| time travel |
[04 Jun 2009|10:00pm] |
well it's basically the weekend. i have a lot of work to do for my RA'ship tomorrow, but it will be from home and I should get to ride a lil bit in the afternoon. Just a little spinning, want to rest up enough for the century on Sunday.
Nothing really to report, I haven't done much this week but go to work. Work is so boring, and I basically try to do as little as possible when I'm there. I was given a brief this morning to edit, by the end of the day I'd only gotten through 10 pages of legal cite checks. I think my colleagues are kinda pissed, since I was clearly just chatting up whomever'd listen and cruising the 'net all day. Tomorrow they must finish the work I did not do. And yet, it is not as if I'm concerned that I might be fired. I truly could get fired (though I think this is very unlikely), but I really would not care; with respect to my goals and desires this job is neither here nor there.
I think they (colleagues) think I'm gay, as one encouraged that I might soon find a nice woman with whom to partner, but then followed up with "or guy! whatever..." Owing mostly, I think, to the fact that I ramble on about my love of Gael Garcia Bernal and Shia LaBeouf. Whatever... I really like Holes, Ok? Euphemism alert!!!
I get to carb load this weekend, per my groundless assumptions. So, tomorrow I will probably split a pizza with my mom. On saturday, I want to roast a bunch of sweet potatos, maybe toss 'em in pesto. After the century on Sunday I want to get pancakes.
*****
Oh. Yesterday Tony came by at about 6 p.m. -- we were to go cycling. We made it up Sepulveda, to Mulholland, at which point I found that I had punctured my rear tire. Either me or my hand pump that I bring with me (or both?) is incapable of getting a tire to a high pressure level, and so after changing the tube I determined it was time to turn around and go home. So, it amounted to a 7 mile ride. To make up for this mishap (I somehow felt responsible), I agreed to go to Tony's work today, to start a ride from Burbank. I mapped out a 30 mile route (up Mulholland to Sherman Oaks, then down Chandler to Burbank, big surprise), figuring we could easily do it in 2 hours. like 2 hrs. 10 min. later I cut the ride short by 2 miles. So slow, man!
*****
The puncture gave me an excuse to get new tires, as the ones I have (that came with the Jamis) seem to have worn down pretty quickly (1500-2000 miles?). I got some contis, the grand prix 4-season, which are evidently popular in the Paris-Roubaix. Probably more than I need in drought-ridden L.A., but would seem to suit the chip'n'seal, gravel, and glass that permeates my routes.
Someone asked me if I was taking a trip soon, or where I would like to travel to next. I couldn't think of a damn thing. I guess I would try to hit up Aussie and New Zealand, probably with my parents.
|
|
|
[31 May 2009|01:09am] |
i intended to go on a rather hilly 65 mile ride this afternoon. however tony too wanted to go, and I ended up waiting for him till 4:30. Well that wasn't really a problem, as I wasn't really ready myself any earlier. Anyways, I figured we could complete the ride in 3.5 hours, like averaging 18-19 mph. We made it back at 8:30, having covered only 57.5 miles, like 14.5 mph average. The thing is, I had to hold back on my pace lest I lose my riding buddy. This was kind of frustrating, and I suppose now I can empathize with the cat 4-5 riders on the ND cycling club who dreaded riding with the likes of me at the end of winter - I was so slow! Thus I shall be patient...
Oh, the ride was in contemplation of a century next Sunday - it is a pretty mellow, very flat route, just to Long Beach and back plus a few circuits. I have never done a century before. OH I guess another goal is to convince tony to draft/ride a wheel (i.e. mine), since it is very beneficial and efficient - I figure the century group will be doing this (I hope!) so maybe the habit will stick.
Tony, my kind friend, is taking me (and 4 other friends) to disneyland tomorrow, his compliments pursuant to his management status at the disney corporation (some kind of super pass/free tix). All the other guys went out tonight but I was pretty tired and wanted to finish disc 2 of season 1 of Rome. Plus I am broke and do not want to waste money in hollywood. I recently concluded that I have dug myself into a hole insofar as 1) I am broke and 2) fancy myself intellectually superior to most (women), a conjunction I find problematic insofar as how I am to meet people (women) of similar mental prowess parsimoniously sitting around my parents' house or at some shitty bar. Moreover, if I'm so smart, why am I so broke?
I am tired tonight because I had GRE workshop/class at some classroom on CSUN this morning at 9. I woke up at 7:30 to drink coffee and attempt to watch the Giro (it wasn't on). The GRE isn't very intimidating but I want to do extremely well on it.
*****
It occurred to me today that the reason the philosophers I've talked to seem indifferent as to whether I sit for the bar is that philosophers might think bar membership is phony or overrated. This is supported by my friend Catherine's remarks to me recently that her classmates from poor(ly ranked) law schools in BarBri in Minneapolis are just painfully dumb. I know that most law students (considering all law schools) are dumb as nails, and want to be lawyers for stupid reasons. And many law students will be admitted to their desired bars. Wise old philosophy professors must know this too, so the Who gives a shit? attitude.
