| | |
|
LizzieGomezSecondPaper 9 - 16 Jun 2012 - Main.EbenMoglen
|
| |
| META TOPICPARENT | name="SecondPaper" |
|---|
-- By LizzieGomez - 20 Apr 2012 | | | I saw the beauty of the law in working for Yesenia, and it was in its weakest form of social control. We came together through the law's role as being "just to the poor." But when Yesenia was left in vulnerable state and justice thus served, the law created a wedge for me to be more than a translator and for the other attorneys to be more than document filers. I was afforded the chance to get to know her from her perspective. By shifting the focus from me to her, the problem became clearer to me. I saw the thang the way she did, after her first beating. Her resolve to rebuild a life that was almost taken away from her was soon my own. Right there I had found passion. How do I know? Because I discovered recently that I get real fidgety when I become self-conscious and absorbed in my own senseless thoughts. But in retrospect I never got fidgety when I was with her. Not once. (990 words) | |
>
> | | | | | |
<
< | Editing remarks
I used something similar in the first draft of my first paper, and this is the advice I received. I think it might be helpful in this context as well. I know this all connects back to your last section, but I still dont think it adds much to the overall message of your story, I personally would just start with "Passion Redefined": "Why is that the
introduction? It may be relevant context for you, but it doesn't
help to communicate your idea to a reader who wants to know what you
think, not who you were walking with when you thought
it". -- JonathanBrice 21 Apr 2012 | >
> | One of the reasons, I think, that Jonathan Brice's reuse of my
comment was unconvincing is that the contexts are precisely
incongruent. In his case, the essay was about an idea, so an
anecdote of relationship inhibited the reader's engagement. Here,
the subject is the relationship, from which an idea is developed; at
the heart of the most analytic paragraph in the essay, which I also
agree with you is correctly balanced, is the question "where do I
stand?" The relationship with Yesenia both unearths and answers that
question.
Your approach to "passion" is idiosyncratic: passion does not always
express itself as a disposition to find problems. But yours does,
and it will. You have found where you stand: as an advocate helping
people to push themselves forward towards the destinies their stories
define for them. You are going to be a lawyer who makes things
happen using words for people whose words are buried inside them.
The things you will make happen for them are what their words inside
them so very fiercely, honestly, dignifiedly, humanly instruct you
they require in order to have the lives they envision for themselves.
Now you have to learn how to build a practice that makes this what
your passion will be used for, cultivated by, stimulated to warm your
life in every other way with. Such a practice has to also pay for
itself, make its living, support you and yours as you need. So you
are designing something, I hope with the help and resources of the
law school behind you, that will allow your passion to flourish and
to make people, many many people, better off in their lives.
I don't think the essay needs revision. I think it achieves its
intended purpose with clarity. It could be polished; there are
rough spots. But I don't think it should be polished. It belongs
in precisely the register you found for it. | | | | |
<
< | Thanks for reading, J! Made a small change for now because I'm stubborn and don't quite agree with you, but I'll keep working on it. -- LizzieGomez 22 Apr 2012
More than understandable...I really enjoyed the overall direction of your paper :) | >
> | |
|
|
|
|
This site is powered by the TWiki collaboration platform.
All material on this collaboration platform is the property of the contributing authors.
All material marked as authored by Eben Moglen is available under the license terms CC-BY-SA version 4.
|
|
| | |