i've got a feeling

that the beatles' song of the same title is top five for them. maybe just personal preference. it seems to be a jam band favorite for covering a beatles song, for whatever reason. i don't think anyone huge has ever done it; as far as i know the dead did hey jude finale and tomorrow never knows, i think they did lucy in the sky too, but i'm not as sure about that. i know phil at least has though. now that i think about i feel more like the dead proper did it as well. phish of course had the whole white album once, and day in the life many times. i personally just find it interesting to examine the treatment of what is perhaps the most revered canon of rock and roll gets in a scene partially concerned with iterations of well-regarded and beloved songs. obviously song structure feeds into cover choices to some degree, but i find the prevalence of i've got a feeling particularly intriguing, perhaps just because it was one of those beatles tunes i did not discover until later on in life, and also because said prevalence largely exists with small-timers i've scoped out on archive (although the choice cut so far isn't so small time; tea leaf with i think vince from leftover salmon guesting). also saw one set list with the tune that follows it, one after 909, denoted as "punk version". made sense. if i was in a jam band, though, i think if i was going to choose a beatles tune off let it be i would go with get back. lots of ground for keyboard improv. why do i think about these things? i don't know. fantasies of entirely different lifestyle i guess. this whole record is so strange, from the jarringly brief maggie may thing at the end of the first side after the title cut (wonder if it is shorter than her majesty at the end of abbey road?) to all of the odd background comments at the end of lots of tracks. anyway, lots of great stuff that didn't make it on to the compilations i knew growing up, especially the "blue" two record set. old brown shoe? what the fuck? i don't think i know anyone into that tune. if you are, speak up and defend your claim. i think maybe george wrote that one though, maybe the tune is there for diversity's sake. but i'm not here today to go on and on about the intricacies of the catalog (would that it were), and you're not here to read me go on about it so. no, rather, i am here to gripe about a wider scope of things.
what those things are; i'm not sure. let me see, yeah, school. that was it. the man is getting me down, and i'm not even employed (employed? let me explain something to you...). i had my first practice exam this past week. wait to see how that went i guess. i feel pretty decent about it. the difference between this and the exam i took earlier, apart from one being graded and one not, is that this practice one was actual exam format with strict time limit. basically, they give you a fact pattern and want you to tease out and analyze all of the legal doctrines and rules at work and usually make a prediction about how things will be resolved. it is very difficult to get these things "wrong"; in fact, i don't think such is possible if one is actually trying. the question is much more how well do you demonstrate that you know about a bunch of different shit by applying it to a situation you've never seen before. the real deal is usually pretty convoluted from what i understand, usually extreme things that would never happen with crazy shit that lands various tangentially related parties whose interactions somehow hospitalize all of them where they will all inevitably be killed by malpractice. things like that. but this one wasn't really too out there, sort of a compelling story really. i just hope it compelled me to regurgitate something meaningful and appropriate and not a complete load of useless shit. like i said, we'll see. the things i learn best at law school aren't the meta concepts that must be garnered from intense exposure and synthesis of many issues, but the little things like seldom-applicable terms. the other day i heard about frolicking and detour, a doctrine excusing typically-liable employers from responsibility for their employee's actions when those actions vastly exceed and possibly contradict the employee's delineated responsibilities. i thought about the valets in ferris bueler. and no, spell check fans, spell check did not mark ferris. law school also gets me to reconsider words sometimes, especially when i read a really old case and see things in an earlier context. etymology makes a lot more sense when the language is less developed. for example, i always sort of thought of the word aggravated as a synonym for pissed off, considering it in an emotional sense. sort of made sense for aggravating injuries too, it was like you had upset the healing process. and likewise i figured aggravated assault or aggravated robbery meant something pissed you off and prompted the crime. this, of course, is not the case, as many of you probably know. breaking the word down, the core is really "grave", and to aggravate something really means to make it more grave. so rather than aggravating circumstances being things that upset the actor and led to the crime, an aggravated crime is one that is one that has been made more grave, that is, worse, by the factual circumstances. so aggravated murder is like instead of just killing someone, you dismembered them. arguments