*****
I'm going to read a lil bit of "The Untouchable" by John Banville. He's an Irishman, he writes such wonderful prose, and I think his subtle influence explains the pompous tone of this entry.
|
|
| hi folks |
[25 May 2009|05:48pm] |
I am back in California. I have to go to "work" tomorrow, and I am dreading it. Hopefully it passes quickly and the paychecks will lift my spirits. As I understand it, I have about 14 months or so of working 9-5 and living with my parents. I don't mind the latter so much, but it happens that this weekend, the weekend of my return, we have a number of houseguests, meaning that I have had to share my room with two others; it feels very much like a youth hostel. And this after living by myself in a spacious flat for the year! I miss the me time. Anyways, I am looking forward to taking the GRE and revising a piece of my writing for a writing sample, then putting together applications and crossing my fingers in the hopes of admission to a good-enough Ph.D. in philosophy program. The more I think about it, I would really like to stay in California.
My folks hosted a little graduation celebration gathering for me yesterday at the house. Not too many people came, but a few friends stopped by. For me, the most annoying part of being recognized for having a J.D. is having people call me 'lawyer,' 'counselor,' etc., since I am (happily) not a lawyer, attorney, or whatever. One friend asked me "You were basically over [law school] halfway through, right?" I said "halfway through the first day." Then he asked why I stuck it out and finished it, and I really didn't have a good answer, or at least not any reason. Now, with hindsight, I can say that the J.D. will add to my marketability as a political philosophy professor down the line, but I really did not have that in mind until the beginning of spring term (well I had this in mind many years ago, but stupidly persuaded myself otherwise). After the first year of school, which I hated, I stuck around because I wanted to go to London. After the horror of London, I stuck around because I was kind of mentally out of it for a few months and was told "by people" to stick with it. Third year was pretty easy, I just took human rights electives and philosophy courses. But why linger on the past...
As mentioned previously, someone advised me to take the bar, lest some might see that I have the J.D. but no bar and presume that I was unable to pass the exam. As I am already committed to not taking the July exam, insofar as I have not registered to do so, have not registered for a review course, and have no money to pay for either, I am beginning to think that I may not even take the bar in the winter. A few lawyers I have spoken to continue to urge that I do so, but that tends to firm up my deterrence to being identified with lawyers. I figure that the bar exam will cost me about $6000 (registration, review course, not working, possibly new laptop), and I can't really square that expense with the mere 'reputational value' - that I can put bar admission on my resume. I still do not plan on actually practicing law.
So, I am kinda thinking that once my applications are for the most part done, I might look for somewhat more substantial ($$$) work that might allow me to live with a friend later in the year and into 2010.
*****
This morning Tony and I did the l.a. bike tour thing before the marathon. I did this a few years ago when i lived in Echo Park. I think I was nervous when I did in echo park cos I was so out of shape. This time around I woke up at 3:30, drove to Tony's, then we rode down to USC and scrambled through the course in like one hour ten minutes. The course is so flat and easy, I bet we could do it under an hour next year if we start at the front and ride with a group TTT style. We go there right at 5 and started with a bunch of kids in beach cruisers. We ended up up front with all these old fat roadies.
There is a race in Bakersfield in two weeks. I wanna do it, but it would involve spending the night there before, since the beginners' cat starts at 7:45 a.m. I need to convince Tony to go and race too or at least my sister to keep me company.
*****
Ryan and Molly gave me a flip camera it is the coolest thing!
|
|
| nothing can be divorced from theology |
[11 May 2009|11:57pm] |
as to the paper i wrote last, for the philosophy seminar, evidently it sufficed, as I received an A for the course. I really felt I was not writing at a high level with that paper, and I thought the fact that I turned it in late Sunday evening when it was ostensibly due Friday was pretty inexcusable.
Anyways, today I forwent the opportunity to go on a day-long tour of Michigan wineries because a) it meant having to be on campus at 8 a.m. to catch the tour bus, b) the tour was literally schedule for like 9 hours, and c) my mom told me it was a bad idea since California wine is so superior and there was the real danger that I would partake in too much alcohol. So, I slept in, packed up a pretty large quantity of clothes and shoes that I basically haven't worn all year, took a trip to goodwill (to donate said clothes and shoes), then headed to campus at about 1 p.m. There I turned in the dozen or so library books I've had on loan all term (though of course when I got home I found I forgot one book, so I'll have to make another trip). I also dropped by the officer of a professor of mine in the law school, who is inter alia a fairly well established medeival scholar and natural law jurisprude. I discussed with him my plans to apply to ph.d. in philosophy programs and he was helpful if not especially encouraging. I only had a legal history class with him, so he's not familiar with my philosophical work, but nonetheless I think he will write me a good letter of recommendation. He did advise me expressly to take the bar, as he thinks that if I have a J.D. but not bar membership, 'they' will assume I took the bar and failed. I told him I had no plans to practice, to which he replied basically that he does not think jurisprudence is philosophy, possibly implying that legal practice is requisite to doing jurisprudence, though I don't think so with respect to the broader questions that I am concerned with. He also warned me 'teaching is tough business,' and noted he recently saw the CV of a Law School applicant who had taught at the undergraduate for 6 years, but didn't 'make the cut' for tenure, and thus was seeking a career change via law school. Not sure what said applicant's field was (could be English or MFA for all I know in which case not an especially unusual story). I definitely need to temper my tenure goal with the reality of the market (though my philosophy professor was decidedly optimistic about my future job prospects). I think I shall have to get into a top ten program, and take into account regionalism in Ph.D. recruiting.
