This law thing
The worse seems to have passed: I've had only minor headaches all day. I still can't believe how so simple and minor a routine can influence one's physiology. The human body is remarkable, though, such an attribute is in the process of making my life very challenging, especially since I doubt I remember anything I've learned about it this past year. I'm planning on spending a couple of hours each day refreshing, to at least gather some of that knowledge back up.
In the meantime, I finished Raising the Bar and have followed it with Boston Legal. The latter, is, of course, the superior show by a very large margin. One of the interesting things I've noted was that the main character in both is portrayed as very idealistic: both Jerry and Alan fight unreservedly for the people they represent and will not hesitate to even make personal sacrifices to benefit their clients. Alan has no problem, for example, gate crashing a private meeting to chastise the partners at Crane, Poole, &Schmidt for not considering Jerry "partner material" because he's a bit odd and doesn't kiss ass (or play golf) or representing a homeless man when Denny shot him with a paintball gun, and then later paying him $75k out of his own checking account when he realized that his principles couldn't come before his friendship with Denny. Jerry, much less financially endowed, uses more scrappy methods to defend his clients, such as antagonizing judges by not waiving charge readings and generally being an outspoken pain in the ass.
Of the two, I found Jerry incredible annoying and shortsighted, whereas I idolize Alan Shore. I think it has much to do with their respective demeanor. Jerry is hotblooded and humorless when it comes to defending his clients. He strikes me as someone you couldn't have an interesting conversation with without it turning into a venue for him to stand on his soapbox for a lengthy time. He's not willing to consider other people's side of issues. Alan Shore, on the other hand, is coldblooded. He's calculating and manipulative and much slimier than Jerry when it comes to tactics (especially underhanded ones). Where as Jerry will bark all day long, you'd never even see Alan coming. Also, while Jerry likes to speechify almost 24/7, he's not nearly as effective with words as Alan is. I've always admired people who have a gift but who only use it sparingly and with laser precision. Though Alan's eloquence is perpetually present, it's often in the form of very pithy one liners or perhaps a short paragraph when speaking directly to other people. He's concise and precise*: he gets a message across with a much smaller word count than Jerry. The exception to this is when he gives a closing. His closings are lengthy, but so excellently worded and so interesting that the length becomes a non-issue.
So...this was not something I'd thought I'd spend a lot of time analyzing here. It always amuses me when I like a work of fiction for its more minor characters rather than the main one. Harry Potter was one such example. I only wish Raising the Bar had spent more time developing the more minor and interesting characters. It would have been fascinating to center the show around Charlie, a law secretary who aspires to be a judge and who works with Kessler (a...rather interesting woman, let's say) and who keeps getting poached by Farnsdale. The politics involved, his relationships with the other judges (and his PD and DA friends), and just what goes on behind the scenes for a judge (there have been exactly how many TV shows centered around the lawyering aspect of the law? And almost none for judges. I'm curious.). To say nothing of the fact that he was in a sexual relationship with his boss and he later comes out as gay. How fascinating is that?!? Such a compelling potential put to waste. Ugh.
One thing this long string of law procedurals has done for me is reaffirm my desire to be a doctor. I couldn't imagine being in a profession that determines people's fate based on words and perceptions. It's like transforming the subjective into the objective. I can't put it into words (ha), but it makes my skin crawl to think that people can spend their lives practicing and studying what is essentially a bunch of human decisions and making people abide by that. At least in medicine there is an objective measure as to effectiveness, something to tie us to reality. It's cold and emotion has little effect on the outcome. I don't have to worry about convincing 12 people that I'm right and that they should let my client/patient get the treatment they need.
Anyway, I think I'm in the market for a new television series. Life on Mars is still exerting its grip over me, but, much to my chagrin, I'm afraid it's starting to wane...
*unlike this post...
In the meantime, I finished Raising the Bar and have followed it with Boston Legal. The latter, is, of course, the superior show by a very large margin. One of the interesting things I've noted was that the main character in both is portrayed as very idealistic: both Jerry and Alan fight unreservedly for the people they represent and will not hesitate to even make personal sacrifices to benefit their clients. Alan has no problem, for example, gate crashing a private meeting to chastise the partners at Crane, Poole, &Schmidt for not considering Jerry "partner material" because he's a bit odd and doesn't kiss ass (or play golf) or representing a homeless man when Denny shot him with a paintball gun, and then later paying him $75k out of his own checking account when he realized that his principles couldn't come before his friendship with Denny. Jerry, much less financially endowed, uses more scrappy methods to defend his clients, such as antagonizing judges by not waiving charge readings and generally being an outspoken pain in the ass.
Of the two, I found Jerry incredible annoying and shortsighted, whereas I idolize Alan Shore. I think it has much to do with their respective demeanor. Jerry is hotblooded and humorless when it comes to defending his clients. He strikes me as someone you couldn't have an interesting conversation with without it turning into a venue for him to stand on his soapbox for a lengthy time. He's not willing to consider other people's side of issues. Alan Shore, on the other hand, is coldblooded. He's calculating and manipulative and much slimier than Jerry when it comes to tactics (especially underhanded ones). Where as Jerry will bark all day long, you'd never even see Alan coming. Also, while Jerry likes to speechify almost 24/7, he's not nearly as effective with words as Alan is. I've always admired people who have a gift but who only use it sparingly and with laser precision. Though Alan's eloquence is perpetually present, it's often in the form of very pithy one liners or perhaps a short paragraph when speaking directly to other people. He's concise and precise*: he gets a message across with a much smaller word count than Jerry. The exception to this is when he gives a closing. His closings are lengthy, but so excellently worded and so interesting that the length becomes a non-issue.
So...this was not something I'd thought I'd spend a lot of time analyzing here. It always amuses me when I like a work of fiction for its more minor characters rather than the main one. Harry Potter was one such example. I only wish Raising the Bar had spent more time developing the more minor and interesting characters. It would have been fascinating to center the show around Charlie, a law secretary who aspires to be a judge and who works with Kessler (a...rather interesting woman, let's say) and who keeps getting poached by Farnsdale. The politics involved, his relationships with the other judges (and his PD and DA friends), and just what goes on behind the scenes for a judge (there have been exactly how many TV shows centered around the lawyering aspect of the law? And almost none for judges. I'm curious.). To say nothing of the fact that he was in a sexual relationship with his boss and he later comes out as gay. How fascinating is that?!? Such a compelling potential put to waste. Ugh.
One thing this long string of law procedurals has done for me is reaffirm my desire to be a doctor. I couldn't imagine being in a profession that determines people's fate based on words and perceptions. It's like transforming the subjective into the objective. I can't put it into words (ha), but it makes my skin crawl to think that people can spend their lives practicing and studying what is essentially a bunch of human decisions and making people abide by that. At least in medicine there is an objective measure as to effectiveness, something to tie us to reality. It's cold and emotion has little effect on the outcome. I don't have to worry about convincing 12 people that I'm right and that they should let my client/patient get the treatment they need.
Anyway, I think I'm in the market for a new television series. Life on Mars is still exerting its grip over me, but, much to my chagrin, I'm afraid it's starting to wane...
*unlike this post...