can be made as to whether this actually makes things worse or not and why, but now i feel i've better tapped into the appropriate understanding of the word. maybe i'm getting my money's worth after all. this week's educational highlight, however, has to be the introduction of a concept entirely unthought (yes, spell check marked it, even when i tried a hyphen) by me until now: linoleum rugs. i was in contracts and the prof, bless her heart, had done some additional looking into the case we were covering, which dealt with the unconscionability (marked) of a door-to-door company's sales to someone where all payments were prorated to all items purchased. basically this lady had paid 1400 dollars and owned nothing, and the contract she signed for the goods allowed the company to repossess everything if she missed payment, and so they were taking all of her shit. on this long list of shit were various household necessities, and some other random shit like a super expensive stereo, toy guns, and a linoleum rug. i couldn't help it; the prof uttered the phrase and my facial expression immediately shifted to my best "what the fuck?" look. my expressive features have done me incalculable harm in my life. of course, the prof looked over and asked me what my problem was and all i could say was "linoleum rug!?". she claimed they were a real thing and then sort of backed off a little unsure. so i looked into it, and yeah, of course, they're real. but seriously, linoleum rug? that sounds like an oxymoron to me. i wanted to link something, but honestly, for best results, just do your own google image search, and regular google. if i could, i would change this blog to linoleumrug.blogspot.net. if i had a band, i would call it linoleum rug. and let me just say because someone should: not on the linoleum rug, man.
the commute to school continues to offer its own frustrations and joys as well. i would say that now, on average, three trolleys pass before i get on one. doesn't really matter when i still get to school half an hour or so early. i'd rather not spend my first 15 minutes in public feeling like people want to stab me for existing in the particular point in space-time i happen to be inhabiting. and it is nice to sit and not almost fall onto someone every start and stop. what i really like to do is read over peoples' shoulders. this is horribly unethical because people reading over my shoulder is like my longest-standing identified pet peeve. but i can't help it; i find it way too fascinating to see the text, look at the reader, and think about why. lots of christian reading on public transport in my experience. wonder about the percentage breakdown between here and the g rap. but that is on the less interesting side of things. my favorite is to see people reading classics and wonder about how well-versed they are in that sort of thing and what made them pick this one up. you can't ask; talking on public transportation is surprisingly limited. it is kind of like being in an elevator, something about the circumstance discourages discussion. anyway, the best thing (in some sense anyway) i've seen anyone read so far is a book entitled "thugs and the women who love them". the whole thing just left me in stitches. the book was pretty thin, and the font was fairly large. i got to read this one from city hall all the way to my stop, and it was pretty hilarious. mostly semi-pornographic poorly written literary junk food. the dialog was my favorite, entirely comprised of things no one would ever actually say, much less my conception of either "thugs" or the "women who love them". one of the top picks: "it's heroin, baby, but call it h". all the sex scenes lacked much dialog except for "damn baby that feels good" about three times per page. funny stuff, but it still doesn't top tempting the beast by laura lay. if you've never heard back forty doing visionary this valentine's at billy's, avail yourself, that reference is to some rag they read from (i kind of wonder how much research they did to find something so terrible yet somehow perfect) for a couple minutes during the jam, excellent. just like those guys always are at billy's. my prospect for catching those guys while back home are kinda slim though, unless i make it a ways into january, they're playing founder's on like the 12th (where you'll have to sit through treetown underground; i guess that is better than jam samich), leading me to believe a repeat fantasy double new years bill with the hippo is unlikely. at least i should get the hippo.
for all of my jam banter in this post, the true obsession is still steely dan. i just can't get enough of countdown to ecstasy. i knew there had to be a story behind my old school, but i never really knew what was up until i came across a great article. i was surprised that entertainment weekly had anything of interest to me, but lo and behold. it would have been great to do this interview. i just wish i could have as flippant an attitude towards institutions of my past, but i have the typical nostalgic regard for all of them. i think, though, that my best time at calvin was actually during summer break when mr. ja and i stopped in and had a cigarette at our pit right after they paved it. the cement was still wet, and i excitedly engraved my moniker, only to come back a month later and find a brick post erected over the signed portion. ah well.