The jurisprude I met with, the natural law theorist, roots much of his jurisprudence in theology. Since he seemed to think jurisprudence was 'separate' from philosophy, I asked if jurisprudence could likewise be divorced from theology.
|
|
| ok |
[10 May 2009|02:01am] |
so i wrote a few more pages. this paper is really weak, my brain is seriously bonked from last week.
*****
anyways, i did come up with this grand desire, namely to go to grad school in l.a. so that i can get mexican food when i'm pulling all nighters like this. i want a burrito with guacamole.
|
|
| oh |
[10 May 2009|12:44am] |
|
also, last night mark e. smith was in my dream, but like aged mid-thirties. i think the thing was he was doing a pilot for either a reality t.v. show or some kind of detective show he was working on. he lived in my condo complex. an american agent interested in the show later came to talk things over but pissed off mark who then yelled something like 'Prat! I am English working class!'
|
|
| hi there |
[10 May 2009|12:23am] |
oh man, down to one final paper. i am to turn it in tomorrow and i have like nothing written. a bit of the old writer's block. this is for the philosophy seminar though so i should have paid it a lot more attention, but truth be told i wasn't (and am not) very enthusiastic about the paper topic and don't envision using this paper as such as my writing sample for applications (i will have to figure something out).
over the last few days i've had to write and re-write a short paper for medieval legal history, which was actually a bit of a challenge, since i basically had to try to cull all of these propositions from strange records of strange medieval english cases on dower. luckily there was a very on point journal article to walk me through a few of the cases i discussed, but i noticed that the professor was not always in agreement with some of the historical data i pulled from academic sources, which made things difficult (i ended up citing to one of our conversations!).
on top of that i had to grade my share of final exams for the undergrad poli sci class. the final was longer than the midterms, and pretty much a huge pain to grade given the timing with my papers due. i returned the exams to the instructor yesterday, who seemed to be generally happy with my work as her TA over the term. i also mentioned my plan to apply to some ph.d. programs next year and she seemed pretty enthusiastic. i was thinking today that i should have a pretty good chance of being accepted into Notre Dame's philosophy department next year, which then brough up some weird scenarios for me, like 'what if it is by far the best i get in to' or what if it is the ONLY program i get in to.' there are some very quality philosophers here, but i feel there contemporary political and ethics focus is more boutique, and anyways i'd be worried by the same sort of 'ideological stuffiness' i felt that i encountered in much of the law school the last three years. plus, my social life has been basically non-existent in south bend!
speaking of dead society in south bend, i did take a breather last night to go to a party for about 2 hours with some friends who were all done with finals (everyone is done but me as far as i can tell). it was a bunch of fat guys drinking with backwards hats; some little *angry* guy punched out a window i guess to show that he was tough. yeah, i dunno that i could survive another five years here.
i went riding today, i guess i've basically been avoiding this paper any way i can! i had meant to go on a shorter ride this morning, but when i woke up the wind was ridiculous, like 35 mph gusts, so i ended up sleeping until like 11:30 a.m. I wrote like two pages of this paper (all i've got so far!), then procrastinated, checked the weather, and figured out that by 5:30 or so the wind was to be done with. so i headed out then for about 2.5 hours. i was pretty sluggish the first hour but thought I had picked things up after that but when i got home and did my 'calculations' my average speed didn't even break 19 mph which is pretty pathetic. hopefully it's the stress and fatigue of finals and not me reaching the peak of my performance!
oh man, i really want this paper to be done, i want to do a longer ride next week, at least 75 miles, but i need to figure out a route, as frankly i'm getting sick of what basically amount to the two routes that i know.
on wednesday i have to go to chicago midday for the asylum externship mock interview, then pick up my sister and mom from o'hare. we are staying in chicago for the evening, as the next day is the real asylum office interview. i hope all goes well with that, as i haven't done work on it since before spring break, some 2 months ago. we talked to the client the other day though, he seems to be doing well. i am pretty confident we will get approval following the interview, which should end this whole 'law' experience on a high note.
ps - i bought an expensive ass bike rack for my car, it attaches to the trunk but is really nice. i hope my bikes are safe on it for the cross country journey to come in two weeks.
|
|
| sauntering across finals week |
[04 May 2009|06:39pm] |
Well since my last post, I took that awful federal taxation exam. It already is fading in my memory. For the record, it was the 'worst' exam I've ever sat for in many respects. First, it was really hard. At least one of the multiple choice questions was rooted in one of the professor's casual 'tax trivia' question-and-answer things that he would do at the beginning of each class (e.g. one of the tax trivia questions, thought not the one that appeared on the test, was "What are David Letterman's Top Ten Ways to Improve the IRS's Image?," then we read a Top Ten list evidently from the late 1990s). It was also very hard because it was very long. As half of the points available were found in the multiple choice questions (25), and the other half in the essays (3), I spent most of the test on the m.c., since I figured I'd be more certain about gaining points there. The essays were extremely complicated and confusing. I submitted only partial and probably incorrect (with respect to the calculations I (mis)used) answers for all three, so I don't think I got many points from them. In fact, I am pretty sure I did not earn even half of the available 200 points on the test. However, everyone who took the exam evidently performed similarly, and one friend didn't even make it all the way through the first essay, let alone the remaining two. So, I suppose things might curve out. Another way the test was the worst ever was that I was, as I indicated previously, embarrassingly under-prepared. But, it's over.
