Colin responds to my post about not knowing any law. Including this note of advice: "if you rattle-off the common law felonies at a dinner party, people will think you're creepy."

Why You Got a B on the Exam

First of all, let me just say this was an unusually strong group of exams. I've been doing this for a lot of years, and I don't think I've ever had a class give such strong answers. You all must have worked really hard, and I appreciated that. Nevertheless, because of the curve, I couldn't give everyone an A, and there had to be some way to sort them out. And while you seemed to have a good grasp of the black letter law, your analysis could have gone deeper. There were policy issues that you could have covered in greater detail. While it was clear you had done all the reading, there was an element of synthesis that some papers had which your didn't. You also misstated the holdings of some of the cases. It sometimes comes down to relatively superficial differences between exams, and your failure to spell-check may have had an effect. I wish you would have formatted your answer in a more organized way. Your exam was at the bottom of the pile and I had already given too many As. While your reasoning was solid, your ultimate conclusion was not the one I had in mind, and arguing for the other side might have been better supported by the facts. You missed a few of the issues that were on my checklist. You failed to cover all of the different parts of the question as written. You didn't reference as much of the course material as I would have liked. You failed to take a position one way or the other. I was tired. I don't like you. I have an unconscious bias against people like you. It was all random. I didn't mean anything personal by it. I know I promised you an A in exchange for that one night, but I couldn't go through with it.

I had dinner tonight with a friend at a Chinese restaurant in Brookline that had gotten a good review in the Globe.

The review ends with this: "For a finale we order hot candied apple ($9.95). A bowl of cold water arrives beforehand, followed by the pieces of caramel-coated apple, reshaped to resemble the intact fruit. We're instructed to lift up the pieces on chopsticks and dip them into the water so the sugary coating won't burn us as we bite into them. It's juicy, faintly sweet, and aromatic -- a joyous finish to an evening in Beijing."

So, after reading that, we ordered the hot candied apple for dessert. So it comes, and we start eating. First bite. "Uh, this doesn't taste like apple." "Maybe when you cook an apple for a while, it gets all starchy like that." "No, I don't think so. There's nothing apple about this." "I think we're eating a caramel potato." "This is pretty vile." "Yeah."

So we played with it for a few more minutes, tasted some little pieces, and decided that, yes, we were eating a caramel potato. So we call the waiter over.

"This doesn't taste like apple. It tastes like potato." "Ah, yes, on the menu it says apple, but we do not use apple anymore because apple was too sweet. We use potato. Perhaps I should have told you." Yeah, perhaps.

Lesson: Hot candied potato? Not so tasty. And I'm pretty adventurous and open-minded when it comes to food. (Perhaps only when it comes to food?)

In any case, the rest of the food was okay but nothing extraordinary. Not really worth the subway ride out to Coolidge Corner, although Coolidge Corner is a cool name and made me think we were going to stumble into a production of Our Town, or something like that. (We didn't.)

A cappella concert tonight at 7. We're doing three songs I wrote, among other stuff. Had my last law school class this afternoon. Really no feelings about that. Maybe different once I've had my last exam. But I'll say more later, probably. Also a funny idea for a post I just haven't had a chance to write yet, but coming tonight or tomorrow. I did something marginally dumb: I ordered a pair of shoes online, using an Amazon gift certificate my mom gave me. Ordering shoes online is dumb. The size was weird. I got the same size as the other shoes I have, but they're too big. Way too big. I don't get it. So now I have to box them back up and send them back. Ordering shoes online was stupid. There's an article about salt on Slate that should be less interesting than it is. Also a funny post on Veiled Conceit about law students in the NY Times Weddings pages.

Mike at Wings and Vodka tosses a prompt for a post over my way. Mike's a funny guy, despite being editor-in-chief of the University of Texas Law Review, so I guess I'll play. "Five things that people in your circle of friends or peer group are wild about, but you can’t really understand the fuss over."

Let's see:

1. 24. I've seen a couple of episodes. It wasn't terrible, but, I don't know, there's too much action. What a ridiculous complaint, I know. It just didn't grab me. I couldn't get myself to care about what happened to Kiefer Sutherland. All I could think about was how he's really aged in just 3 days since the show started. And doesn't he ever sleep? I want some irrelevant cable channel with 24 hours to waste to put on the anti-24. Just a really boring day. Maybe some guy with allergies who goes shopping for socks. I don't know. Conan O'Brien did a spoof the first season of 24 that was 24 seconds, one second each night. The three seconds I saw were funny. Maybe I should give 24 another chance. At least three people whose opinions on this stuff I trust really like this. Maybe next week. Unless I forget.

2. Anna's Taqueria. This is irrelevant for anyone who doesn't live here, but I figure I can waste at least one of the five. People say Anna's is so much better than Boca Grande and I just don't see it. I mean, I think Felipe's is much better than both of them, and it's not even close. But I just don't get the Anna's thing. It's further away, and I can't really tell the difference. I think maybe I'm just not that into burritos. They're not that interesting. It's just a whole bunch of bulk smushed together. Felipe's is cool because there's some more interesting stuff going on inside the burrito, more cheese, a little less dense with the rice and beans, and, surprisingly, the roasted vegetable burrito is really awesome, and doesn't taste like you're killing yourself like the other ones do. A couple of my friends told me a couple of weeks ago that you can ask them to grill the burrito, and that makes it even better. I didn't really think it would make a huge difference, but I tried it last time, and, wow, it's really quite amazing. The tortilla gets this nice buttery crispness and the flavors all meld a little bit inside, and, really, it's a whole different experience. Unreal. Transcended the genre. In a way that Anna's and Boca just don't. Oh well.

3. Disingenuously inflating the scores on course evaluations to make them completely worthless.

Come on. I'm glad you think the professor is nice and you don't want to hurt his feelings, but that doesn't mean you should be giving 4's and 5's when the class deserves 1's and 2's. If you can't bring yourself to go more than half the time, and when you're there you feel like electrocuting yourself in the laptop outlets just to break up the monotony, it's just not a good class. I'm sorry. And it doesn't help anyone to lie about it. Not the professor, who maybe, just maybe, would want to try and improve if he knew he was a terrible teacher. Not the students picking for next year. And not the school, which ought to know that two-thirds of the classes here are pretty horrid compared to what they should be. Save the 4's and 5's for classes that are awesome, and use the 1's and 2's please. When everything averages a 4, it's meaningless. And use the comment spaces on the back! How else can they find out there's real room for improvement here? And, yeah, part of the problem is that the evaluation forms aren't asking smart questions. But even understanding that, let's stop the grade inflation. For the sake of those yet to come.

4. iPods. I just can't really get into listening to music in my ears while I go about my day. I understand the appeal, especially at the gym, but I just don't feel the need. Then again, more and more I've been using my cell phone while walking back from somewhere, and it's not like that's any better. So I don't really have standing to complain. But sometimes I just like to think while I'm walking somewhere, and don't really feel the urge to distract myself with music. Then again, I'm listening to music right now while writing this post. I don't know, I'm just not really digging the iPod thing. I have no good reasons at all, and if I can get one free with my Lexis points I'm going to anyway, so then I'll really have no standing to complain. But whatever.

5. Statutory rape. It's really got to stop, I mean it.

revised newspaper column (two new paragraphs at the end; the first half is mostly the same as monday's post)

I have a secret. And it’s getting more and more difficult to hide it. I think my family’s finally catching on. There’s only so much verbal gymnastics one can do before the truth is obvious. My friends here know my secret. It’s their secret too. It’s the elephant in the room. It’s okay to talk about it, but it’s embarrassing for other people to find out. I mean, it’s not our fault, but it can feel that way. Like we’ve done something wrong. Like we’re imposters. But I don’t think we are. I think somehow the expectations just don’t match the reality. People make certain assumptions. Heck, we make our own assumptions. But it turns out that the assumptions just aren’t true. And so we carry around our secret, a little bit ashamed, a little bit amused, a little bit concerned, a little bit puzzled, a little bit resigned, and a little bit angry.

Here it is: I don’t know any law.

That’s an overstatement, but not by much. I don’t know that I really thought about it before I started law school, but I feel like I must have assumed I’d graduate having more of a clue than I do. I’ve been noticing more and more lately. People cut you some slack when you say you’re just a student, but you tell them you’re about to graduate and they expect Perry Mason. After watching a segment on The Daily Show last week, I had a conversation with a friend about whether they would be allowed to film on the Harvard campus without permission. Neither of us had any idea. I have no clue what the difference between robbery, burglary, larceny, theft, and just plain stealing are. My cousin is a teacher. She asked me whether it’s legal to handcuff her students. I mean, it sounds illegal... but is that really a more informed answer than I would have given three years ago?

I plugged the words “what every lawyer should know” into Google. I found pages that tell me what every lawyer should know about today’s paralegal, what every lawyer should know about computer forensics, what every lawyer should know about electronic evidence and discovery, what every lawyer should know about the Florida code of judicial conduct, what every lawyer should know about reciprocal discipline, what every lawyer should know about title surveys, what every lawyer should know about the Plain English rules, what every lawyer should know about representing deaf clients, what every lawyer should know about winning and defeating summary judgments, what every lawyer should know about crop insurance, what every lawyer should know about Texas residential landlord/tenant law, what every lawyer should know about brain injuries, what every lawyer should know about lurking liability in business practice, what every lawyer should know about the role of psychologists in custody cases, what every lawyer should know about parliamentary procedure, what every lawyer should know about about anti-SLAPP motions under Code of Civil Procedure § 425.16, what every lawyer should know about trips and slips on public sidewalks, what every lawyer should know about minimizing and responding to attacks on corporate information infrastructures, and much, much more. I don’t know anything at all about any of these things, and can’t imagine too many of my classmates do. Yet we’re all going to be law school graduates very shortly (barring any disasters in the upcoming weeks). And if we pass the bar, we could actually represent clients. Yikes. If I was a client, I would not want me as a lawyer. Sorry.

