandtFirstEssay 3 - 05 Mar 2016 - Main.EbenMoglen
|
|
META TOPICPARENT | name="FirstEssay" |
| |
< < | | | Interviews and Rationales
-- By ElizabethBrandt - 18 Feb 2016 | | Every interview will still require me to play the part of Thinking Man and make up my best transcendental nonsense with which to convince the interview of the inevitability of our meeting. There’s no getting around the performance art of the interview. I’ll leave out the story about my grandfather for risk of sounding more emotional than a good Thinking Man should. I’m sure I’ll even enjoy some of the conversations that I have with interviewers, but answering this question will probably never be one of those enjoyable moments for me. Maybe one time I’ll feel non-conformist enough to tell the interviewer to bugger off because it’s, frankly, none of their business. | |
> > | | | | |
< < |
You are entitled to restrict access to your paper if you want to. But we all derive immense benefit from reading one another's work, and I hope you won't feel the need unless the subject matter is personal and its disclosure would be harmful or undesirable.
To restrict access to your paper simply delete the "#" character on the next two lines: | > > | Part of the transcendental nonsense, to start with, is that the mock
interview is training you to participate in other mock interviews.
The ones you are thinking about are conducted by organizations
seeking to hire workers. To be such a lawyer is already to have
made certain choices. When I and my law partner, SFLC's legal
director, hire lawyers, or when I decide to take students on who
will become our lawyers, the interview has no such shape. We are
hiring people we intend to work with directly, people with whom we
two ourselves will actually be practicing. Such a conversation to
elicit such a narrative is not helpful, let alone worth the time.
So everybody performs an unimaginative work that they have learned
to do both sides of, but which is not the thing itself, which is
something that has to be invented every time people meet in order to
decide whether to have a relationship. Those skills, too, have
fallen into such peculiar desuetude that people now try to establish
using the computers that spy on them whether they are mutually
attracted by such artificial narratives before they permit
themselves to meet and to begin to perform their LinkedIn or
Facebook profile, as the case of dating may be, as best they can
under the disadvantage of presence as well as absence, also known as
reality.
So you came to law school both in order to be a lawyer and to have a
way of life that has meaning for good or ill in the society around
you. Which means learning to bend reality by being fully present in
it, rather than by making artificial "profiles" that abstract nicely
from it and that can be packaged and promoted for sale to others the
way every other commodity that has no effect on its society is sold.
This is a fine first draft, in that it clears the space for the
excellent construction that comes next. You can now ask, what does
it actually take in realistic terms both to escape the performance
of these falsities and to continue moving swiftly and efficiently
towards the sort of fully-involved life in the community you want to
have? Thinking about that leads to planning and execution about
that, which is better than all the successful performances of the
profile of what you do not quite want in all the world. | | | |
< < | | > > | | | | |
< < | Note: TWiki has strict formatting rules for preference declarations. Make sure you preserve the three spaces, asterisk, and extra space at the beginning of these lines. If you wish to give access to any other users simply add them to the comma separated ALLOWTOPICVIEW list. | | \ No newline at end of file |
|
|
|
This site is powered by the TWiki collaboration platform. All material on this collaboration platform is the property of the contributing authors. All material marked as authored by Eben Moglen is available under the license terms CC-BY-SA version 4.
|
|
| |