१८ डिसेंबर, २००५
Audible Althouse, #26.
Here's the new podcast. Questions raised: Why do I -- a conlawprof! -- withhold the answer to whatever the conlaw question of the day is? Why do I -- a lawprof! -- dare to talk about movies that I haven't even seen? Does King Kong belong to the nostril-flaring school of acting? Is "Brokeback Mountain" political? Why pay any attention to "The Apprentice"? If Althouse doesn't stick to the subject of law, is she nuts? If Althouse riffs about nostrils, is she high? (38 minutes.)
याची सदस्यत्व घ्या:
टिप्पणी पोस्ट करा (Atom)
पोस्ट्स
७ टिप्पण्या:
The level of self-involvement here is staggering. I'm guessing you were one of those law clerks who saved draft memos for their "historical significance." The judge I clerked for always thought it was hilarious how self-important people are in the legal profession. These audibles take the cake -- at least the first few minutes do. I couldn't listen beyond that.
It's self-important of me to poke fun at people who are outraged that I talked about nostrils. Uh-huh. I'm sure the federal judges are all ridiculing my pomposity -- right after they finish their group-sing of the Audible Althouse theme song.
I'll share all that cake with them.
Zuh?
Isn't blogging inherently self-involved?
I have to tell you this, you are a person I truly, thoroughly enjoy who may, as a profession, be a law professor.
You could not be one too. Be a nurse, a carpenter, you think and write in a way I really like, usually. If you always talk about law or nursing or carpentry exclusively, that's your audience. You hold forth on practically everything and are totally interesting.
Remember Bill Murray in Grounhog's Day after stealing Punxatawny Phil and driving away with him at the wheel? "Don't drive angry!" he chided.
Now we can say "Don't drink and blog." "Don't podcast angry...."
And you get to live that moment over again and again and again.
Ruth Anne: Are you saying I seemed angry? You haven't heard me angry. I assure you, it's much angrier.
टिप्पणी पोस्ट करा