Eureka!

Z.H., Fellow 1L: “What makes you want to get up and go to work every morning? What keeps you going?”

David M. Hernand, Partner at Gibson Dunn: “Being a lawyer means being a problem-solver. I’m a problem-solver, and I like using my brain everyday.”

The above exchange took place in one of my classes today; the writing department invited Mr. Hernand to speak about the importance of legal writing in practice. His reason for continuing to work as an attorney, especially after leaving the BigLaw life briefly in his career, was enlightening. Not because I’ve never heard it before, but because it’s been a while since I’ve heard something akin to this explanation. And because only yesterday, I could barely articulate why I came to law school in the first place. Yet after hearing Mr. Hernand’s reason, I think I may have rediscovered my own.

In my last post, the problem-solving nature of law may have been what I was getting at. Like I said before, whenever anyone asked me why I decided not to pursue a career in journalism, I always said, “I want to make the news, not report it.” This is not to say that reporters don’t do an important job–believe me, I know the value of a free press, and I wouldn’t sacrifice it for anything. I have an unbelievable respect for and experiential kinship with journalists. But I think becoming a lawyer may have appealed to me more because, really, what I wanted to do as a journalist was fix the world’s problems.

Awareness is certainly a step in that direction. But a cardinal rule of reporting is not to get too involved–although, like all rules, this one has some exceptions. But generally, it’s meant to be followed, all in the name of maintaining at least some semblance of objectivity, or, more accurately, balanced and fair reporting. Except for documentary filmmakers, reporters who frequently go undercover (and tread the line between journalist and activist), and Ernie Pyle, most reporters maintain a certain amount of distance from their sources. As much as I knew these stories needed to be told, I wanted to do more than tell them. In a word, I wanted to act.

My personal history of legal interest now makes more sense. As a journalist, it was natural that I was drawn to constitutional law. And with a J.D., I knew I could make things happen, make change happen (as cheesy as that sounds), rather than simply watch it happen. The same idea applies to my later interest in entertainment law, business law, and intellectual property law–it’s all about solving problems in order to allow innovation to keep happening. It’s about ensuring companies and individuals will continue to create because they feel free to create–with adequate legal protection and different means of further innovation and advancement. By George, I think I’ve got it!

Looks like I’ve found my new tagline: “I enjoy being a problem-solver.” Because honestly, that’s the truth, and it’s been the truth in every career aspiration I’ve had. Now I just have to figure out whose problems I want to solve. But more clarity should come in time. For now, this is good. When people ask me why I decided to go to law school, I no longer have to say, “That’s a loaded question.” Because now, I found the words to articulate the reason. Thank you, Mr. Hernand. Looks like you’ve solved another problem.

And it comes full circle. Excerpts from my law school personal statement:

Discovering the perfect paradox—that seamless fusion of two or more ostensibly opposed perspectives or alternatives—is a challenge I embrace. Wearing the hats of a reporter, an AmeriCorps member and a leader in my university’s Asian Pacific American community requires me to consistently confront professional and personal ambiguities, where only innovative thinking and confident decision-making can resolve the uncertainty. Because of my eclectic experiences, I fearlessly approach familiar problems in new ways and use challenge as a path to success.

[…]

The opportunity to combine my passions for philanthropy, media, and entertainment and to pursue these interests in an intellectually invigorating yet pragmatic environment has ultimately propelled me toward a legal career. Working as a journalist for much of my life and later studying communication and business law in college has caused me to deeply value ideas: entering a profession where I will have the capacity to help individuals as well as companies protect the intangible assets that matter the most to them—creative works and trade secrets—is a natural extension of my identity as a visionary writer. With my educational background and personal experiences, my belief in the inherent promise of a paradox will enhance the synergy of any law school classroom. I reject traditional approaches in favor of new ways to advance and protect what I value, and I see discrepancy as a laboratory rather than a barrier.

It all makes sense now! Who knew that tidbit they always tell you about keeping your personal statement handy and rereading it when you need reminders of the big picture would actually be true? I will never doubt again.

(via)