On Saturday I had to 'finish' a fairly lengthy (about 6,000 words for 3 credits) paper for Economic, Social, and Cultural Rights. By finish I mean I pretty much wrote the whole damn thing on Saturday. I submitted it by the midnight deadline, but it is a pretty crappy paper. The main thesis relied on some 'conceptual' or theoretical arguments around consent and veto, which arguments were problematic in this paper for two reasons. First, not all professors are receptive of such conceptual work, and second, my conceptual work in this case was pretty sloppy. But, it's over!
Now I am about halfway through a paper for Transnational Corporations & HR. I started writing it this morning and it is due tomorrow afternoon. Actually, this paper might not be that awful insofar as it is basically a memo, and so I don't really have to do much real analysis or arguing - just summing up a few treaties, then I'll give a 'policy argument' regarding tacit and emerging 'progressive human rights norms.' I am a little worried about my time-line here, as I have to proctor an exam for the poli sci class I TA for tomorrow from 10:30-12:30. I'm not sure that I'll sleep much tonight, and am worried about falling asleep during the exam.
After tomorrow I have to write two papers, though one should be short and fairly easy. The other is for that philosophy seminar and may take a few days.
*****
I have like no plans for moving, and I don't really know what to do with all my stuff, furniture and such. My dad owns the condo I live in, so I guess I could just leave it there...
*****
I went on a nice bike ride yesterday but it was sort of humid and the random wetlands smell rotten.
|
|
| oh boy |
[01 May 2009|02:26am] |
Well I am evidently 'done' with my half-assed fed tax outline which more or less means i'm 'done studying.' it certainly doesn't feel that way however, i don't think i know anything significant about federal income taxation law at this point. i haven't gone over any practice problems or anything like that, i guess i never do that for exams though. for other 'straight law' i've taken (usually against my will!), the core material is mostly made up of case law, so i just end up skimming down holdings and memorizing them, then arguing fact patterns according to the rules from the core case law. this tax law is different, as it is all rooted in the tax code, pure misery. anyways, i did go get a three dollar calculator per the syllabus' recommendation (requirement?), so i'm hoping that it comes through for me tomorrow morning. i really don't think i could get to any better level of preparation though - impossible in any case at this point, but i mean that i have absolutely no interest in this course (or 'straight law') at this point, i just can't build up the mental locomotion to do anything else.
so, i guess i'll print out this outline and my notes, maybe read through it (don't think so), sleep for a few hours, then go take this test. it is four hours long, which really sucks, i get so bored during these. alas, at least it is my only exam this term. oh, half of it is made up of 25 multiple choice questions (though I think they are all calculation-based), so I'm hoping I can use my usually stellar m.c. skills to excel on that part. As for the three essays that make up the other half, I'm hoping prof does what I do in grading undergrad exams and award half the points on formality (thesis, support, counters, conclusion), as I'm sure my actual arguments will be pure shit.
see my locs?
*****
I have a lot of stuff in my cupboards and not much time left here. That and given my general aversion to studying prompted me to make 'banana brownies' this afternoon. Oh, there was a mushy banana chilling on my table and I didn't like the look of it. I really didn't have any chocolate, aside from cocoa powder, which proved pretty much problematic as these don't have much of a chocolate flavor. They are like subtly sweet cocoa crackers, sort of like the 'bread' on an ice cream sandwich, plus a baked banana kick (invoking banana sandwiches for me). Anyways, they did take up a lot of the whole wheat flour and sugar/sweeteners that were chillin', and I did eat a bunch of them - I guess it turned out ok.
I really just want the next 9 days to be over, as I just want to clean out this flat and ride my bike excessively.
|
|
| oh shit |
[29 Apr 2009|01:41am] |
So I am pretty stressed out, but also procrastinating: the vicious circle of finals. This is an extra special addition of finals time, as law school is over. I have four papers to turn in next week and haven't done any of them. Two I've started, but pretty minimally, and the other two I haven't even so much as 'prepared myself mentally.' Presently I am half-assedly putting together the half-assed skeletal for what will be the half-assed outline for my federal income taxation exam on Friday. 'Fed Tax' as it's known is a mandated class at Notre Dame Law School, and as such constitutes a reason to NOT go to law school here. This is the most awful class I've ever taken, and I can't even temper my resentment for it by telling myself, as I can do with elective courses, that I selected the class and have to live with my decision. Because you force me, I resent you. Then again, I guess I did decide to go to Notre Dame Law School, and thus 'decided' to take this class, but it simply wasn't within my purview at decision-time. Anyways, it will all be over on Friday. (I don't know if I mentioned it here or not, but the Fed Tax professor is the one who earlier in the semester was sending me creepy emails passively asking me about my roommate's suicide, if I wanted the class to (publicly) pray for me/him on the anniversary, etc which really added to my emotional turmoil back in Februrary (i.e. the anniversary). This professor also takes attendance everyday, uses this data to calculate 'participation points,' and so I only have about 82% of total participation points - a B- going into the final. I just hope I have a B- exiting the final!)
