I've been told that the Anonymous Lawyer blog is mentioned in a column in Friday's Wall Street Journal. Wondering if anyone happens to have a copy and wouldn't mind throwing it in the mail (I'll PayPal you the postage if you want). Alternatively, I'm not averse to someone throwing a Wall Street Journal username/password my way, but I'm guessing that's a tougher request. Anyway, shoot me an e-mail if you've got the article and wouldn't mind parting with it...
UPDATE: Oops. It's actually available free on the WSJ site, over here.
The line about me: "Mr. Blachman wrote screeds in the voice of a fictional law firm partner that
effectively made him unemployable by any major firm, then unveiled himself to
the Times. His novel will be published this summer by Henry Holt."
Hmmm. I'm not terribly concerned if it's true that I'm "unemployable by any major firm," but I guess maybe that's true, I suppose. I'd certainly understand if a firm was reluctant to hire me, worried I'd just be using it as material for "Anonymous Lawyer: Return of the Jedi," but if I signed some sort of non-disclosure "I won't write about you, even fictionally" agreement, and was genuinely willing to do the work and be a good associate, am I really so dangerous? I'd like to think there are bigger threats out there (see, e.g., Cravath associate having sex with teenage girls). All I'm doing is writing some harmless satire. Eh, whatever.
The author of the WSJ piece, Cameron Stracher, has a book about law firm life called "Double Billing." I read it a few years ago, and I liked it.
That statement about you being unemployable is a bit drastic to be hanging the entire article on it.
I find it hard to believe that you are "avoiding practicing law at all costs." I get the feeling that writing was just more fun, and it happened to work out for you. I really don't think that no large firm would hire you now, if that is what you wanted (especially with a non-disclosure agreement). But, we all have to remember that law practice doesn't end with the big firm.
I also can't beleive that the author implies that your book won't be successful because it's in "blog" format, and perhaps too real. What a speculative argument. It's new and interesting, and something that hasn't been done. Not everyone can be John Grisham, but that doesn't mean you won't be successful.
Posted by: Jen | March 27, 2006 at 12:48 PM
Seems to me that Mr. Stracher may be a little jealous -- you know, him being a "serious" writer trying to pen the next great American novel, and you being a blogger on the verge of literary success. The implication is that you "cheated"... you're not a real writer and you just want to avoid practicing law. Bull, I say, as I have enjoyed "Anonymous Lawyer" much more than the last couple Grisham novels.
Posted by: Dabbler | March 27, 2006 at 01:53 PM
The piece strikes me as a little unfair given that Stracher could have easily waited until your book came out and then, having actually read it, write pretty much the same piece. In addition to being preemptive, the piece also serves as an easy dodge, because when your book is successful, Stracher can praise you for having overcome the shortcomings of the book's blog influence and format.
Posted by: MattP | March 27, 2006 at 09:36 PM
I also think it's odd that he lumps you with two bloggers who were writing in a completely different idiom to yours. And I don't think Anonymous Lawyer has burned any professional bridges for you--frankly, the kind of partners who wouldn't want the author of AL working with them are not the kind of partners you'd want to work for.
One characteristic of the mediocre mind is the tendency to lump together and discard superficially similar things with which it has but the most passing acquaintance.
RES
Posted by: RES | March 27, 2006 at 10:08 PM