May 23, 2006

So who won?

My little contest here.

(And is it too obvious what got me wondering?)

16 comments:

SWBarns said...

I don't know who won, but you should have to read the book as penance for directing me to that blog.

Unfortunately, I spent a couple of hours reading that thing, like a train wreck I just couldn't look away.

Ann Althouse said...

Say more about your reaction. It sounds as though you were entertained by it in the way that the author intended.

SWBarns said...

It was entertaining, sure, sort of like LIFETIME television where you can tune in to watch abusive men and the women who love them (until the last 15 minutes). The problem with the AnonymousLawyer is that he never takes a fall so all of your righteous anger has to dissipate.

I had flashbacks to my youth, being intentionally manipulated by partners to no real end. People like these are one reason that my name is on the door. I would guess that many of the blog readers don't believe that an organization could run like this, especially 1L's and 2L's who are beating their heads in trying get in the door. A good friend worked in a firm that he referred to as ‘the slave ship.’ I guess that lots of lawyers start at a firm that is best described as ‘a good place to have been.’

I went from thinking 'this guy is a miserable bastard' to thinking 'what a wry sense of humor' and back again.

MadisonMan said...

I found myself pitying the man. I can't imagine anyone liking him for his personality. Maybe for his position, wealth -- if he has it. But because of his core being? Hardly.

Dave said...

" would guess that many of the blog readers don't believe that an organization could run like this, especially 1L's and 2L's who are beating their heads in trying get in the door."

Interesting. I think one of the reasons I did not go to law school was that I knew how miserable these associates' lives were.

Consider: my father was a partenr at one of the big firms in NYC and I recall meeting some summer associates who worked with him, when I was about 15. They were all sucking up to me.

At 15.

They were trying to curry favor with the son's boss, as it were.

How pathetic is that?

Not for me, that.

Sean said...

I'm not sure about Prof. Althouse's final question. Was it the immediately prior post, the description of "lad lit" characters, that recalled the protagonist of "Anonymous Lawyer"? I would say that, if you imagine trying to staff a business with a bunch of 20-something "lad lit" boys and Bridget Joneses, you will become a lot more sympathetic to Anonymous Lawyer.

Ann Althouse said...

Sean: Yes. The thing is that "Anonymous Lawyer" is written by a young man who I think is very much like the lad lit writers. The lad lit writers have main characters who stand in for them, however. "Anonymous Lawyer" has the young man imagining an older guy.

Anyway, Sean's a contender for the prize... C'mon, help me out here.

Dave: LOL. How did your father try to help you not get a twisted attitude over such a weird experience?

Truly said...

If it's really that bad, you should give it to whatever avatar quxxo has assumed (is he/she "Jacques Cuze"?). Fitting punishment, since you don't have the capability to ban him/her.

Dave said...

Ann: I don't knoww that my father helped me not get a twisted attitude.

I think I've always been rather cynical and skeptical of orthodoxy. Even at 15 I think I was sufficiently aware of the folly of trying to curry favor with someone just by being nice to his son. Especially at a corporate law firm in NYC.

I guess, then, to answer your question, my father endowed me with a healthy dose of skepticism and wariness.

Ann Althouse said...

Dave: "the folly of trying to curry favor with someone just by being nice to his son"

Well, there is a huge downside to not being nice to someone's son. If you had said to your father, X is a jerk, you could have really hurt him, I think. Thus, X had to fear you. He probably also feared that you'd say he was a suck-up, but what could he have done, really?

Eli Blake said...

To be honest, I don't really get the point of reading anything you don't want to read. Maybe if it was a job requirement, but to be honest, if I don't like reading something then I quit reading it and go find something that I like reading.

You may feel free, however, to consider that an oblique compliment on your blog.

Dave said...

Ann: I would hope law firms are more interested in the opinions their associates write for their clients than about the opinions their partners' fifteen year old son has about their associates' personality.

But that's just my take.

How much credence would you give a fifteen year old's observations about another person?

Dave said...

"I don't really get the point of reading anything you don't want to read."

Ha. Another reason I didn't go to law school.

And yet, I'm still forced to read that which I don't want to read. (Not this blog tho.)

Ann Althouse said...

Dave: You must not have kids. If one of my sons, when he was 15, told me someone disrespected him, I wouldn't like that person.

As to this contest: I've asked people to argue why I should read the whole book. I never said that anyone would actually convince me to read it. I need to give away a book. I'm not going to read it. I figured out a long time ago that life is too short to read books that you don't have to read that don't engage you.

Dave said...

Ann: No, I don't have kids.

Truly said...

Sooooooooooooooooooo... who did win?