The only motivator I have at this time, given the direness of my immediate future (no job no money) is of course that sealing the deal on law school is a big step towards applying for the Ph.D. and then ultimately teaching (perhaps a life of job security (tenure), health insurance, the occasional professional conference, casual attire). On that note, I really need to get on the ball with professors for purposes of 'relationship management' and letters of recommendation. I'm not confident that I'll get a letter from the other philosophy professor with whom I took a seminar earlier this term, and in fact I feel tacky/uncomfortable at the thought of approaching him. (While I got a good grade based on a good paper I wrote, I never spoke up in class, and never really discussed philosophy with him aside from a short meeting to approve my paper topic.) There are however several natural law (read: super-conservative, ultra-Catholic) philosophers/jurisprudes within the law school with whom I have very amiable relationships from prior courses, so I think I can get at least two letters that way. However, the 'heavyweight' philosopher in the law school is at Oxford until August, and so I need to summon up my powers of email charm and persuasion to remind him of the two classes I took with him previously (for some reason, I don't think he has a clue who I am, though I did participate more than usual in his classes).
*****
The other day I roasted sweet potatoes. I cubed them with the skins on, tossed them in a bit of peanut oil, soy sauce, and garlic, and tossed them in the oven for like an hour. The came out so delicious, and savory.
I rode Friday Sat and Sunday, not too far (like 30-40 miles each day), but there were some pretty formidable winds, which tend to mess up my pacing and mental fortitude.
I meant to go ride today but instead I took three naps before/after three random classes and ate a bunch of food (free meal at the Dining Hall for one class, then I ate like a gallon of ice cream from my freezer). Now I am drinking wine! I better ride tomorrow.
*****
Some movie reviews. My Medieval Legal History class (two pages of paper complete!) inspired me to get on a medieval English history in cinema kick, so in the last couple of weeks I rented Becket (1964, dir. Peter Glenville), The Private Lives of Elizabeth and Essex (1939, dir. Michael Curtiz), and The Lion in Winter (1968, dir. Anthony Harvey). I only watched half of Lion however, as the netflix disc was damaged and wouldn't let me go further; no matter - I didn't like the film very much! As for Becket and Essex, both were great and photographically quite interesting and pleasant.
Peter O'Toole is Henry II in Becket. I love O'Toole though I'm beginning to sense that he invokes the same 'character' or character-base, at least in his historical roles, as the Henry II of Becket bears much character-continuity to that of Lion (oh, he plays Henry II in that film too), though the 'universes,' tones, and stories of the films are very different. On top of that, compare (easily) his Pope Paul III in The Tudors. Paul III is much more subtle and mellow, but then again O'Toole is much older now - what isn't masked by age is all that sass.
Bette Davis is amazing, and makes an amazing Elizabeth I in Essex. The film is about her supposed love affair with the Earl of Essex, played by Errol Flynn, whom I don't find so amazing, but I guess he was pretty handsome. My favorite parts of the movie are a few fleeting shots of Davis brooding by herself, on her throne, at the end of a few scenes, completely consumed (but also in control of) the conflicting interests of her personal life and her queenly duties. Vincent Price is also in the movie. I don't think I can dislike any film that Vincent Price is in.
Other than the medieval stuff I watched Herzog's Invincible (2001) and Fellini's Roma (1972). I very much enjoyed both. They say that Invincible is 'boring' which is not true, or at least it is not any more 'boring' than Herzog's other 'narrative' films (Herzog does usually keep a weird pace and sometimes dwell on shots, e.g. a frame full of river, or a field blowing in the wind). They say Roma is 'plotless,' which is largely true, but as I watched I came to realize, when is plot ever important to Fellini? Pure iconography, and very enjoyable.
I also watched The Day the Earth Stood Still (2008, dir. Scott Derrickson (huh?)) a few weeks ago. It was pretty good, by that I mean entertaining. I have always been an Keanu Reeves apologist, alas. Keanu is beginning to age however.
|
|
|
[22 Apr 2009|10:50pm] |
Today I had a very encouraging and lengthy conversation with a professor of political philosophy here. As I've noted I am in a very small (3 students) graduate seminar, and as such have gotten to know this professor pretty well over the semester. I told him of my desire to teach philosophy and/or law at the university level, and that I intend to apply to Ph.D. programs, and he was very enthusiastic. I was told that the J.D./Ph.D. is a fairly desirable trait for the purposes of professorship down the line, and that doing a J.D. followed by a Ph.D. (as opposed to vice versa or jointly) generally results in the best work and philosophers, which was also good to hear. His specific recommendations of programs were somewhat daunting, as he basically stressed Yale, Harvard, NYU, and Columbia. I don't know if I can take those recs as flattering, as I am more intimidated by such 'heavyweights.' At any rate, I was told that a degree of regionalism (i.e. colleges and universities hire regionally, from more 'local' departments) exists outside of the very top programs (basically NYU, Rutgers, Princeton, Pitt, Harvard). As such, I think my plan to stay regional in my applications makes sense (since I would like to stay in the West), supplemented by apps to 'the very top.' I was told to basically stay away from any non-top-twenty programs, which will apparently knockout UCR, UCD, UCSD, Georgetown - sorry guys!
Also, he has signed on as a recommender (which makes at least two confirmed, though I know of another law professor who will write me a weather). I need to approach to other philosophers whose classes I've taken as a law student, though the two I have in mind are somewhat 'less friendly' in the way genius philosophers often are. Professor also said he'd work with me over the summer to perfect a writing sample, and recommended I put real work into preparing for the GRE (part of the plan anyways).