i have spent most of today feeling sorry for myself. i don't know what really brought it on, but it was kind of intense for a while there. i feel alright now after a couple beers, but the issue was basically the same as always: school is an enormous omnipresent pain in the ass, and that would be one thing if there was a definite reward. but being a lawyer still sounds like more of a punishment than anything in my view, paycheck be damned. instead, i feel like i will never be able to get a worthwhile job i enjoy and my best hope is that the metaphorical big lebowski kills me before the student loan people cut my dick off. i don't even feel like cutting my losses is an option, and i think that is part of the strategy for law schools. no matter how much you don't like it, you're already so far in debt that if you don't get your shit together and make a bunch of money you'll never get out from under your loans. but then they get people to do so, and they're good enough, and then they make a ton of cash, and some of that gets donated back to the alma mater. that's the strategy as i see it anyway. but it really ratchets up the pressure, and sometimes it all seems too much for me. i have never been more convinced that i am a completely useless idiot with an absolute dearth of appreciable talent. i try and chalk it up to not fitting the profile of a law student correctly, but i have never had less confidence in my intellectual capacity. part of that might be my inability to assert myself in class. i just don't feel right voluntarily speaking in front of seventy people, because most of my peers who do so raise nothing but contempt in my eyes. and my thoughts don't serve to push the issue; rather it is usually more of a wait, let's take a step back here. i'm not in philosophy seminars with seven other people anymore though. i'm just some fucker who did well on the lsat and fooled the schools and myself into thinking that i'd be a good fit. some fucker whose house it is raining in right now, which might not help my feelings at this time. i don't know if you've ever lived in a leaky dwelling, but i find it incredibly discouraging. i usually like the rain, but not as much when i cannot avoid it if i choose i guess. regardless, i think i've decided that it is not so much lawyering that i am opposed to. there are some awesome lawyers out there who do really cool shit. the problem is that they do their thing for cheap, even though the pressure is incredible and the stakes are higher than well, pick your favorite stoner. i don't want to be relied on unless i feel as strongly about something as whoever i'm helping out. there are just so many people who are so smart and motivated and i am starting to feel like i should never have tried to consider the big time. just keep my head down and live on in complete obscurity because i'm not remarkable enough to move beyond that. it is difficult to describe the feeling. i just wish could be professor of classic rock and call it good, but that is not how the world works. instead, the game is rigged and loaded, and i just feel like there is no place for me anywhere. that is the only thing i've really learned so far. if i want any inhabitable space in this society, i can no longer be the i that i am. i have found that i am just lazy, marginally able and theoretically redundant. this country does not need more middle class white men forcing their opinions on others, especially not if those middle class white men are anything less than the top one tenth of one percent of the intellectually aspiring crowd. and that is fine and good. i would be more than happy to return to the midwest and keep my head down and never have anyone worry about who i am and make a paltry salary allowing homeownership and slight discretionary income. i just have to find out how, and reconcile to myself the realization that i am not special. everyone with good upbringing is told that they are, but at the end of the day it simply cannot be true. however remarkable i was as part of a small sample, perspective is bound to assert itself somewhere along the line. and the east coast is a great place to get that perspective. real movers and shakers out here, and i do not fit in with that. i am ready to give up on aspiration already. i now know that there are people who are smarter and want it more, and that combination is unbeatable if you lack either element, more so if both. blah blah blah. i really wanted to say something meaningful here and i have fucked it up miserably. add it to the list. i thought about going back and deleting this portion, but nah. let it ride. something still beats nothing, which is all i typically have. but now i have the dan: california tumbles into the sea - that'll be the day i go back to annandale. tomorrow i legally observe for the first time. hope the weather improves, and something worth blogging about happens. you'll find out either way.