Yale 250

(Personal Statement Examples, Advice, Critique, . . . )
anubis1911
Posts: 150
Joined: Sat May 04, 2013 12:41 am

Yale 250

Postby anubis1911 » Thu Sep 12, 2013 9:05 pm

Give me some topics you've written about? I read the TLS book, but I need a better idea of what to write about.

User avatar
jselson
Posts: 6337
Joined: Sat Jan 05, 2013 3:51 am

Re: Yale 250

Postby jselson » Thu Sep 12, 2013 10:34 pm

This was mine:

jselson wrote:"In analyzing the representation of sexual consent in the arts, sincerity and authenticity are the most often-cited critical justifications. However, as Judith Butler has asserted, authenticity is a poor critical mechanism as it privileges hegenomic structures at the expense of the queer. Within the legal sphere, the emphasis on the moment of the giving of consent also privileges those structures that turn human relationships into forms of contract. Butler's famous notion of "gender performativity" may help in crafting a new understanding of artists' and society's approaches to consent, one that recognizes its epistemological and ontological limits.

For example, the rock artist Meat Loaf’s highly theatrical and campy approach to consent in “I’d Do Anything for Love (But I Won’t Do That)” recognizes and plays with the fluidity of the objects of consent’s intentionality by leaving ambiguous the question of precisely what “that” is. The cosmological focus on hell, the planets, dreams, and prayer reveals the ideological parameters that craft what individuals recognize as needing consent as well as the terms of that consent, and yet also recognizes the unconscious drives that prevent intentionality from ever attaining the pure rationality of the contract: “Some nights I lose the feeling, / Some nights I lose control, / Some nights I just lose it all when I watch you dance and the thunder rolls.” Meat Loaf moves from the role of victim to that of voyeur and magus as his ability to communicate his intentions dissipates. Intentionality in consent laws is a normative legal fiction that assumes a stable identity, and yet the concept of performativity as it is embodied in art shows that identities always remain contextual."

jshaffer740
Posts: 34
Joined: Mon Jul 22, 2013 8:48 am

Re: Yale 250

Postby jshaffer740 » Tue Sep 17, 2013 11:32 am

jselson wrote:This was mine:

jselson wrote:"In analyzing the representation of sexual consent in the arts, sincerity and authenticity are the most often-cited critical justifications. However, as Judith Butler has asserted, authenticity is a poor critical mechanism as it privileges hegenomic structures at the expense of the queer. Within the legal sphere, the emphasis on the moment of the giving of consent also privileges those structures that turn human relationships into forms of contract. Butler's famous notion of "gender performativity" may help in crafting a new understanding of artists' and society's approaches to consent, one that recognizes its epistemological and ontological limits.

For example, the rock artist Meat Loaf’s highly theatrical and campy approach to consent in “I’d Do Anything for Love (But I Won’t Do That)” recognizes and plays with the fluidity of the objects of consent’s intentionality by leaving ambiguous the question of precisely what “that” is. The cosmological focus on hell, the planets, dreams, and prayer reveals the ideological parameters that craft what individuals recognize as needing consent as well as the terms of that consent, and yet also recognizes the unconscious drives that prevent intentionality from ever attaining the pure rationality of the contract: “Some nights I lose the feeling, / Some nights I lose control, / Some nights I just lose it all when I watch you dance and the thunder rolls.” Meat Loaf moves from the role of victim to that of voyeur and magus as his ability to communicate his intentions dissipates. Intentionality in consent laws is a normative legal fiction that assumes a stable identity, and yet the concept of performativity as it is embodied in art shows that identities always remain contextual."


Nice 250. But as a huge fan of The Loaf :), I have to correct you - he wasn't ambiguous at all about what "that" is. He answers it several times throughout the song :D:
  • "But I'll never forget the way you feel right now, oh no, no way ... Oh I would do anything for love, but I won't do that"
  • "But I'll never forgive myself if we don't go all the way tonight...Oh I would do anything for love, but I won't do that"
  • "But I'll never do it better than I do it with you, so long, so long...Oh I would do anything for love, but I won't do that"
  • "But I'll never stop dreaming of you every night of my life, no way...Oh I would do anything for love, but I won't do that"
  • "After a while you'll forget everything / It was a brief interlude and a midsummer night's fling / And you'll see that it's time to move on...I won't do that, no I won't do that"
  • "And sooner or later you'll be screwin' around...I won't do that, no I won't do that"

It's really just a bunch of 7sage referential phrasing - a lot of people miss it :). Hopefully you take this in the toungue-and-cheek spirit it was meant - no discussion of Mr. Loaf should be done with any pretense :).




Return to “Law School Personal Statements”

Who is online

The online users are hidden on this forum.