back to bollocks

the first crack back at it was notably less than inspiring. i really did try to have the best attitude i could about things, i swear, but i guess it just wasn't enough. kicked things off with evidence, which might not have been the right foot, but then i didn't get to write the schedule. it has like a hundred people in it and an awful lot of them want to be trial lawyers. this fails to thrill me. however, today i got into the homework (i didn't have books before that first class) and that went alright. very concrete, and i appreciate that. part of my beef with the first year curriculum is that it is supposed to be the portal into the central focus of the school, which is training people to be lawyers. the problem is that the material, while relevant to people becoming lawyers, and in fact foundational to that endeavor, is hurried and unfocused. it is taught by people who have a vast grasp of the material and understand how much of a gloss they are giving it, and yet no one wants to blow the whistle and say wait, we aren't really teaching in a comprehensible manner. in a rush to be comprehensive, the true goal is sacrificed. all that is left is a bizarre and arcane competition to fulfill lofty expectations that have no actual bearing on an individual's competence. the idea is not to identify critical thinkers or those who grasp the material on a deep level, rather, the goal is to discover who among the masses is willing to waste the most time on such an ultimately immaterial exercise. sorry about that. my point is that the purported goal of teaching people practical skills and knowledge is not the foundation of the introductory curriculum, and that it should be if that is how they are going to talk about it.
anyway, the material for evidence is all produced by the national institute for trial advocacy, which is more or less run by my school, and it serves its purpose remarkably more deftly than anything i have previously encountered. unfortunately, the course is taught through the lens of the courtroom, and that does not thrill me. i guess i was hoping, ironically, for something a little more broad-based. i want to know what is and is not admissible evidence, not how to object about it later. in the end, though, i will concede it is fair for them to do it the way they do. just doesn't get me fired up is all.
after that it was on to globalization (marked. huh.) and the constitution. this is one of the ones i expected to be a little more my speed. good theoretical underpinning, maybe fewer people. no. it is another huge class full of braying jackasses who string together buzzwords and jargon in an inane attempt to impress others rather than make a meaningful contribution to the discussion. this is the kind of course that i would probably have loved if it were taught as an undergrad poli sci class. but no. it is going to be a crock of bullshit where i listen to people i think very little of express opinions i care even less about. the only good news is that it doesn't have a book.
no book is great news because even though only three of my five courses have books, i have already dropped ab out $450 on books. and i am still missing the hardcover for one class, which should tag on i think about another $120. faaaack. the real kicker is that previous experience has demonstrated how pitifully little i shall even make use of some of these texts. my only hope is to recoup some money later on and blow it senselessly, ideally on high-quality beer.
this year i have my first evening class, and it holds much more promise than the rest of the schedule for a few reasons. first of all, it is the first reasonably sized class i have had here. that right there is enough to make me relatively thrilled about the prospects. secondly, it is the only class in the area of law i am hoping at this point to pursue, namely intellectual property. this class focuses on unfair competition and trademarks. this class is also the first i have had that is taught by an adjunct. normally this sort of thing would set me off, but this guy seems promising. spends most of his time practicing, has a nice long personal story of how he wound up where he is, and it is pleasingly organic compared to much of my tenured faculty. real job, real dissatisfaction, real solutions. none of this ducks-in-a-row clerked for supreme court bullshit. hopefully my optimism is rewarded.
today brought the first installment of international law, my initial fancy and contributing factor to the specifics of my current situation. i am reserving judgment on it thus far. it is, however, chock-full of all my least favorite people from last year. the prof i think is newer at my school, i think she taught somewhere else before. she called someone out on normative language though, and that is kind of cool. the text holds early promise, but i said the same thing about my torts book last year, and that turned out to be the biggest disaster i have ever encountered in professional printing. i could have shit out something better knowing nothing about the material. there is not a doubt in my mind about this. this was the class where they gave us a free updated edition (unheard of) and i turned it down. i didn't want to be personally responsible for book burning.
the one class i haven't had yet is jurisprudence. it is another one i feel could go either way at this juncture. the reading was fine by me, so we'll see how the class goes. the text was made up of selections from socrates, aristotle, and aquainas. nothing i hadn't seen, and kind of tough to approach without thinking about way too many things i had considered about these folks over the years. that is all fine and good, but we all had those couple of people in our first college philosophy class that just couldn't just the fuck and said nothing anyone else wanted to hear. i'm not worried about that happening, really. i made it through that before. no, my real concern is that as far as i can tell, a frightening percentage of "those people" decided to go to law school. this does not really seem implausible to me even abstractly. and in my experience, well... i've met plenty around here. we'll see what happens. i'm hoping for the best since the class is like two hours long.
so that takes care of school. let's have some good news. i was cleaning the other day and found these khakis, the only ones i moved out here with me. they were the only ones i had ever felt even somewhat comfortable in, probably mostly due to the cargo pockets. anyway, i hadn't worn them in a long time. i immediately recalled that this was due to their having an enormous hole in the crotch. but i still moved them here for some reason. anyway, it was the kind of tear that only rips when repaired, and so i was gonna pitch them. searched the pockets though, and found some scores. two dollars, first and foremost. all crumpled up with some other shit. other shit included an absurd amount of camel cash, a mulligan's receipt, and a gruv unit set list (from teazers!?). i was happy to find all of it, but it proved that i had not worn these pants in like just about three and a half years. and yet i moved them out here with me.
brief story about the hole in those pants: i was trying to catch one of the cats one time when he was out around auburn. i believe i went over a fence.
in more good news, i had the extremely good fortune to be the recipient of a couple old school camel wides filters the other night. i cant believe how much better they are than the new ones. they hit the spot so unbelievably well. i tried to write a complaint letter to those fuckers but i wouldn't cough up enough information, so they claimed they couldn't verify my identity. i don't want your fucking coupons, i shouldn't have to prove i'm eighteen to say you fucked up your product. just fix it already. i'm pretty resigned to the fact that such a thing is not likely to occur.
my current recourse to old school is lilly, rosemary, and the jack of hearts.
i haven't made it to any shows since dr. dog, but a few good ones are coming up and i hope to have money to see at least one and hopefully two and ideally all three, but it would be a stretch. philly slick is playing at world cafe on sunday, old crow medicine show is coming to town at a lousy venue, and the avett brothers are playing with drive-by truckers in baltimore, both sometime in later september. wish me luck.
one good thing about being back at school is hitting up a couple old lunch favorites. definitely got a cheesesteak one day and the notorious chicken b.l.t. the other. just what i was looking for. the food is alright, but sometimes just getting what one wants is as good as something high quality that just isn't fitting the mood. nice to have something work out at school, sitting around and talking shit, watching first years not believe their ears. whatever, the most important lesson for law school and many other things is to be able to have some real good laughs at it.