It all makes me start to wonder about doctors. Now that I know what we know after law school, I have to ask – how much medicine do doctors know after medical school? Do they have to run into their offices after every patient and look up the difference between the kidney and the spleen? Do they need to double-check the number of toes we’re supposed to have? Are they not quite certain what color healthy phlegm is really supposed to be? It’s frightening if they know as little about medicine as I know about what’s legal and what’s not. Then again, they’re dealing with life and death. We’re only dealing with freedom and justice. So who cares?

But you know what? It’s okay. I’m cool with it. Because here’s what I’ve learned in three years of law school. We can all find the law. What I can do that I couldn’t before law school is make the arguments. I can make stuff up that sounds credible enough. I can make my uncle think I know what I’m talking about when I tell him it’s illegal to buy milk on Tuesdays. I can make my grandma think I’m serious when I tell her giving a tin of brownies to her friend without charging is a violation of the antitrust laws. I can use big words, compound words, Latin words to make stuff up. And if they know I go to Harvard Law School, they believe me. This is an awesome power, and I waste it by telling my mom she’ll forfeit her U.S. citizenship if she makes an illegal U-turn, or telling a friend that you’re allowed to steal cable as long as you file the right paperwork with the local public library. We have the tools at our disposal to say anything, and have people believe us. It’s crazy.

So what else have I learned in three years of law school? Let’s see: The law is whatever judges want it to be. The Socratic Method can be used very well, and very badly. Walter Gropius was a hack. Some of my classmates will get my vote when they run for Congress. Some of them will not. Boston winters are long. The Red Sox are awesome.

Okay, some of this is tongue-in-cheek. I’ve learned some law. And, more importantly, I’ve learned how to think about the law, and how to read the law, and where to look to fill in the gaps. I’ve gotten a better sense of a whole bunch of aspects of society and why they’re structured like they are, and what the road toward change would look like. I’m a more informed citizen, a smarter consumer of information, and a more engaged civic participant. Just as important, I’ve met a lot of people who care a lot more about the law than I do. I expect my classmates will go to do a lot of neat things (if they eventually escape their law firms), and, honestly, help to change the world for the better. That’s a cool thing to get to think. I’ve had fun. I’ve made some lifelong friends. I’ve gotten to try and fill a column each week with something that people will read. It’s been awfully rewarding.

When I stepped foot on campus 3 years ago, I’m not sure I had any idea what to expect, or what I sought to get out of this place. I hadn’t thought enough about what people did with a law degree, or why I even wanted one. I kind of hoped I’d figure it out along the way. People say that’s a terrible reason to go to law school, and it probably is. But here’s my other secret, and I think too many of us are loathe to admit it. For all the things law school can do better – and there’s a number of them: more exposure to what real lawyers do, better integration of legal writing into the curriculum, more dynamic teaching, better food in the cafeteria – it’s not a bad place to be. I’ll miss it, genuinely.

This article is about chef Jamie Oliver and his efforts to transform British school lunch from crap to something better. The article talks about the recent 4-part television series documenting his efforts. It made it sound interesting enough that I sought out a place to download it. I just watched episode 1. This is great TV. This is awesomely entertaining. I mean, I like the Food Network, and I thought Kitchen Confidential was a brilliant book, so maybe it's just that I'm the right audience, but, really, this is so cool. I should be sleeping (8:50 class in the morning) but I couldn't shut it off. I'll watch the other 3 segments tomorrow, almost for sure.

From the article:

[One] little boy, tasting what he said was his first-ever vegetable, threw up on the table....

To shock the older children into nutritional awareness, he tossed a chicken carcass into a blender along with bits of skin, fat and bread crumbs, whizzed it around, and showed off the result: stomach-turning mush that, when shaped and cooked, could pass for the nuggets they had been eating.

In a televisual tour de force, he talked his way into a meeting with the chief executive of the company that supplies schools with a notorious dish called turkey twizzlers (ingredients: 30 percent or so turkey, 70 percent other) and scolded him in a way that even Michael Moore in all his glory has never achieved.

There's so much awesome stuff out there in the world. What's so cool about the Internet is you can find just a little bit of it. Man, so many people doing interesting, cool things in the world, and then making art from it -- books, TV, movies, etc. What would people back in the 1600s, struggling to survive disease and merely *live* say if they could come back today and see the stuff we have time to waste doing, thinking about, and watching. Seriously, it's these random discoveries -- a British documentary about school lunch? I mean, am I for real? -- that make life seem kind of neat a whole lot of the time. (Sometimes I'm impossible to please, and sometimes it all just seems too easy.)

Column draft, in progress...

I have a secret. And it’s getting more and more difficult to hide it. I think my family’s finally catching on. There’s only so much verbal gymnastics one can do before the truth is obvious. My friends here know my secret. It’s their secret too. It’s the elephant in the room. It’s okay to talk about it, but it’s embarrassing for other people to find out. I mean, it’s not our fault, but it can feel that way. Like we’ve done something wrong. Like we’re imposters. But I don’t think we are. I think somehow the expectations just don’t match the reality. People make certain assumptions. Heck, we make our own assumptions. But it turns out that the assumptions just aren’t true. And so we carry around our secret, a little bit ashamed, a little bit amused, a little bit concerned, a little bit puzzled, a little bit resigned, and a little bit angry.

Here it is: I don’t know any law.

That’s an overstatement, but not by much. I don’t know that I really thought about it before I started law school, but I feel like I must have assumed I’d graduate having more of a clue than I do. I’ve been noticing more and more lately. People cut you some slack when you say you’re just a student, but you tell them you’re about to graduate and they expect Perry Mason. After watching a segment on The Daily Show last week, I had a conversation with a friend about whether they would be allowed to film on the Harvard campus without permission. Neither of us had any idea. I have no clue what the difference between robbery, burglary, larceny, theft, and just plain stealing are. My cousin is a teacher. She asked me whether it’s legal to handcuff her students. I mean, it sounds illegal... but is that really a more informed answer than I would have given three years ago?

I plugged the words “what every lawyer should know” into Google. I found pages that tell me what every lawyer should know about today’s paralegal, what every lawyer should know about computer forensics, what every lawyer should know about electronic evidence and discovery, what every lawyer should know about the Florida code of judicial conduct, what every lawyer should know about reciprocal discipline, what every lawyer should know about title surveys, what every lawyer should know about the Plain English rules, what every lawyer should know about representing deaf clients, what every lawyer should know about winning and defeating summary judgments, what every lawyer should know about crop insurance, what every lawyer should know about Texas residential landlord/tenant law, what every lawyer should know about brain injuries, what every lawyer should know about lurking liability in business practice, what every lawyer should know about the role of psychologists in custody cases, what every lawyer should know about parliamentary procedure, what every lawyer should know about about anti-SLAPP motions under Code of Civil Procedure § 425.16, what every lawyer should know about trips and slips on public sidewalks, what every lawyer should know about minimizing and responding to attacks on corporate information infrastructures, and much, much more. I don’t know anything at all about any of these things, and can’t imagine too many of my classmates do. Yet we’re all going to be Harvard Law graduates very shortly (barring any disasters in the upcoming weeks). So any imaginary clients we might find ourselves with would naturally expect someone not only be equal to “every lawyer,” but better.

Yet I know nothing.

But you know what? It’s okay. I’m cool with it. Because here’s what I’ve learned in three years of law school. We can all find the law. What I can do that I couldn’t before law school is make the arguments. I can make stuff up that sounds credible enough. I can make my uncle think I know what I’m talking about when I tell him it’s illegal to buy milk on Tuesdays. I can make my grandma think I’m serious when I tell her giving a tin of brownies to her friend without charging is a violation of the antitrust laws. I can use big words, compound words, Latin words to make stuff up. And if they know I go to Harvard Law School, they believe me. This is an awesome power, and I waste it by telling my mom she’ll forfeit her U.S. citizenship if she makes an illegal U-turn, or telling a friend that you’re allowed to steal cable as long as you file the right paperwork with the local public library. We have the tools at our disposal to say anything, and have people believe us. It’s crazy.

So what else have I learned in three years of law school? Let’s see: The law is whatever judges want it to be. The Socratic Method can be used very well, and very badly. Walter Gropius was a hack. Some of my classmates will get my vote when they run for Congress. Some of them will not. Boston winters are long. The Red Sox are awesome.

More later.

I just called Comcast to let them know that after the current billing cycle, they should cancel my cable TV. After pressing all the right buttons, I got to an automated message:

For disconnects, a representative is available Monday through Friday between the hours of 8 A.M. and 6 P.M. Please call back at your convenience.

Well... that's not quite right. I just called at my convenience. You want me to call back at your convenience. Don't tell me to call back at my convenience. That doesn't make any sense. Cable companies. Silly.

New York Times Magazine piece by Michael Lewis sort of following up on his book "Moneyball" about baseball and the Oakland A's and Billy Beane. The article is about two young ballplayers, Steve Stanley and Mark Teahen (Stanley's an A's minor leaguer and Teahen is the Royals' rookie third baseman, on the disabled list right now). Lewis is such a good writer I'll read anything he writes... but baseball stuff just makes it even better.