So, a plan of mine finally makes sense, is apparently feasible, and is thus far moving on schedule.
*****
I went on a nice ride today despite some pretty gnarly winds (headwinds on the way out, meaning nice tailwind back in!). I feel like I need to take these longer rides seriously, and really spend more time pushing myself instead of cruising or feeling sorry for a sore neck or achilles or whatever. I do however want to take some pictures of things I like looking at out there (i.e. northwest of campus, in southern michigan, amongst farms and horsies, etc). I think I will probably go on a harder ride on friday and a leisurely recovery ride on saturday; i'll try to remember to bring my camera then, hey maybe i'll stop and have a little picnic. I did see on the map there is something called like 'Dowling Pond' or 'Dowling Creek'.
DAN DOWLING
|
|
| mind and body |
[20 Apr 2009|12:24am] |
MY MIND
Well I was not accepted into the LL.M. program. This does not come as much a surprise because, as I believe I intimated here at some point, I learned several weeks ago that I was not in the first round of admission offerees, and it was 'not likely' that either a second round would come to be, or at least that I would be included as an admitee at any rate. So, the disappointment-effect was spread over the ice so to speak, and I wasn't too bummed when I received the news last Thursday - I went spinning, which perked up my mood a lot even though my legs were dead, then afterwards watched Purple Rain at Catherine's and Lawrence's, at the end of which I pretty much felt great. Second and related, the professor for whom I know work as a research assistant and who had indicated previously that I could work as his research assistant over the summer called off the summer gig - meaning my term of employment ends with the academic year (it is pretty much over now). So, beyond May 17, the date of commencement, there is nothing to keep me here in Indiana. On May 18, I will begin the drive back to Los Angeles, this time with the help of my sister Meggie. I think we will take a few days to enjoy some sights in New Mexico, so I should arrive about May 22 or May 23. Get ready!
My plan for life from this point is then to work for a year in some capacity that will allow me to pay off the large sum of 'pure private' debt I know carry from credit cards and my 'London fun loan.' However I do not want to take a work schedule that will take away from the main goal of the next few months, which is to apply for Ph.D. programs for Fall 2010. So far I have only been researching Ph.D. in Philosophy programs, though I may widen the scope to include more specific programs like, for instance, Berkeley's Jurisprudence and Social Policy program ("the scholarly study of legal ideas and institutions from the standpoint of one or more of the basic disciplines, e.g., history, economics, philosophy, sociology or political science.") I will probably shoot for a Philosophy doctorate however, as my goal is to teach undergraduates, and I feel my law degree in some sense already imputes me with a certain degree of qualification for teaching beyond philosophy - so the philosophy degree would cement the further specialization. As I indicated before, I will only undertake this enterprise under circumstances in which I have guaranteed funding (which is pretty much always the case with the departments I am considering). I want to stay near home, or at least no more than half a day's drive from home, and so my list of potentials so far is
1. UCLA
2. Berkeley
3. Stanford
4. Univ. of Arizona
5. USC
6. UC San Diego
7. UC Riverside
8. UC Davis
Since my areas of interest are Political Philosophy, Legal Philosophy, Ethics, and Applied Ethics, my breakaway favorites are UCLA and USC, since they are also in Los Angeles. Univ. of Arizona and Stanford are second favorites.. To this end, beyond the region NYU, Harvard, Yale, and UNC-Chapel Hill are especially suited to my interests (but I probably only have a shot of getting into UNC). Princeton and Georgetown would also be good fits.
So, over the coming months, I have to perfect a writing sample, get letters of recommendation in order (actually probably have to do this in the coming weeks), and take the GRE.
And lo and behold, the firm where I worked last summer emailed me on Saturday inquiring as to my availability to begin work again at the end of the academic year. Soon I will be a Juris Doctor living at home reviewing appellate briefs and dreaming of more schooling, all while living the shadow of monstrous law school debt, woo hoo!
So note that I have no plans to take the bar or practice law.
MY BODY
Back in January - or was it February? - I tweaked my knee while out on a run on a cold and drizzly day. My dad later said it was pre-patellar bursitis, more of a chronic disorder than a specific injury, and to combat it I had stopped running and started doing special stretches before cycling (and I have been cycling tons more since the weather has improved). Nonetheless, I have felt that the absence of running as contributed to the fitness plateau I feel that I am currently on. Basically I have just been cycling, really no other cross-training (even neglecting basic toning and abs workouts as I'm usually bonked after my rides). Moreover where as last term, when I was focused on losing a lot of weight fairly quickly, I quite strictly counted calories, and ate very little early in the day (de minimis breakfast, small snack for lunch), then had a large dinner. My class schedule was more spread out though, so if I didn't eat in the morning, I could make it through a class or two, ignoring hunger, then go home and have a small snack and a nap, eat supper mid-afternoon and exercise in the evening. Since then I've started on these IMMENSE breakfasts every day - usually 600 calories of cereal, fruit, and bars (sugar!). My lunches are also bigger, and I still have a pretty big supper (and then snack afterwards!). Anyways, my weight has been in a weird five pound fluctuation zone lately, and I feel slightly sluggish. I do acknowledge that I have gained *some* muscle mass in my legs from riding, but I don't lift weights and it's not like I'm doing any climbing here in Indiana. I blame my weird school schedule, because I have these very long days on Tuesdays and Thursdays, which led to the big breakfasts in the first place (to hold me over through all the classes). I am worried that full-time work over the summer will lead to further bad habits, eek. However, I should be able to ride after work for 2 hours most days through the summer, with some long rides on the weekend. On the upside, I did go running this afternoon, only for about 25 minutes, for the first time in months. It was fun! If you see me eating junk food, hit it out of my hand and give me some carrots.
