Oral Advocacy, Success & Self-Gratification

This past weekend I participated in the 2007-2008 Northeastern Black Law Students Association Fredrick Douglass Moot Court Competition in Newark, New Jersey. “Fred Doug” is substantially more time-consuming than the traditional Foundation Moot Court program due to its intense oral advocacy component. I reasoned that it would be time well-spent given my aspirations of becoming a litigator. Since last November and even more so since I received my first semester grades, my sense of intellectual self-worth has been channeled into preparing for this competition.

I experienced an adrenaline rush as my co-counsel and I sat across the table from our opponents before the quarter-final round. It was uncannily similar to the feeling I used to get before kick-off in my former life as collegiate and international rugby player. Right before the coin toss to determine if I was going to regurgitate my petitioner or respondent argument, I told myself that “this” (my simultaneous feeling of anxiety and prowess) is what “it” (competition) is all about. I naively believed that the overall experience and the skills I have acquired were my only objectives for participating in Fred Doug. As I fought back tears at the awards banquet the following evening, it became alarmingly clear that I had hoped to gain more than those intangibles from the competition. In the athletic setting, I have endured torn ligaments, broken bones and the agony of defeat, yet I can recall only one occasion when I cried. Thus, my little moment at the awards banquet forced me to take stock in how and why I allowed myself to get carried away.

Like virtually all of my fellow classmates at CLS, I am used to success. There are boxes of dusty trophies, medals and plaques in my mother’s garage to prove it. The formula for a good portion of my professional, academic and athletic experiences has been: hard work + self-doubt = success.

The first two definitions of “success” according to www.dictionary.com are: (1) “the favorable or prosperous termination of attempts or endeavors,” and (2) “the attainment of wealth, position, honors, or the like.” My conception of success includes both definitions: tangible results, the intrinsic feeling of having accomplished something I am proud of and the gratification attained when others (formally) take notice. I am embarrassed to acknowledge the last component, but it exists and it was the only thing missing from the culmination of my Fred Doug experience.

I have never questioned whether the intrinsic value of competition could ever be enough for me. My respective activities have all been successful at least at some point in time, meaning that I received recognition from others. And this has been enough to justify the entire process, including my antecedent defeats and failures. Would I have devoted as much time to schoolwork and sports if I knew I only stood to achieve concrete results and/or intrinsic benefits without any recognition whatsoever from anyone? Would a well-written essay or first place finish have meant as much to me if all prior schoolwork had been pass/fail and my prior athletic pursuits did not include any audiences or press coverage? As repulsed as I was to learn from Eben that former CLS students rejected the “no grades” proposal, perhaps the only difference between me and those students is my lack of assuredness in my capabilities as a legal scholar.

I am starting to think that my One-L angst (which was much more pronounced last semester) has much less to do with my intellectual development and more to do with an unfamiliar dearth of recognition from others relative to the recognition I have received in previous academic and other competitive experiences. This may have been obvious for some of my peers from day one, but it has taken Fred Doug to bring this reality to the forefront for me. I worked hard to prepare a coherent brief and develop oral arguments for both sides of the certified question. The same is true for all twenty-nine of my Columbia Fred Doug teammates. Their intellect and efforts should not and do not diminish what I have acquired and accomplished in the process.

The keynote address at the Fred Doug awards banquet could not have been timelier. Former New Jersey Attorney General Peter C. Harvey (CLS class of ‘82) warned us not to allow our legal career to be driven by our egos. Mr. Harvey did not say anything particularly novel relative to what has been discussed in this class or on the wiki. However, his comments juxtaposed with my silliness about the whole awards business have allowed me to look at my career aspirations in a new way.

I have convinced myself, at least for the time being, that it will not be too difficult to foreswear a big law firm salary. However, I have not previously considered the extent to which I run the risk of seeking prestige as a proxy for big money. My Fred Doug experience has taught me that I have a hard and unhappy road ahead of me if I place more value in being recognized than in doing the job that needs to get done and/or learning whatever I am supposed to learn. I do not want to become another crab clawing my way through the do-gooder barrel for fellowships that unmistakably convey to the world, “I am not at a big firm earning a big salary, but I could be if I wanted to.” I suppose this is at least partially what “creative lawyering” is all about.

-- FeliciaGilbert - 19 Feb 2008

<--/commentPlugin-->