Other interesting stuff in Times Magazine this week. An article about how TV can make people smarter, with some stuff about the show '24' and how cognitively demanding it is to watch it:

The dialogue on shows like "The West Wing" and "E.R.," on the other hand, doesn't talk down to its audiences. It rushes by, the words accelerating in sync with the high-speed tracking shots that glide through the corridors and operating rooms. The characters talk faster in these shows, but the truly remarkable thing about the dialogue is not purely a matter of speed; it's the willingness to immerse the audience in information that most viewers won't understand.

Cool article. And at the end I realized that the author's upcoming book keeps coming up on my Amazon recommendations. Neat.

Coming tomorrow: this week's issue of the Harvard Law School paper is the last one of the year, meaning I get to write one more newspaper column before I graduate. Hopefully, I'll find a way to tie three years of law school and say something profound. I'll post whatever failed attempts I come up with on here tomorrow, as I try and write them. :) And hopefully they'll get some creative juices flowing toward some sort of law school wrap-up series of posts that will be of some value to someone, and of some interest for me to write. Could be cool to start thinking about how this all comes together in the end, and what I've learned, and what I wish I'd done differently....

1. Happy Passover

2. I was trying to explain to a friend what is kosher for passover and what isn't. I failed.

3. But I found a really funny website while trying. This site lists products that are and aren't safe for passover, which doesn't sound funny, but the level of detail makes it kind of hilarious. I don't mean to sound dismissive, because I know some people really care about this stuff. But it's so exacting, I just thought it was funny. Here are some excerpts:

Some [] hand matzos from our bakery have been discovered to contain white specks of flour. Those matzos with white specks should not be used on pesach[Pesach = Passover]. Product can be returned to point of purchase for a full refund.

Lactaid Milk must be purchased before Pesach. Lactaid drops, if available, must also be purchased and added to the milk before Pesach. Lactaid pills contain chometz [non-Passover-safe stuff] and do NOT fall into the category of pill medication. They may not be used on Pesach. If an individual who is lactose intolerant must drink milk or consume other dairy products on Pesach, an Orthodox Rabbi should be consulted.

Please note that there are some flavors of Tums that have real chometz while others are safe.

Crest toothpaste is no longer recommended for Passover.

I was flipping channels yesterday evening and found myself watching an episode of The West Wing I'd seen before, but I couldn't really stop from watching again. It was the second season opener, where Josh and the President have been shot, and there are flashbacks to how Josh and Sam and Toby joined the campaign, and Bartlet's town meeting in New Hampshire, and just about how politics has gotten so cynical, and here, in Bartlet, they'd found a candidate who was different.

It reminded me how good television can be. It's a fantastic hour of TV. And there just isn't much that's on that's that good. I can't think of anything on now that's as compelling as the Aaron Sorkin West Wings. Tremendous.

I fear I may have written about this subject before, but I can't find the post so maybe I haven't. But it's a very important issue I feel compelled to address.

Does anyone besides me use fabric softener?

I'm talking about the blue stuff in the bottle with the little bear, not the dryer sheets in the bright orange box. The stuff for the washer, not the dryer. I always thought everyone used fabric softener, to make their clothes softer and smell like spring. But last week I ran out of fabric softener, and having similarly run out of interesting topics of conversation, I mentioned the lack of fabric softener to a couple of friends. And the responses I got were remarkably consistent. Apparently no one uses this stuff. No one. They sell it everywhere, but who is buying it? No one I know, it seems. But I've always been convinced it does something. Otherwise why would they sell it? And in so many places? And why would there be so many commercials? And why would they have a cute little bear on the bottle? I mean, it does *something* doesn't it? Or am I just a sucker for the cute little bear?

Does *anyone* else use fabric softener? Anyone?

1. An e-mail we just got:

Harvard University Health Services has developed a survey to assess student interest in DENTAL INSURANCE options for graduate students.

Please take 5-10 minutes to complete the survey; at the end you will have the option of entering a lottery to win

Any guesses? I started reading and immediately thought the lottery was going to be to win... dental insurance. But, no, it's for an Apple iPod. Cooler than dental insurance. Well, hopefully.

2. Lexis points expire in June. I'm just 500 away from an iPod shuffle. I may actually go to a training class I don't need to go to just to get those points. Isn't that pathetic? I know it's pathetic, but 45 minutes sitting in the library may be worth it for a free iPod shuffle. I've never gotten anything for my Lexis points. Little does Lexis realize (or maybe they do) that the majority of my Lexis research has been for newspaper and magazine articles and not legal research. Or maybe that's good for Lexis, since that's their big feature over Westlaw. Or maybe if I mention Lexis a few more times in this paragraph someone will see it and give me 500 Lexis points so I don't have to sit through the class. Lexis Lexis Lexis. I love Lexis. Much better than Westlaw. Woohoo!

3. An e-mail from a reader: "Seventh name the Pope decided against -- Pope Jesus I." Wouldn't Pope Jesus II be more offensive? I don't know enough about this stuff to know.

I've been meaning for the past week or so to write something about the scandal surrounding Detroit Free Press sports columnist Mitch Albom, also the author of best-sellers "Tuesdays with Morrie" and "The Five People You Meet in Heaven." Albom fudged the details on a column he wrote a couple of weeks ago (his deadline for the Sunday paper was Friday, and wrote about something happening on Saturday as if it had already happened... he wrote about two NBA players attending a Final Four game... which they had planned to do, but ended up not doing). There's a column in today's Investor's Business Daily that sums the whole thing up pretty well. It's interesting. I don't think I have anything to add beyond pointing out the column though.

Six Names the New Pope Decided Against

1. John Paul III
2. Ringo George I
3. Moishe IX
4. Benedict Arnold XVI
5. Eggs Benedict XVI
6. Michael Jackson II

It doesn’t feel like it’s been nearly as long as it has since I walked into Austin Hall and started to take a look at the faces of the people I’d share my 1L experience with; since I sat under a tent on Jarvis Field and met my BSA group; since I got called on for the very first time; since I read my very first case; since I wasn’t a law student. It goes really quickly. Not each class, not each day, not always each semester, but taken together, it feels like it’s just flown by.

I’m falling right into the trap here. This is perhaps part of why the Dean has been hosting dinners for each 1L section this month. Channeling our energies toward wistfulness is probably better than making us remember what the on-campus interviewing process was like. Or FYL. My section’s was this past Monday. In the library.

I don’t know that I’d ever eaten dinner in the library before. The cocktail hour was in the library's reading lounge; dinner was scheduled to take place in the computer lab. The second part of that sentence is a lie. But the first part isn’t. As we slowly trickled in, they set up a table with wine and beer, and people began talking in small groups. The students studying remained at their tables. The conversation got louder; more people arrived; Dean Kagan joined us. And the students studying remained at their tables. Not that they should have necessarily been forced to leave, but wouldn’t you? There are people talking all around you, why would you stay? Some people are just that dedicated.

It’s interesting to have a reception in the library. Someone asked where the empty glasses go. I suggested perhaps the book return. Conversation drifting to a topic you’d rather not discuss? Check your e-mail at the nearest terminal. Really bored? Join the students who remained, studying, at their tables.

One thing I noticed was that in three years, if anything, we’ve grown more conformist. The invitation suggested business casual attire. I am as guilty as the rest, but apparently this means blue shirts and khaki pants for the guys. Blue with a pattern is okay. Barely. Just make sure it’s mostly blue. I felt like I was at a law firm reception. I suppose that makes sense, actually.

After about 45 minutes we proceeded to dinner in the 4th floor Casperson Room. The walk was slowed by everyone needing to swipe their ID cards in the turnstiles. Another slightly bizarre necessitude of dinner in the library. The dinner was good. Salmon (“The Only Choice When There Is No Choice” ™) was the main course. Salad, bread, and a dessert were waiting at each table setting when we arrived, to speed up service I imagine. They came around very frequently and renewed – er, refilled – our water glasses. Sorry. Library jokes. I know it’s lame. In fact, let me just get rid of the other one now, and be done with it. …By the time the coffee came, it was well overdue. Terrible, I know. My apologies for subjecting you to that.

At the end of the meal, the Dean said a few words and introduced one of our professors from 1L year. She gave a short speech. Socratically. (I’m not kidding.) (No, really, I’m not kidding.)

And it was her speech that got me thinking kind of wistfully. She asked us what surprised us the most about law school. What we were proudest of. What life lessons we’d learned. Most of the answers were predictable. People surprised at how talented and smart their classmates were. Proud of how much they’d been able to learn and process and accomplish. Learned that you can argue both sides of everything. Learned that not everything has an easy answer. Learned how to use Westlaw.

And she told (reminded?) us that law school has changed us, and we don’t see things the same way as before we came here, and we can’t go back. And even if I honestly don’t know if law school has changed me, I can accept that maybe it has in ways I haven’t noticed. Although maybe not. I don’t know. But that isn’t the point. Change is scary. It’s been three years here. And it’s very quickly coming to an end. So it’s a little wistful. She reminded us to do good with the degrees we’re leaving with. I mean, it’s kind of our obligation to the world to do good, I think.

It’s gone quickly. Everything seems to, when it ends. Life’s weird that way.

I caught the last 5 minutes of "Extreme Makeover: Home Edition" earlier tonight. This show is terrible. I mean, it's great for the people whose homes they make over, but it's not good television. They apparently spent the hour redesigning a home for a woman and her two sons, and then at the end they told the mother they set up a college fund for her two sons. Cutaway to one of the sons, talking to the camera:

"Now I finally know the real meaning of Extreme Makeover: Home Edition."

What????