Speaking of which, tonight I made Dan's Famous Grilled Chicken on a bed of barley-apple-carrot pilaf. It was delicious. I marinated the chicken all afternoon in a mixture of thai chili sauce, teriyaki, soy sauce, ketchup, and salt and pepper. I seasoned the pilaf with soy sauce, yellow curry, and cinnamon.
*****
I want to go see Crank: High Voltage, I Love You, Man, and Paul Blart: Mall Cop but I will probably wait for the DVDs
*****
My sister got married on April 3rd. The days before and after, in addition to the wedding and reception, were super fun. I got so sauced at the reception, like embarrassingly drunk. Shirt unbuttoned tie around bare neck with paunch hanging out on the dance floor drunk. See photo.
|
|
| nothin |
[16 Mar 2009|11:39pm] |
i didn't write my paper last night. i overslept this morning, but still made it to long beach airport with plenty of time to make my flight. i think slept for all 3.5 hours of the flight, and half of the 3.5 hours of the coach ride from chicago to notre dame. i was able to finish my regular philosophy reading assignment, but definitely no paper for tomorrow. i hope prof isn't too miffed. i am so tired right now, i guess all that spring breakin' caught up with me.
nothing waiting in my mailbox to the tune of LL.M. acceptance or rejection. the profs associated with the program seem to be super busy though lately, as my emails to them regarding coursework etc often go unanswered or are at least definitely answered timely.
i went to the store when i got back in to town, ostensibly just for fruit and milk, but got some other stuff like frozen kofta curry veggie dumplings, frozen yogurt, crackers'n'snacks, cereal, cheese - a few essentials that of course added up to 60 bucks. i got some pumpkin butter, this english brand, cos the apple butter i usually get, the amish brand made in michigan (honey apple butter, so awesome) was out of stock. this english shit is like SALTY, pretty gross. tastes more like sweet potatoes then pumpkin butter. maybe i'll just have to turn it savory, hmmm maybe warm it up and toss it with carrots and garlic.
eeek so much work to do. then the notre dame road race this weekend. some friends are going to CHI-TOWN on friday and though I said i was interested it is now clear i won't be making that trip due to saturday morning's race. it should be fun i hope my knee lives. i have pre-patellar bursitis you know.
man, i am not ready to get back to work. my eyes are literally starting to cross, i need to write up some quick discussion points from philosophy reading and hit the hay.
oh, i better do my review of Body of Lies before I forget. My sister and I rented this Ridley Scott film last week. Leo DeCaprio plays a hot-shot undercover CIA guy whose mandate appears to include all of the middle east. We first find him in Northern Iraq trying to track down this Al Saleem character - sort of an Osama-lite who is orchestrating bombings in Europe and elsewhere, but whose greater organization is anchored in Iraq and (eventually we learn) Jordan. Thus DeCaprio spends much of the film in Jordan. His handler back in Langley, VA is Russell Crowe's character, a chubby, rude, ambiguous man who plots assassinations via a hands-free cell phone attachment while taking his kids to soccer practice, etc. He justifies any questionable techniques (e.g. sacrificing informants, torturing anyone) with a principle that 'no one is innocent.' Basically power-drunk. Anyways I highly recommend this movie. DeCaprio and Crowe are awesome per usual, though curiously have very few scenes together - I wonder if they aren't another one of those pairings (mighty hearts) who would have to segregate on sets. Oh who knows maybe they get along splendidly. Russell Crowe makes the sort of hackneyed 'bad-terrorists' story line work and adds some layers by way of the very different political and ideological cultures of the Iraqi wastelands, the Jordanian intelligence bureaucracy, and the Crowe-DeCaprio CIA rogues. There also some love interest of DeCaprio, an Iranian nurse living in Jordan - sort of vapid though, the character. Finally, since it is Ridley Scott there is at least one explicit scene of mutilated body parts (in this case sort of a wink back to that scene in Bladerunner!).
The Americans
|
|
| i have a paper due |
[16 Mar 2009|12:48am] |
Must submit the midterm paper for political philosophy on Tuesday. But, tomorrow I'll be en route to South Bend and losing three hours (EST) so I need to get at least a few pages done tonight. I have an outline. The 'paper' is to take up a very focused assignment - three pretty specific questions/task from the professor regarding a feminist challenge to Nozick's and Rawls' best known justice theories, any potential defenses available to Nozick and Rawls, and describing a 'post-gender' society, whether masculinity/feminity exist. The last part seems somewhat useless at first glance but after last summer's employment discrimination class gender concepts and stereotypes, and the evident need to get them sorted out properly and justly, are pretty central at least that area of law practice. I plan on incorporating one or two employment discrimination cases, e.g. the 2006 9th Cir. decision upholding a casino's policy of differentiating between sexes with respect to appearance - the casino required female bartenders to wear make-up, etc. My notes indicate that there was no illegal stereotyping because the stereotyping in play (that women should wear make-up) would not inhibit job performance - illegal sex stereotyping is a concept that emerged from an earlier case in which a female broker of some sort was fired or not promoted for being to aggressive ('masculine'), but that kind of trait helped her performance, so prohibiting it was illegal stereotyping. Weird reasoning, I'll have to review. Last weekend my mom and I saw a staging of "The Taming of the Shrew" in Glendale - I think I want to cull some language from its dialogue to demonstrate long-standing bad gender concepts. Could do the same from medieval case law, no doubt, though I don't want to open that can of worms with the paper due Tuesday.
