Legal Commentary

I don't really have any advice about the law school hiring process, primarily because I do not think I've been around long enough to have accumulated advice.  I did just go through the process and have been malingering around law schools for the past few years in temporary roles, and I do have a few observations that may be peculiar to me and my experience, or perhaps others have noted exactly the same phenomena, in which case I'll just be restating the obvious and adding nothing new.

Here's my first observation: it is not advisable to be deemed "theoretical," and it's certainly no good when one is deemed too "theoretical."  I'm not exactly certain what is meant by "theoretical," other than a pejorative judgment.  Possible and non-exclusive meanings may be impractical, insufficiently attuned to the urgencies of the quotidian, disconnected with students' concerns, inadequately grounded in legal doctrine, abstruse, contemplative to the point of paralysis (think Justice Tatting in The Speluncean Explorers), and directed at too narrow and specialized an audience -- one which commands more attention than it, at all events, merits.  Surely there are many others.  But whatever "theoretical" is, it seems to generate the uncontrollable urge to roll back one's eyes in ennui.  So for job candidates, it's best avoided.

The difficult part is that I'm at something of a loss for how to avoid it.  Sure, there are the tell-tale signs: Ph.D.s in non-legal disciplines do nothing to allay "theoretical" suspicion.  But it's been my experience that one doesn't need to have a Ph.D. in order to receive the troublesome label.  It may be the subjects that one chooses to write about, one's writing style, one's speaking style, one's thinking style, the things one likes to talk about over dinner, the books one has up on one's shelf, one's background, one's taste in cognac, and so on.  It's hard to know how the designation is conferred, but once conferred, it's quite difficult to shake.  And if one is "too" theoretical, that may well be taken as a disqualifying mark.

Now, as I said, these observations are particular to me and I do not purport to offer them as "advice."  And there are likely as many opinions about the desirability of the "theoretical" candidate as there are meanings of the term itself.