If you're going to make the participants plug the show on camera, at least give it a less clunky name that makes sense. "Now I finally know the real meaning of 'Redesigning Your Life'" would be moronic, but at least it would make sense. "Now I finally know the real meaning of Extreme Makeover: Home Edition," especially as said by a 12-year-old, is just ridiculous.

The New York Times Magazine has an article this week titled "There's Nothing Deep About Depression."

We idealize depression, associating it with perceptiveness, interpersonal sensitivity and other virtues.... But the aspect of the romanticization of depression that seems to me to call for special attention is the notion that depression spawns creativity.

Objective evidence for that effect is weak.... [S]tudies suggest that bipolar disorder may be overrepresented in the arts.... But the benefits of major depression, taken as a single disease, have been hard to demonstrate. If anything, traits eroded by depression -- like energy and mental flexibility -- show up in contemporary studies of creativity....

Basically, the author is saying that depression is a disease like any other disease, and so we should treat it. Which he says makes sense to people except that there's this feeling people have that depression is special and people who are depressed are creatively special and by treating depression we would stop people like Van Gogh from painting neat stuff because he needed to be sad to paint it.

I think I'm probably guilty of having some of the thoughts the author says are bad. There's something compelling about sadness, something that seems deeper about frustration and angst and melancholy, and the stuff on the sad end of the emotional spectrum, than about happiness, which sometimes seems somehow superficial. People who can tap into the darker feelings and who can talk about their frustrations and their angst -- I feel like I find them more interesting sometimes. It's hard to find the words to describe why.

But the author of this piece -- which is a really interesting piece -- hits it on the head, I think, in the very last sentence of the article.

"We should have no trouble admiring what we do admire -- depth, complexity, aesthetic brilliance -- and standing foursquare against depression."

And, yeah, that makes sense. It makes sense that depression isn't the same thing as being able to tap into that side of the emotional continuum, as being perceptive or sarcastic or deep or thoughtful. And it really isn't depression that's interesting and compelling, but those other things.

I mean, depression sounds pretty awful. I get the point the author of the piece is making, because I feel like it's easy to think that there's something noble about sadness, something "heroic," as he writes. But I guess what he's saying, and what the article made me realize, is that it's naive -- and just wrong -- to confuse the two. I mean, I'm pretty happy most of the time, I'm sure I've never been depressed. Depression would suck. Article is interesting. Creativity is a magical phenomenon. Okay, that's it.

Re: the public interest auction post -- I've gotten more than one e-mail telling me than In-n-Out does in fact have a secret menu, and sharing with me what that menu is. Not to give away any secrets :), I will say it's *easily* googleable. Maybe McDonalds has a secret menu too.

A friend forwarded me a link to the website of a Latvian law firm whose attorneys, perhaps owing to the translation from Latvian to English (but let's pretend that's not the reason), have some pretty hilarious biographies.

Lauris: "It is quite amazing that leaving behind the break neck pace and complicated rhythm of the daily work, Lauris prefers to enjoy the beauty of simplicity - sweeping leaves, and discussing daily issues with elderly people and small children."

Indrikis: "Sparkling eyes, gentlemen-like reservedness, profound knowledge, exquisite sense of humour, ability to penetrate into details and a unique ability to as if isolate from the others in order to get a better general impression.... Anything that drastically differs from the daily routine might be an excellent opportunity for spending the free time, exploring untouched corners or facing the challenge of not meeting any human being for more than a week."

Sigita: "Despite the businesslike daily pace, Sigita is a very womanly being and theatre has been her greatest passion already since early childhood. Whereas it is not just a superficial dedication to something for sake of a snobbish impression - for Sigita theatre is just as significant and profound as everything that is substantial in her life. If you notice a women on a sandy beach reading a play written by a not very recognized Russian author, you can be almost sure that it is her."

Zane: "Zane has chosen to live in a beautiful world of internal and external beauty, where fragrances and aromas are of importance"

Andris: "With friends and colleagues Andris is open and sincere, endowed with a good sense of humour. He even treats himself with a healthy dose of humour – you will never hear that Andris has gone for skiing during the holydays if he will not be sure of the total correspondence of the meaning of the word skiing with his undertaken activities. The best answer you will most probably hear from him is that he has been sliding down the hill on the skis, and was attempting to perform it in vertical position. He is the one to make others laugh, cheer up, listen to and support."

Maija: "She knows how to take care of everything – seems that some small dwarfs are assisting her in sharpening all the pencils in the office, taking care of the sugar level in the sugar pots, ensuring faultless work of the office technique, reminding colleges about prearranged meetings and treating our guests with a cup of coffee."

I think the cap and gown e-mail freaked me out a little bit because it made me realize this is for real, that I'm really just a few weeks from being done with this whole law school thing.

[cue introspective music]

Change is scary. New things are frightening. I feel like I have a pattern that repeats itself. I'm a little slow to adjust. It takes me a little while to find enough people I like, enough cool things to do, and to really feel some level of comfort in a new situation. Which is probably true for everyone, I guess, on some level. Although it does seem like there are some people who can jump right into something and immediately make it seem like they belong. That may all be for show though, I don't know. But I was the kid who went into the swimming pool slowly, one step at a time, to get used to the water. I can definitely remember times as a little kid really not wanting to get out of my mom's car and go -- wherever it was, a new year at school, a new summer at camp, a birthday party, anything. Ten minutes in, I was fine. But that moment of change -- that moment when you don't know what exactly you're going to find yourself in, who's going to be there, whether it's going to be okay or not -- it freaked me out a little, consistently.

I feel like I've gotten a lot better at this kind of stuff as I've gotten older, as I should have, but there's still that feeling in the back of my head sometimes. That voice that tells me it would be easier not to go to that party, because what if it's not fun, or what if I don't know anyone, or what if there's no one to talk to. I try not to listen to that voice too much, and I feel like I've finally convinced myself that voice is usually wrong, and more often than not, things are so much more fun and so much less unpleasant than I can scare myself into thinking they could be. And this applies to pretty much anything I guess. I overthink. I look at the lists of people in my classes before each semester to figure out who I can try and sit near in case the professor makes us commit to a seat on the first day.

In undergrad I feel like it took me two years to really get comfortable, to find enough people I clicked with and feel like I was socially in a good place, to get a level of security where I didn't have to manage my life so much, or worry about it, and that things were really cool and fulfilling. Even though the first two years I had a bunch of friends, and activities, and was relatively happy. There was just something that took a little while to click. And here it was kind of the same. 1L year was fine, but life was better on these fronts last year, and even better this year, which has been really cool and, actually, I've been awfully content with life lately. Which is awesome. But...

That means it's a little scary to know I have to start over again pretty soon, even though it's only "starting over" if I frighten myself into thinking it is. I mean, I have a lot of friends in New York, I have all of the ingredients for a cool and fulfilling existence. There's no reason I shouldn't be excited, there's no excuse for not being able to craft the life I want to have. But it's still kind of frightening when it starts to sink in, and I realize that I need to do stuff like figure out where to live, and what my days are going to look like, and put in the energy to create a situation where I don't feel like something is missing, and I don't get myself in some sort of funk where I'm not seeing enough people, or doing enough things, or whatever.

I said this in an e-mail to someone the other day, but I feel like I'm kind of terribly extroverted for an introvert -- that I like being around people, just not a ton of them at once. :) What's been interesting to figure out as I've gotten older is that this is all kind of idiosyncratic, that everyone feels comfortable in different settings, and that a lot of really cool people are totally cool being alone a lot, more than I am, or that a lot of really cool people are totally fulfilled in a way I'm not by being in a big crowded place where you have to scream to talk to anyone, and just everyone experiences stuff differently and has different tolerances and preferences.

Anyway, this is a way too self-involved post that probably only gets written because it's 2 A.M. and my better sense has already gone to sleep. And a good night's sleep will knock the angsty-ness, or whatever's jangling in my head tonight, out of my brain before I start sending bizarre e-mails to friends that make me sound insane (I think I've already sent three of those tonight, unfortunately -- I hate that feeling, after you send an e-mail, when you realize that actually no one really needed to read that and it was all just you sorting stuff out in your own head and it didn't need to go anywhere. I guess I hate that about this weblog stuff too, but, then again, it's kind of what I like about the weblog stuff, in a way. I don't know. I'm obviously insane tonight. I apologize for that.)

Okay, cue music that wraps all this stuff up and sends me to sleep. Less angst tomorrow, more jokes about the Pope.

A surprise e-mail today:

ACADEMIC REGALIA (i.e. CAP & GOWN) for COMMENCEMENT

To receive your regalia in time for Commencement, place your order at the Harvard Coop's third floor Textbook Department during the reservation period: April 4th-April 20th 9:00 a.m. to 9:00 p.m

Rental Fees
Cap, Gown and Hood...$75

We have to pay for this stuff? Don't we pay enough in tuition that this stuff should come with that? Shouldn't it be an all-inclusive package? I mean, is this stuff optional? Can we go to graduation without it? If not, how in the world can they really get off charging for it? It's a RENTAL. The school should buy a whole bunch of gowns and caps (and hoods? what's the hood for?) and just re-use them year after year. They just re-grassed an entire field where an ice rink used to be. Surely they can afford some cheap nylon capes, or whatever the gowns are made of.

I know, it's only $75, but that's a lot of money! And for what? For something I don't even get to keep (and wouldn't want to keep anyway). Do they charge for the diplomas too??