I am so tired right now though. Last night was Molly Brickhedge's old birthday and I got wasted. I feel sick, I think I'm getting a touch of the 'Dowling home illness' I tend to get when I come home - achy and sore throat, I think it has something to do with the pets and the air quality here. I slept in my clothes last night, well passed out on the sofa, but I think it was only for 5 or 6 hours - anyways, not very restful at all. I tried to nap today, but to no avail. The combination of exhaustion and restlessness sucks. I had good french toast this morning at some cafe downtown, then ate more when I got home, then had a huge dinner of grilled kebabs, dan's special baby carrots, brown rice, salad, and biscuits. Plus 1.5 pieces of pumpkin pie and ice cream. Then later some cookies and tea. Still don't feel much better.
A lot of people are asking a lot of questions about what I'm going to be come May 17th, graduation day. I must find out whether I'm in the LL.M. program very soon.
Spring break has come and gone, so quickly. To recap, last weekend on Saturday I picked up my rental road bike from Hollywood Pro in Topanga, and rode with Tony briefly. I went to the sausage and beer hipster place downtown with Ryan and Molly and slept on their sofa. I think I went spinning. On Sunday I rode again briefly then I went to the theatre and dined at La Buca with my mom. On Monday I rode again, I don't really remember where or for how long, maybe just up Sepulveda to Mulholland or maybe over to Griffith Park. Monday night I went to Long Beach and ate dinner with Bobby then we wandered to empty LB bars, getting pissdrunk. Tuesday I think I was too hungover to ride, but I went spinning. Wednesday I did a pretty epic ride. I think I took a break Thursday, played tennis with Tony. Friday and Saturday were two more mini-epic rides - 40 miles of climbing and descending around Topanga state park and Malibu - really fun. Then last night I partied and alas I am still recovering. SPRING BREAK '09
|
|
| When stressed, think about the future. |
[02 Mar 2009|09:57pm] |
So I have a tonne of work to complete this week (basically client's asylum application needs to be complete and there is much in balance), and thus I shall take the time to post here. Still no word on whether I'll be in the LL.M. program next year, but still feeling hopeful. Met with my philosophy professor putatively to discuss a paper due after next week's spring break; the meeting went nearly two hours and we talked about a lot of things, and he offered some insight as to the day to day of a professional philosopher (a colleague's recent debate blowing up the blogs, his position as an editor for a press, a zillion books to keep track of - basically a lot of relationship management, like any other job i guess). Thing is I'm leaning strongly towards working in academia these days, spent last night looking at admissions info for oxford's law faculty (and philosophy faculty but law's the shit) d.phil, and some other stateside ph.d. programs with strong legal philosophy showings. If I were to apply for such doctorate programs, I would probably only do so under two conditions (1) I get into the LL.M. program next year and write something substantially related to the field (tentatively would like to work on (natural, 'theoretical') normative framework for certain human rights (i.e. case study approach)) and (2) Do something substantial in the field 2010-11 (employment with judicial or quasi-judical IO entity related to human rights adjudication). Applications to such doctorate programs would be very limited to programs where I felt employment was very likely upon degree-completion, with added preference to programs in California. Oxford has by far the best legal philosophy infrastructure (e.g. Raz, Finnis, Hart's ghost) and both its law faculty and philosophy faculty facilities legal philosophy research towards a D.Phil. It is the bomb. Then NYU (Dworkin, Nagel). UCLA, USC, and Cal., and maybe Univ. Chicago for good measure. So, it would be a very focused endeavor.
Sometimes I feel like Notre Dame could and should attempt to assert itself in legal (and political) philosophy given Finnis' presence half of the year, but it is really difficult to find anyone doing much in terms of straight jurisprudence currently. I had hoped to get involved with the Natural Law Institute at the Law School, but honestly they don't seem to do much of anything aside from put out a yearly journal (though we are still awaiting a 2008 volume?). The profs associated with it are Bradley, whom I now know from PD ethics, but who is on sabbatical; Finnis, who I know but I'm pretty sure still doesn't know me two courses and two As later; and Rodes, who knows me (but not my name) from weekly medieval legal history but who is in his 80s and deservedly enjoys a semi-retired lifestyle (that's the class we drink wine in from 8-10pm every Tuesday btw).
OK, this entry is just a distraction now, I better get back to work. Spring break starts Friday!
|
|
| navigation |
| [ |
viewing |
| |
most recent entries |
] |
| [ |
go |
| |
earlier |
] |
|
|
|
|
![[info]](http://l-stat.livejournal.com/img/userinfo.gif){kind=small}
sensibleknave's journal