You may ask yourself, well, how did I get here?

I was bored.

If I think about it honestly, I must admit to myself that I applied to law school because I was bored with teaching, and I was looking for something to fill my days. I suppose I should also admit that I had been spurned by a woman (who was probably just out for social climbing anyway) and maybe that pushed me towards wanting to try a more "glamourous" career. I also tell the story of how I got a ticket for not having a fare card on the AMT to Blainville, where I was going to talk to a grade school class about running. I was honestly mistaken, and I went to court and pleaded so with the judge and I won. I had also gone through a divorce (not the same woman, haha), and it was remarkably easy from a legal point of view (because we had no possessions or children to divide, I'm sure). I went home for a high school reunion, and everyone was a lawyer. So all signs were pointing to the law. But in retrospect, it wasn't a very informed decision; it was much more of a whim, and the base of it was I was bored.

After four years of living in the legal world, I have to say that it was worth it. Even if I don't pass this exam, it will have been worth it. McGill is, even if I can't say the best (because who knows how they measure those things), at the very least one of the best law schools in Canada, and perhaps the world. It is also the cheapest, thanks to Quebec resident tuition. So while going to law school on a whim might be a foolish and perhaps even financially disastrous idea elsewhere, in my situation it was not so bad.

It was worth it because one of my "goals" going into law school was to learn more about how the world works. A friend of mine (one of the many SMC alum who became a lawyer...interestingly he recently gave up his post at a bay street firm after only 4 years I think...hmm...) described the law as the rules behind the world. Or something like that. And I think if you are living in the world, playing by the rules, or at least knowing them, is pretty important. On that goal, I have to say, mission accomplished.

But I am not sure I had too many other goals. Making money was never a goal, at least, not money for the sake of it. It's a pretty easy equation, really: you can make high-five, low-six figures, but you spend all your time in the office. I'm not someone who likes to spend time in the office. I never had my eye on a particular job, or particular area of law, until very recently. Anyone who does is naive and misinformed, anyway (or very very well-informed, I suppose). There's a pretty big disconnect between each of the steps required to become a lawyer. The LSAT is not really comparable to law school exams. Law school, and it's exams, are not really comparable to the vast majority of legal work. That's because law school is based on appeals cases, which are generally what makes the law. Most lawyers work either on contracts or on first-instance cases, which are all about facts. There aren't too many facts in law school. The jump to bar school is similar to the jump from law school to real cases. The disconnect in bar school, in my opinion, is that we are asked to solve problems in only one way. That's a big difference from the real world. Not a leap for anyone who has dealt with bureaucracy in Quebec (or anywhere, I suppose), but for the people who run l'école du barreau, there is only one way. It doesn't bother them that many lawyers in Quebec think they are out to lunch. One lawyer said to me, and I quote "le barreau c'est notre pire ennemi." Ouch. But there are enough stick-in-the-muds to keep up the joke.

As I said, I do think I have an idea of what I would like to do as a lawyer. It's pretty specific. I would be happy with a job as a criminal prosecutor, probably someone who specifies in cases involving section 672 and following of the Criminal Code. You can look that up. ;) Apparently the DPCP (Crown Prosecutor's office in Montreal) think I'm at least worth a look: I have an interview with them next week. So clearly I have been doing something right.

If I don't get that job (and it's a very competitive process, the bar exam is just one issue. I may not get it even if I pass), there are many other avenues. The part-time teachers at Concordia got a nice settlement and a raise, so teaching there is actually a reasonable financial possibility. There aren't too many well-paid distance running coaches in Canada, but with the time I would have as a teacher (one course=5 hrs a week, tops) I could definitely dedicate the time required to the athletes to bring them to the top level (the coach's renown and reward just follows the athlete's performance...but that's a whole other post). I am in the general provincial government employment pool, so if I wanted a boring desk job that pays reasonably well, I could probably get one there. I'd be disappointed at not being a criminal prosecutor, yes, but I would not be disappointed at not being a lawyer, generally. Because I never really set out to be one. Seems odd, but looking back, that's the case.

That's what happens when you don't set clear goals: if you don't know where you are going, how are you going to get there?