Course Selection Help

For 1Ls and 2Ls here, it is time for course selection. I am excited, in partnership with Vault and U.S. News & World Report, to announce a set of prestige rankings to guide 1Ls and 2Ls as they choose classes. Please be aware that all of the usual caveats regarding rankings apply - this is only one measurement of the value of the different attributes ranked, and should not be your only guide when choosing classes. Nevertheless, do be aware that the prestige of your classes will affect the quality of your resume. Thus, ignore at your own peril.

DAYS THE CLASS MEETS
1. Tuesday
2. Monday
3. Thursday
4. Friday
5. Wednesday
T6. Saturday
T6. Sunday

TYPES OF LETTERS IN COURSE NAME
1. Consonants
2. Vowels

PROFESSOR GENDER
1. Women
2. Men

EXAM TYPE
1. Eight-hour take-home
2. Three-hour in-class
3. Hybrid
4. Paper
5. No exam

PROFESSOR TENURE STATUS
1. Tenured
2. Not tenured

SEMESTER
T1. Fall
T1. Spring
3. Winter

LAPTOP POLICY
1. Laptops permitted
2. No laptops

NUMBER OF CREDITS
1. 3
2. 5
3. 1
4. 2
5. 4

PROFESSOR CHILD MOLESTATION STATUS
1. Does not molest children
2. Molests children
3. Has molested children in the past, but does not currently molest children

I hope these rankings have been helpful in choosing classes for next semester.

Thanks to Anthony Rickey, I now have an RSS feed. I have no real idea of what that is (I know it has to do with reading blogs using an aggregator, but I'm not even entirely sure I know what *that* is), but in case anyone is looking for it, there it is. He's got a detailed review of the new movie Sin City, if you're looking for one. His review's a good read; I can't say I'm dying to see the movie though.

This Thursday is the Harvard Public Interest Auction, where the school pretends it can't afford to fund students who want to spend the summer working for public interest, and professors pretend it's not unconscionable to auction off access to themselves, and students pretend it's not ridiculous to give the school even more money than we already do.

My plan was to make up some fake items up for auction that would be funny, but, as it turns out, the real ones are funnier than anything I could make up. I've combed through the book. Here's a sampling:

LifeCycle Stationary Bicycle
Looking for a way to get into shape for summer? Than this almost new LifeCycle Exercise bike is your answer to fitness fun.
Donated by: Alan Dershowitz

[Why is Prof. Dershowitz donating an exercise bike? That's the only reason why this one is funny, I guess.]

Five-Course Dinner for Four with Professors Goldsmith and Manning
If you think dinner with your professors has all the appeal of a military tribunal, an evening with Professors Goldsmith and Manning will change your mind. Don't miss the chance to interrogate these pre-eminent scholars over a sumptuous meal.

[Making light of torture is always funny.]

Spend a Day With Dinosaurs at the Harvard Museum of Natural History
The Harvard Museum of Natural History offers 2 guest passes to explore one of Harvard's finest museums. 21 million specimens add up to one great experience.

[Or just spend a day with dinosaurs at a faculty meeting...]

Pen and Ink Drawing
"Art and the Law" isn't just a class anymore -- consider this pen and ink rendition of Palsgraf v. Long Island R.R. Guaranteed to be a conversation starter.

[Would anyone really bid on this??]

Copy of the Ultimate 80's CD
Is your name Rio? Do you have the eye of a tiger? Do you just wanna have fun? Brush up on your Pat Benetar and rock out with Wham! with this blast from the past. Side ponytail not required.

[Um, copying a CD... yes, this is really worth a lot of money...]

Federal Sentencing Guidelines
Professor Frank Bowman (Indiana School of Law, HLS ’79) is co-author of the Federal Sentencing Guidelines Manual. Keep yourself abreast of all the latest changes and recommendations by taking home the recently released 2004 edition.

[This one isn't even autographed!]

Four Frequent Wrapper Cards
Want your friends to like you more? Give them stuff! The Wrap’s Frequent Wrapper cards are the perfect way to start. With four cards, four of your friends will be able to get their 10th burrito, wrap, salad or smoothie absolutely free!

[What? Are these worth any money at all? Aren't these just the cards they give you for free when you go there and get food? What is the value here? This one is just bizarre.]

How to Order From the Secret Menu at In-N-Out-Burger
Essential for anyone living or working on the West Coast. An expert's guide to how to order from the secret menu at In-N-Out-Burger. Make your burgers so much better.

[The SECRET menu???]

Breakfast Tour of New York Stock Exchange for Six
t If you're interested in financial regulation, there's no better combination than Professor Jackson and the NYSE. Jackson will provide breakfast and a tour of the Stock Exchange for the winning bidder and up to 5 additional guests. We definitely like this investment - and we think you should buy, buy, buy!

[Yes, law students are very interesting people.]

Scrabble Cuff Links
In Atwoodville, Connecticut, it is illegal to play Scrabble while waiting for a politician to speak. Impress at the next cocktail party with fun Scrabble tidbits and these conversation-starting Scrabble cuff links.

[No comment.]

Professional Consultation on Suggestive Questioning of Children
Would you like to learn more about suggestive questioning of children? Here's an opportunity to speak with HLS alum for an hour by phone about the area of the effects of the suggestive questioning of children - how easily they can be lead to saying what the interviewer wants to hear.

[Definitely no comment.]

Citrus Furniture Wax
Aspirational furniture wax? You betcha! Keep your desk and bookshelves sparkling and be the envy of your peers with this luxurious citrus-scented furniture polish.

[Huh?]

Be a Legend in Your Own Time
OPIA will use your name on a sample resume or cover letter in the world renowned Public Interest Job Search Guide. Through this one strategic move, you will have name recognition throughout HLS as well as the entire job-searching public interest world.

[Who could possibly want this???]

Authentic Thai Kickboxing Shorts
Twelve year old Thai boys fighting for the livelihood of their entire families sure look good doing it. Now you can too, with these authentic Thai kickboxing shorts.

[Something sounds vaguely pedophile-like about this one.]

Six-Person Shabbas dinner in NYC
What's the new black in New York City, summer 2005? Shabbas dinner with Professor Suzanne Stone. Everyone's doing it. So should you.

[And this one sounds vaguely racist.]

Lunch with Dean Martin of Harvard Medical School
Enjoy a lunch at the Harvard Club of Boston with Joseph Martin, Dean of the Harvard Medical School and Caroline Shields Walker Professor of Neurobiology and Clinical Neuroscience.

[Dean Martin? That's funny.]

Behind the Scenes Langdell Library Tour (Its secrets revealed!)
Remember the scene in the Paper Chase where the "hero" breaks into the law library to read Professor Kingsfield's contracts notes from his student days? Now you too can see the student notes of past professors, and other great mysteries.

[Pass.]

Homemade Heaven
Feeling homesick? Try my homemade yummy chocolate chip cookies - they are guaranteed to give you that warm and fuzzy feeling despite being surrounded by dorm rooms, homework, and finals!

[I'm just nitpicking here, but is there not something a little stomach-turning about the word "fuzzy" so close to the cookie description?]

Lunch with a 30-Year Department of Treasury Staffer
Everyone needs to eat lunch - why don't you do it with a 30-year member of the Treasury Department, while in D.C. this summer? Learn about how this HLS alum made his way into Treasury, and maybe make some inroads yourself.

[That's an eye-catching title there. Boy does that sound interesting.]

Email Help
Is your inbox filled with too many annoying emails you have to respond to but would rather avoid? I will respond on your behalf to the annoying but scary stalker guy who won't take the hint, to the requests for help you feel guilty about turning down, etc.

[Uh, no thanks, actually.]

Rent-a-Nerd
Anything a nerd can do, your rent-a-nerd can do better. Use him to help you with your homework, fix your computer, or just dance around with his pants buckled up to his chest. He may even wear white knee socks!

[Frightening.]

[and my favorite of them all...]

Bar Review Course
You know you deserve the best; why not save up to $1000 at the same time? BAR/BRI is the nation's most popular bar review, and its regular cost is well over $2,000. Minimum bid $500 (your bid supports the auction), then pay $1250 to BAR/BRI. (Fifteen available)

[Uh, this isn't really that cheap, is it? $1250 + $500+ -- so you're really not saving all that much...]

Daniel Drezner and all of his commenters with more about man-dates (see my Saturday post). My e-mail's running about 11-0 agreeing with me that the article was bizarre. Can never tell what's going to get me a lot of e-mails. I write about coats made out of lamb fetuses and I get nothing. I say Chicago is kind of gray and I get a dozen and a half replies. :) Eh, the unpredictability is what makes it fun.

We keep getting e-mails asking us to fill out a Survey of Student Engagement. This is not quite that survey.

Dear Reader:
I recently e-mailed you (personally) asking you (personally) to (personally) participate in the Law School Survey of Student Engagement. If you have not yet taken the 15 minutes (give or take an hour) to do so, I (personally) hope that you will do so now. As I said then, the closer we come to 100% participation, the bigger my bonus will be. I need your help to finally get that hot tub I’ve been trying to earn enough money to afford.

