arez wrote: DoubleChecks wrote:
iThwl wrote:Could anyone compare Robert Clark & Guhan Subramanian for corporations? which one do you recommend?
DEFINITELY Subramanian. I have heard great things about him. Lots of friends took his classes and liked them. Clark is aight for corps; I had him. He was kind of boring (but I mean, it is corps), is slightly entertaining when he sings his songs, but deep down is probably a bit racist/sexist/etc. Maybe not even that deep down. It becomes apparent when certain comments slip out of his mouth, and when I heard he was the HLS dean during the whole Frug and gender inequality scandal in the 90s, my reaction was, "Hm, not surprised." Sounds harsh, but he's not a bad guy -- more like one of those old privileged ones who don't realize calling someone an 'Oriental' is now deemed inappropriate. I personally found it more entertaining than offensive, and again, it isn't particularly apparent or anything. Certainly not Mnookin-level inappropriate haha.
Expand on the Frug and gender inequality scandal? I like old HLS dirt.
I don't remember all the details, but it was about the wife of HLS Professor Frug who was murdered in the 90s I believe. They didn't catch the killer, and a yr later, on the anniversary of her death, the Harvard Law Review had published this parody that it did every yr. It was distributed at this HLS faculty dinner that, mercifully, Frug may not have attended. But anyways, in this parody, there was one that made fun of Frug's deceased wife, who may have been a vocal feminist. The HLR parody had her dead self or something having discussions with various people and whatnot, but sprinkled throughout the whole thing were sexist footnotes and just pretty insulting things. Well, needless to say, that caught wildfire and was used as an example of how male-centric and sexist the Harvard Law Review had become at the time. Most members of HLS were (and still are) men, but this incident was used to show a general acceptance by the group of thinking stuff like this was okay. Lots of plausible deniability went on, even though multiple editors had to have seen it before it was published, etc.
The whole thing grew even bigger into a school-wide discussion about gender equality, with people like Nesson saying how HLS did not hire enough female faculty/professors, and with some on the other side saying, at the time, that there weren't enough female faculty because there just weren't enough qualified ones. Back and forth, and Clark was the dean of the school at the time who was sort of like, "Aw crap, I don't want to deal with this. I don't think this is a big issue (even though it is imo), but I can't simply say that!" <-- not an actual quote by him, I am now just speaking for him in a biased way haha. Changes were made, some female professors were hired, but the problem is far from "solved"...sort of like racial inequality
What is scary is that this all happened in the 1990s. Whaaa...heck, I think Harvard ugrad gave out differently titled degrees to female graduates well into the 90s as well. Harvard, as an institution, tends to move slowly imo, even though it is in the liberal NE. But Minnow (and probably Kagan) seems to be willing to change some things, if only aesthetics. A lot of my minor complaints during 1L yr have been fixed, almost as if by magic!
Horrible Harvard IT that is slow and makes us all wait in queues...next yr, new IT system! Ugly architecture and ugly law school buildings...next yr? New WCC law school building that is badass! Harvard EIP is too late compared to other schools, becoming a disadvantage...next yr? EIP moved up! Dorms are really ugly...now I hear they are getting renovated too lol. You get the drift. Before I came in, the current grading policy and exams BEFORE instead of AFTER winter break were instituted as well.