The genesis of this paper was in reading the first few posts of the "fuck this stupid rule" thread. It then became an end-of-semester reflection on the lessons learned and how they may help us approach the next two years.

Our choices and prioritization will define our law school experiences. We have the option of going where this year’s tide takes us (bankruptcy practice, anyone?) But, for most, that is a bad idea.

Law school has tricked us all into wanting to find rules and play by them, as though education is primarily a competition, and many of us take up the role presented. By giving up autonomy and viewing this experience as a three-year pie-eating contest, we lose.

While reading “fuck this stupid rule,” I was struck by the direction of the comments; I understood the OP to mean something different than the comments assumed – I do not think an important message is “I don’t care what grade I get in Property.” We all know some people will care what grades we get in all of our classes, and will treat our GPA’s as a scorecard. Luckily, we are empowered to decide “I don’t care if people judge me for a poor grade – I have better things to do with my time.” It may be trite, but Geisel’s “those who mind don’t matter and those who matter don’t mind” has some truth to it: truth that is threatening to risk-averse beliefs. If we make decisions actively, we are likelier to be happy.

Granted, as pointed out in the thread, it is useful to remember some people will care about our grades. But, it is something to be aware of, not obsess over. For better or worse, good grades were generally a prerequisite for getting where we are; it would be a mistake to assume great grades are necessary to get us where we wish to be. To be truthful, although grades and LSAT were critical for getting here, as the first exercise of this class demonstrated, they are not why any of us are here.

Moglen often spoke about our different personalities, shifting between, and using awareness to our advantage. But shaking the overarching posture of the risk-averse, hedging, opportunity maximizing law school applicant, and not letting those traits dominate decision-making as a law school student is a considerable challenge. The nature of law-school-as-a-contest does not make it easier – but I am inclined to think the experiences we had as undergraduates and in the working world that provided us with why we are here were probably not found whilst playing undergrad-as-a-contest, and I propose that the same is true of law school and finding meaning in what comes next.

A story:

I had a Monday, Wednesday, Friday Econ class my freshman year. It took me a week to realize my professor was a hack, and while attending would be necessary to earn a decent grade (this professor thought of himself as a personal bulwark against grade inflation,) I decided I had better things to do. I barely got a C- in the class. I learned the things I wanted to learn later.

Many Fridays and Mondays, in lieu of class, I knocked on doors in Mississippi to keep Haley Barbour out of the governor’s mansion. He raised money with the CofCC? —white supremacists-and I thought it was a lousy idea to put him in charge of a state. We lost. We were trying to change things with words, and we lost because of poor organizational management and badly allocated (however plentiful) resources. I thought law school could help with that.

I skipped more classes, made more crappy grades, and lost with Wes Clark, too. But, I served a party I care about. My academic adviser was not amused. I decided to get a new academic adviser.

About a year later I found myself in an interview for the most fulfilling job I have ever had – they asked about my grades, but they asked about my priorities, too. I got the job, working for a non-profit in the Mississippi Delta. As an economist.

And what it may demonstrate:

To me, this demonstrates three things. First, as Moglen said, we do have time to become an expert in something we feel passionately about, and that expertise will serve us in the long run. Pursuing interests will require other academic sacrifices, but it opens more doors than it closes. Second, mentoring is critical to success, and, as mine was, the advising we receive here is lacking; this course regularly demonstrated the variation among students, and the single track, consensus built wisdom of the law school is insufficient for a diverse body of students. We must be proactive at finding help if we wish to be successful. Third, committing to being good at something requires throwing other things overboard – luckily, they will float, and the consequences are less scary than they seem.

The most recent buzz I have heard in the law school is that there are not enough courses/sections in bankruptcy next year. I suspect this is more a result of groupthink and social expectations than any desire to actually work in bankruptcies – I often hear people (me, mostly) complaining that the first year curriculum is unsatisfying because it does not relate to the reasons they (I) came to law school. It would be disappointing to feel that way about the second year, too.