SECTION I.
In your experience at your law school during the current school year, about how often have you done each of the following? (Very Often / Often / Sometimes / Never / Too Drunk To Remember)

1. Asked questions in class that contributed to class discussions
2. Asked questions in class that did not contribute to class discussions
3. Prepared two or more drafts of a paper or assignment before turning it in
4. Even bothered to spell-check a paper or assignment before turning it in
5. Come to class without completing readings or assignments
6. Came to class at all
7. Worked with other students on projects during class (i.e. Instant Messaging)
8. Worked with classmates outside of class to prepare class assignments (i.e. Cheating)
9. Put together ideas or concepts from different courses when completing assignments or during class discussions (i.e. Thinking)
10. Used e-mail to communicate with a faculty member
11. Used spam e-mail to communicate with a faculty member
12. Worked harder than you thought you could to meet a faculty member’s standards or expectations
13. Are lying about the answer to question 12
14. Worked with faculty members on activities other than coursework (use your imagination)
15. Had serious conversations with students from a different planet than your own

SECTION II.
During the current school year, how much has your coursework emphasized the following mental activities? (Very Much / Quite a Bit / Some / Very Little / I Wouldn’t Know, Since I Don’t Go To Class)

1. Memorizing facts, ideas, or methods, from your courses and readings so you can parrot them back on the exam
2. Keeping the Tetris blocks from rising too high while answering a professor’s inquiry about a case you didn’t read
3. Convincing yourself that any of this actually matters

SECTION III.
Which of the following have you done or do you plan to do at your law school before you graduate? (Done / Plan to do / Do not plan to do / Wouldn’t do for all the money in the world)

1. Clinical internship or field experience
2. Volunteer or pro bono work
3. Work on a legal research project with a faculty member outside of course requirements
4. Do anything at all outside of course requirements
5. Study abroad
6. Study right here
7. Moot court
8. Real court, following an arrest
9. The People’s Court

SECTION IV.
During the current school year, about how many hours do you spend in a typical 7-day week doing each of the following?

1. Reading assigned textbooks, online class reading, and other course materials
2. Preparing for class and clinical courses other than reading (studying, writing, doing homework, trial preparation)
3. Masturbating
4. Legal pro bono work not required for a class or clinical course
5. Freecell
6. Working for pay in a law-related job
7. Working for pay in a non-legal job
8. Working for pay in an illegal job
9. Relaxing
10. Socializing
11. Drinking alone

SECTION V.

To what extent does your law school emphasize each of the following? (Very Much / Quite a Bit / Some / Very Little / For The Last Time, I’m Not Even Enrolled Here)

1. Spending significant amounts of time studying and on academic work
2. Encouraging the ethical practice of the law
3. Passing out on the sidewalk
4. Working effectively with others
5. Working ineffectively with others
6. Burying your soul deep inside what used to be a living, breathing heart but is now merely a lump of coal that sits in your chest, black and withered from the evil all around you

THANKS FOR SHARING YOUR VIEWS!
Your responses to the survey have been lost in the system somewhere.

So apparently the new Pamela Anderson sitcom (and we all know how awesome that's going to be...) is called "Stacked," and she plays a bookstore clerk. Clearly, they named this one before they figured out what it was about, always a great way to develop a TV show.

A

The original plan was for her to be a department store saleswoman, and to call the show, "Nice Rack."

B

The original plan was for her to be an organic farmer, and to call the show, "Melons."

C

The original plan was for her to own an up-and-coming chicken coop, trying to make a name for itself in the world, and to call the show, "Pamela Anderson Has Big Breasts, Just In Case You Hadn't Noticed."

I just saw "Fever Pitch," the new Jimmy Fallon / Drew Barrymore romantic comedy about the Red Sox. I'll admit I'm hard-pressed to come up with a baseball movie I didn't like, but I really enjoyed this one. It was consistently funny, and sweet, and emotionally resonant -- AND it was about baseball. Where could it go wrong? Truth is, I felt like it hit pretty much every note. I mean, at its heart it's a standard romantic comedy, so the plot points are predictable, a lot of things are over-the-top, everyone talks in punchlines... but still, within the formula, it totally works. It's actually funny, and smart. And there's more than enough baseball stuff going on to make it legitimately a baseball movie. Roger Ebert likes it too. The bad: not too much. His pack of friends and her pack of friends are straight out of central casting and almost entirely a waste. The beginning is a little slow. The end wraps it up a little quick. But I'm quibbling. This is a fun, enjoyable movie, that I thought ended up totally worth seeing. I even felt some tears welling up in my eyes a couple of times toward the end. Best movie I've seen in 2005. Then again, so far it's the only movie I've seen in 2005, I think. I mean, the characters are so ridiculously likable throughout the movie, even when they're doing stupid things, that you can't help but root for them.

Although, honestly, part of why it worked for me is because it's a movie where the grownup who acts like he's twelve wins in the end and gets the girl. And we need more of those movies, because they give hope to those of us who sometimes feel like we're still twelve.

Okay, go see the movie. Especially if you're a baseball fan. And ESPECIALLY if you're a Red Sox fan. There's so much Red Sox in here. This movie is probably going to play to empty theaters in New York, but I saw it in a practically-full, ENORMOUS stadium-seating theater at Boston Common, and the crowd was part of the experience. It played really well for the Boston audience. Take your Yankee-fan friends if you want to torture them.

A neat article paying tribute to Ted Koppel and Nightline, and saying that there should be a place for the long-form reporting Koppel likes to do.

The New York Times is on crack this morning. This is a pathetic and completely bizarre article.

The delicate posturing began with the phone call.

The proposal was that two buddies back in New York City for a holiday break in December meet to visit the Museum of Modern Art after its major renovation....

The weirdness was apparent once they reached the museum, where they semi-avoided each other as they made their way through the galleries and eschewed any public displays of connoisseurship. "We definitely went out of our way to look at things separately," recalled Mr. Speiser, who has had art-history classes in his time.

"We shuffled. We probably both pretended to know less about the art than we did."

Eager to cut the tension following what they perceived to be a slightly unmanly excursion - two guys looking at art together - they headed directly to a bar. "We couldn't stop talking about the fact that it was ridiculous we had spent the whole day together one on one," said Mr. Speiser, who is straight, as is Mr. Putman. "We were purging ourselves of insecurity."

What??? Who are these people??? The article goes on to coin a ridiculous term, the "man date," and basically tries to create a social stigma where there completely isn't one. "And thus a simple meal turns into social Stratego. Some men avoid dinner altogether unless the friend is coming from out of town." Because, clearly, no one should ever want to spend time with their friends.

Anyone who finds a date with a potential romantic partner to be a minefield of unspoken rules should consider the man date, a rendezvous between two straight men that is even more socially perilous.

Simply defined a man date is two heterosexual men socializing without the crutch of business or sports. It is two guys meeting for the kind of outing a straight man might reasonably arrange with a woman. Dining together across a table without the aid of a television is a man date; eating at a bar is not. Taking a walk in the park together is a man date; going for a jog is not. Attending the movie "Friday Night Lights" is a man date, but going to see the Jets play is definitely not.

I don't know, and maybe I'm just insane, but the people I'm friends with, male or female, it's because they're interesting and I like talking to them, I like spending time with them, I like doing things with them. Otherwise, why would we be friends?

"Dinner with a friend has not always been so fraught." Give me a freaking break. I was honestly kind of incredulous when I read this article.

Maybe it's just me, but I do plan things with friends, and, in a lot of ways, I'd rather do things one-on-one, or in a group of three or four, than in a group of eight or ten or twelve or fifty. There's a level of superficiality when you're hanging out in a large group -- you're not really talking about anything, it's not really particularly satisfying. I feel like one of the things that makes life cool is developing connections with people, getting to really feel like you know someone and what they're thinking about, finding people who you do connect with, and who you can have actual conversations with, and enjoy spending time with.

I want to feel like I'm a part of people's lives and they're a part of mine. It's part of why the weblog thing has been cool. But it's even cooler in real life. And I'm just baffled that this article really thinks there's something wrong with this, that it's a thing at all -- I mean, why bother to have friends if they're not people you want to do stuff with -- and, further, I don't have any idea who this article is describing. Maybe it's a self-selected kind of thing, or maybe I'm just weird, but I don't really know anyone who's insane like the people in this article, and who really agonizes over whether it's okay to go to a museum with a friend, or to talk about something that isn't sports.

And, yes, at the extreme level, sure, it would maybe be a little weird to go with another guy to a "date" restaurant, or, I don't know, shopping for underwear. But is this really a thing? Like, a thing that needs a New York Times article? A thing that actually is a societal issue? I just find it bizarre. And kind of sad. Because I think people are missing something if they're not seeking connections with other people that go beyond the weather, and missing one of the points of life, kind of. It's pathetic if people really feel like the people in this article. I really think it is.

UPDATE: I'm glad I'm not the only person who thinks this is bizarre.

Waxbanks writes: "Ladies and gentlemen, arguably the stupidest thing I've ever seen in the New York Times that wasn't written by Maureen Dowd or Judith [] Miller: the man date.... So let's review: America is a nation is of pathetic insecure homophobes unable to attain a level of intimacy with one another unless hard liquor and meat products are involved - and for some reason the NYTimes thinks this ridiculous article constitutes news?"

Rebel Prince writes: "Oh, honestly. Has the idea of straight guys going out together for anything besides business or sports become so marginalized in popular culture that the Times feels it worthy of coverage?"

Sabroso City writes: "I guess I've been in NYC too long, but who the heck goes to a movie and leaves a seat between them? Are they that insecure and still in middle school?"

The Attorney-Client Relationship

One of the sessions at LexThink was about the attorney-client relationship, which, honestly, is something I hadn't much thought about. Even as a summer associate, I feel like you just don't get exposed to that side of the equation much. The discussion started with a comment by one of the attendees, who isn't a lawyer, saying that he finds it frustrating that his lawyers want to come in, solve a problem, and then get out -- but don't want to learn about the business, don't want to really work with the client and develop a relationship as an advisor, and don't really want to act as a team. They just want to come in for every transaction, do what they do, and get out. And this, he thought, was a bad thing -- or at least it wasn't the way he would envision it in a perfect world. He wanted a lawyer that would learn about the company and work on not just the obvious problems that need to be dealt with, but uncover other legal issues that may not be so obvious, or be a part of the team that decides how the business should act -- to be there to consult on what the legal ramifications of x act or y act would be, and how to work within the law to be a better business. For it to be relational instead of transactional. To be proactive instead of just reactive. To help fireproof the house instead of just being a firefighter. (Okay, three of those sentences is more than enough.) And the consensus was that that just isn't how most lawyers work, at least not in the context of the larger firms.

The thought that I had was that a large part of this is probably due to specialization. People at the firm I was at were specialists -- they did '40 Act stuff, or mutual fund stuff, or tax stuff. So they'd be great when there's a specific problem to solve -- it's all they do, so they'd be experts. But I didn't get the sense there were really "generalists" who could come in and do everything, or even felt like their job was to go in and scope the whole situation out before referring it to the specialists.

The related complaint seemed to be that lawyers' bedside manner isn't always very good. That they weren't responsive to client needs, that they weren't always treating clients with respect and listening and solving the problems the client wanted solved. That lawyers function by keeping the client in the dark, keeping the law a mystery that only the lawyer has access to, and that only the lawyer has the expertise to deal with. When that's not really true -- so much of what passes for legal work can be done by any reasonably smart person, law degree or not. There were complaints that lawyers never do client surveys, or really do much at all to manage the relationship. And all of the secrecy leads to problems on the behavioral end -- it makes it a lot easier to charge a client for more hours than a problem really needs if the client has no idea what's involved in solving the problem; it makes it a lot easier to get away with mistakes; it makes it easier to cheat. I heard stories at the conference about associates who completed a project but a partner would make them spend more hours on it, just to pad the bill. Or partners who would have associates reinvent the wheel each time, just because someone else was footing the bill.

What I kept thinking about was an analogy to doctors and hospitals. In my health care law class, I think the professor talked in one of the first classes about how hospitals are often full because there's an incentive to fill the beds -- as long as there are beds, doctors will fill them. Patients on the borderline will get admitted, etc. Similarly, for lawyers, the incentive is to fill the day. If there are hours, they will get billed. But this isn't always in the patient's (or client's) best interest. But at least with doctors and hospitals, there are people managing the system. I mean, insurance companies are kind of evil, and they probably do a pretty bad job of this -- but there are general practitioners and triage nurses, who see patients before they get referred to the specialists. And there are hospitalists, who manage the system from that end (read this if you want a book by two hospitalists about medical mistakes and the systemic problems causing them, and how to fix them -- I helped edit it when I worked at a publishing company; it's a really good book, seriously).

But law firms don't have those pieces, at least as far as I've been able to tell. There's no one who tells a client when they need a specialist, or looks at the bigger picture to make sure the relationship is working and the client needs are being fulfilled. Maybe there is and they just don't work well enough to satisfy client needs as much as clients want. I mean, I would imagine there's some point person at every firm, with every client, who's in charge of the relationship. It would be silly if there wasn't. But in other industries, I feel like it's really prominent in a way it isn't with law firms -- in advertising there are account executives, who manage the client relationship from beginning to end; at the software company I worked for before law school there were people who called in to check and see if the customer was happy. I got the sense from the people at LexThink that this just doesn't happen in law.

So some sort of Customer Relationship Management. People on the client's side, to help manage the process, determine the specialist lawyers they need, work proactively instead of just reactively, relationally instead of just transactionally. Interesting. Does any of this make any sense?

Fantasy Baseball Post

Just a quick summary of the players I ended up with. Kind of obsessed, and I've ended up with 6 teams. There are no players who've ended up on all 6, but 2 pitchers have ended up on 5 of the teams -- Danny Haren and Joe Blanton, both starters for the A's. I'm not sure how that happened. Dan Meyer, an A's minor leaguer set to be in the rotation by mid-season is on 3 of my teams too. So I have the back half of the A's rotation all locked up. Zito and Harden, the A's top two starters, aren't on any of my teams. Oh well.

A bunch of players on 4 of the 6 teams. Tadahito Iguchi (the new second baseman for the White Sox, from Japan), Austin Kearns (oft-injured Reds outfielder who I drafted on a bunch of teams last year and got completely burned as he hit .230 and was injured most of the year), Royals second-year OF David DeJesus, Mariners rookie OF Jeremy Reed, Astros closer Brad Lidge, Marlins starter A.J. Burnett, and Cardinals starter Chris Carpenter. I have a ridiculous bias for young players over veterans, which isn't the best strategy because the young players don't always end up panning out. But every year I get swayed by the hopes for rookies and second-year players to really break out and become stars.

Players on three of my teams: Reds OF Adam Dunn, Padres OF Dave Roberts, Dodgers OF J.D. Drew, Royals starter Zach Greinke, Astros starter Brandon Backe, Blue Jays starter Ted Lilly, and Padres reliever Akinoro Otsuka.

On two of my teams: Joe Mauer, Todd Helton, Mark Loretta, Jeff Kent, Carlos Guillen, Vladimir Guerrero, Lew Ford, Erubiel Durazo, Kevin Brown, Jake Peavy, Oliver Perez, Scott Kazmir, Wade Miller, and Miguel Batista.

And the absurdly long list of players on one of my teams: Hitters -- Piazza, Posada, Ivan Rodriguez, Kendall, David Ortiz, Casey, Teixera, Konerko, Durham, Hillenbrand, Beltre, Rolen, Blake, David Wright, Lowell, Jose Reyes, Renteria, Rollins, Jack Wilson, Mike Young, Nevin, Hatteberg, Brian Roberts, Aaron Boone, Abreu, Walker, Ichiro, Berkman, Bay, Rowand, Craig Wilson, Carlos Lee, Winn, Pierre, Jenkins, Swisher, Lawton, Kotsay, Hideki Matsui, Manny Ramirez, and Delmon Young. Pitchers -- Clemens, Buerhle, Weaver, Odalis Perez, Eaton, Oswalt, Radke, Johan Santana, Brian Lawrence, Linebrink, Mota, Latroy Hawkins, Looper, Aquino, Tsao, Mariano Rivera, Foulke, Takatsu, Francisco Rodriguez, Benitez, Felix Hernandez, and Matt Cain.

And, while I'm at it, my picks for:

AL MVP -- Ichiro Suzuki, Seattle
AL CY YOUNG -- Johan Santana, Minnesota
AL ROOKIE OF THE YEAR -- Jeremy Reed, Seattle

NL MVP -- Adam Dunn, Cincinnati
NL CY YOUNG -- Jake Peavy, San Diego
NL ROOKIE OF THE YEAR -- Clint Barmes, Colorado

And my bold predictions for the playoff teams and the World Series winner:

AL East: Boston
AL Central: Minnesota
AL West: Oakland
AL Wild Card: Yankees

NL East: Braves
NL Central: Cardinals
NL West: Padres
NL Wild Card: Astros

AL Champions: Oakland
NL Champions: Padres

World Series Winner: Padres

Two links to relatively new law student weblogs whose authors have e-mailed me recently. Barely Legal Blog has a series of posts on "types" of law students -- the philosopher, the old guy, etc. that are kind of amusing, and this one has some interesting cartoons -- I like the concept and think there's potential. I usually don't feel that compelled to link to stuff but the writers of both of these seem like they could be cool, and I read more of each blog than I thought I would. So there they are.

Actually...

Okay, I think I've been a little harsh on Chicago. I didn't go to the right places, I'm being unfair about the subway, etc. In fairness, I want to provide equal time to people who like Chicago, and, since they actually live there and didn't just spend 4 days wandering between chain restaurants, they're probably right. I just got a really informative and excellent e-mail from a reader named David. He says:

1) I don’t think it’s fair to base any opinion of a city on food that you had at the airport – even it proclaims itself to be famous. I’ve lived in Chicago for almost five years and I’ve never heard of a flatbread salad.

2) For someone that is interested in comedy and theatre, you probably should have gone to the Second City – particularly the free improv shows that start at midnight on Fridays and Saturdays. The place is no secret, but even the worst shows I’ve seen there have still been very entertaining.

3) Yes, Chicago is full of chain restaurants, especially in the touristy areas. But if you know where to go, Chicago has some of the best restaurants in the U.S. I actually like New York style pizza better than Chicago style, but, seriously, there are much better places to get Chicago-style pizza than Giordano’s. And the Mexican food in Chicago is much better than in New York. We also have a great neighborhood on the North Side full of Indian and Pakistani restaurants – I’ve only been to a handful of them, but they’ve all been excellent. If you’re okay with spending a little more, Chicago has some of the best chefs in the U.S. (probably still a little behind New York and maybe San Francisco). Chicago probably doesn’t have the volume of restaurants that New York boasts, but New York is about 5 times the size of Chicago. And the cost of living in Chicago is much more reasonable.

4) Chicago’s public transportation is not great, but it’s adequate. The stop where you got tied up – it sounds like State & Lake – is particularly confusing if you don’t know where you’re going.

5) If you like the blues, Rosa’s Lounge on the West side has some of the best blues I’ve ever seen. It’s a dive and in kind of a dangerous neighborhood, which gives it more credibility in my opinion (I know everyone wouldn’t agree with me on that one). But there’s also Kingston Mines in Lincoln Park, which has different blues acts seven nights a week – sometimes it’s great and sometimes it’s just average. There’s also a very good local music scene in Chicago and because of its central location, nationally touring bands pass through here often, so we have a lot of good clubs for that – it sounds like you saw one of them in Park West.

6) If you like jazz, you should’ve checked out the Green Mill in uptown on the far north side. It used to be a speakeasy during prohibition and was frequented by Al Capone and other famous mobsters. They still have the underground tunnels that were used for smuggling in booze and for escapes when it was raided. They have well-known acts that pass through on weekends, so the cover is about $15. But the house band is awesome and you can see them for free after 2 am. The place is open until 5 or 6 am on weekends.

7) Finally, for a baseball fan, you’ve got to see a weekday afternoon game at Wrigley Field. In my mind, nothing compares to taking the day off and going to scalp some tickets for an afternoon game. Of course, it’s a little more expensive to scalp tickets now than it was a few years ago before the Cubs started playing decent baseball. Nonetheless, U.S. Cellular doesn’t compare.

So, Chicago fans, I offer that as an apology, and, for anyone visiting Chicago, this should provide a helpful start.

One negative that I forgot to write about, though -- what's up with Chicago being pretty much the only major city left to not have an indoor smoking ban? In all honesty, that totally made me disposed to dislike the city right when I realized that. Where I saw the Josh Rouse concert, Park West, it was ridiculously smoky. Same with a restaurant where I ate one night. And there was smoking in hotel lobbies. Ridiculous! If New York and DC and Boston can do it, Chicago can do it too. (And, despite my willingness to backtrack on my overall Chicago-bashing, I'm not providing equal time to any libertarians who want to argue why smoking bans are bad. Sorry.)

Wrapping up Chicago stuff.

The baseball game yesterday at U.S. Cellular Field was fun. I don't know that I've ever been to Opening Day before. The game was really quick -- 1 hour, 51 minutes. 1-0 White Sox. Real quick.

One bizarre thing:

On the way out, we passed a man and his wife, *changing their baby's diaper in the middle of the stadium concourse, ON THE GROUND, as everyone was leaving.* I'm not sure why they thought this was a good idea. (1) The concourse is filthy (they did put a towel under the baby, but still!), and (2) There were hordes of people streaming out of the ballpark, and they were totally blocking traffic and putting their baby in real danger of being kicked in the head by accident, and (3) Isn't this why we have bathrooms? Bizarre.

One not-really-that-bizarre thing:

On the subway, there was a woman with a kitten inside a knitting bag. Kind of cute.

In the airport yesterday, one marginally dumb thing:

I was getting food, and ended up getting a salad from a vendor whose sign said, "Chicago's Famous Flatbread Salads." This was a normal salad, accompanied by a very normal piece of flatbread. If this is famous, it shouldn't be. In fact, if anyone has ever heard of the famous flatbread salad, e-mail me, because I don't believe this is actually famous.

And a couple of random music recommendations courtesy of some stuff I listened to at a Tower Records kiosk while I was away:

Aqualung. Cool stuff. I especially like the song, "Brighter Than Sunshine," of what I've listened to so far. It's Coldplay-esque, but something really compelling going on with it. It's good. Also, Amos Lee has some pretty cool stuff.

Overall -- Chicago didn't really blow me away. It's kind of lacking in charm. In uniqueness. So many chain stores and restaurants. Nothing really special that I saw. I mean, I'm sure there are tons of cool areas I didn't go to, and tons of cool stuff I didn't see in the areas I did go to, but nothing really made me think, "Oh, wow, Chicago is really neat in a way that other cities aren't," or even in a way that other cities are. It's okay. Maybe just being from New York my perspective is skewed on cities, though. Not that everything's awesome in New York, but just that there's definitely stuff that's unique about New York, and maybe I expect more unqiueness out of cities than it's fair to look for. I don't know. No big deal. I still had fun. :)

Something random came into my head the other day: I bet improv comedy would be really hard for homeless people, because they wouldn't totally be feeling the suggestions the audience would give for the different games.

"This scene takes place in the kitchen." ????

"We're going to do a two-person scene at the office." ????

"You're on the phone with the cable company complaining about the bill." ????

"In the grocery store, buying food, and realizing your credit card has just expired, and you're out of checks." ????

"Setting up a wireless router in your living room." ???? Okay, for that one, I have no idea what it means either....

(I apologize if this is ridiculously offensive. It made me laugh when I thought of it, but it was late, and I was tired.)

What's Up?

Okay. I've gotten a handful of e-mails over the past couple of weeks asking me what I'm going to be doing after law school. And I haven't been completely forthcoming on here, at first so as not to jinx anything, and then mostly because I didn't really know how to write about this stuff without it being too self-promotional and uncomfortable. But it's been mentioned in some other places, and now I just feel kind of weird that I haven't said anything on here, and I feel like it's making me tiptoe around what I post, which is silly. So, anyway, since the New York Times article about Anonymous Lawyer ran in December, I've been fortunate to get an opportunity to write a novel based on the Anonymous Lawyer character, and, at least for the short-term, that's what I'll be working on after law school, and then hopefully some other opportunities will emerge, or if they don't, I'll figure it out from there. So that's answer to the "what are you doing after law school?" question.

Part of why I went to the LexThink conference (which I will write more about sometime this week) was to meet some lawyers, and see if I could pick up on some things that would be interesting to think about for the Anonymous Lawyer project. But listening to them talking about various aspects of the legal profession got me thinking about some stuff, and I have some ideas I want to sit down and try to sort through in writing, and some other random post ideas... so all that's coming.

But first, some marginally offensive throwaway stuff like this:

The Best Two Rejected New York Post Headlines I Can Come Up With For The Morning After The Pope Died

1. "Pope? Nope!"
2. "John Paul-Bearers"

OK, a quick catchup of Chicago. 24 hours from now I'll be on a plane back to Boston. I'm missing tomorrow's classes to go see opening day White Sox game... I think that's excusable. Yesterday I ate Chicago-style pizza here with a friend from law school who graduated last year and is now working at a firm here. And then I got a copy of a free Chicago paper to see if there was a cool play or movie or improv show to see in the afternoon. There were a couple of choices, and I ended up going to a preview of the Chicago production of Take Me Out, which won a Tony Award when it was in New York, and is about baseball. It was okay. I probably should have read a review first.

And then I spent today at LexThink, where I met cool people like Ernie, Al, Buzz, Matt, Ben, Enrico, and Arnie, among a whole bunch of others. The conference had discussions about all sorts of interesting things, like the disadvantages of hourly billing, how attorneys can improve their relationships with clients, how to market to women differently from men (???), how to incorporate technology into law practice... all interesting.... not the most relevant topics for my life, personally :), but still interesting. It was mostly just kind of cool to meet some people and hear them talk about some of this stuff. I actually have some substantive thoughts on two fronts -- some of the legal issues got me thinking, especially about attorneys and clients and their relationships, and I'll try to write a post about that sometime in the next few days, and also about what makes a good conference. So, definitely some substantive stuff coming. And definitely some funny stuff. I get back to school late tomorrow night. And then... content! I'll also take requests. :)

Josh Rouse concert last night was really good.

But onto a different topic...

What's up with the Chicago subway system?? This is, without a doubt, the least user-friendly subway I've ever seen. I don't speak any French at all, but when I visited Paris I had no problem navigating their system. Here, it's a mess. Besides the fact that it makes the NY system seem clean, well-lighted, and safe -- and besides the fact that the subway maps show three lines following the same track with no indication of which stops where, two things in particular are truly bizarre:

1. It costs $1.75 for a one-way ticket. The only way to get a ticket is in a machine *that doesn't give change.* The subway attendants have no change, no tokens, nothing. There is, as far as we could determine, no way to do this without having $1.75 in exact change -- and the machine was kind of fussy with which dollar bills it would accept anyway. I mean, not a huge deal if you have 2 dollar bills and end up losing a quarter, but kind of inconvenient to go find a place on the street to get change if all you have is a twenty... and just a ridiculously unfriendly way of doing things anyway.

2. We wanted to change from the Red line to the Brown line. So we got to a stop called Lake Street, and the announcement said transfers available. Got off. No signs. Walked up the stairs at one end. Just an exit. Walked up the stairs at the other end. Just an exit. No signs at all. Went back down. Found a subway worker. She said we had to go out the exit, through the turnstiles, and then "turn and you'll see it." Maybe. We got back on the next train and just walked a couple extra blocks instead, since another train was coming and we figured it wasn't worth risking a long wait. But, I mean -- no signs?

Yeah, so the Chicago subway system gets no points with me. Sorry. Easily ranks as the worst subway system I've seen, behind 6 others I can think of having been on.

Just saw Wrigley Field. They were mowing the grass in preparation for the baseball season, people moving stuff around in trucks, etc. There were a bunch of people standing by one of the gates, and they let us inside for a few minutes to look around, which was cool. Walked around downtown earlier today, took the subway, saw the river and the area where the museums are.

Last night I saw a dress rehearsal of the Northwestern law school parody show, which one of my friends is in (Hi, Jessica). It was cool to see another school's version; they parodied a couple of the same songs that we did or have recently, but with different topics.

Good: Chicago-style hot dog
Bad: Chicago-style thunderstorm

Walked part of the "Magnificent Mile" yesterday, which is really just like someone shook a big shopping mall until all of the stores fell out. It's just chain stores, there's nothing special about it. Not enough local character. I guess. Maybe all cities are like this.

Some thoughts for posts that I can't really write from an Internet cafe, at a nickel a minute:
>>Hanging out with lawyers vs. non-lawyers
>>What makes one city cooler than another city
>>More about the Chicago-style hot dog, and perhaps about Chicago-style pizza

Tonight I'm going to see a concert -- Josh Rouse, whose music I downloaded a little while ago off a reader recommendation, and was pretty cool. Should be fun.