The reason change in the legal environment has not been more profound more quickly is that nobody wants to be a grunt.
A grunt, of course, is slang meaning infantryman or footman. These are very highly disciplined soldiers, who possess much discipline, who fight primarily with small arms. The Infantryman's Creed of the U.S. Marine Corps is ""To locate, close with, and destroy the enemy by fire and maneuver; and to repel the enemy's assault by fire and close combat."
Just as in law school, grunts are one of the most rigorous of occupations. Third Wave attorneys simply use cheap tech instead of small arms. With a PDA in one's hand and a notebook computer in one's lap, we operate with the instruction of the law, of the code, but what this accomplishes is ultimately up to us.
To often, maybe, we see grunts in the image of Rambo. But, the truth of the matter is that we learn to be self sufficient. We can work in teams or we can work on our own. We have the luxury of versatility that office politics to often restricts with Big Law.
The problem is that many, and maybe most, lawyers coming out of law school do not want to see themselves as grunts. They would rather see themselves as the royal prince and princess who commands the footmen. They see themselves as the officers. The see themselves as the generals. They wish to rule from a perch. Spout commands. They desire to strategize, but not to implement. To give orders, not take them. If this is not the position the lawyer is in, it is too often the position if which he or she dreams.
In our second wave law firms kingdoms are based upon high rise castles, armies of associates and junior partners, and support of paralegals, assistants and secretaries. They concern themselves more with tactics than the law. More on loopholes than the truth. Right or wrong is not the issue.
I guess in 1999 I abdicated my thrown. I voluntarily demoted myself back down to grunt. What I have learned is being a grunt is not too bad. I have to rely on myself. I must collaborate with other grunts instead of just following orders. I do not have the prestige or clamor of the head honcho, but nor do I have the worries, obligations or concerns of the man at the top. But, what is mine is mine. When I have to rely on myself I have nobody to disappoint but myself. I have nobody to support but myself. When I am at war it is notebook to notebook combat, but my obligation ends after the battle, and I am free to be who I really am. I do not need, and I no longer crave, the attention or the accompaniment, the pomp or the circumstance, or the difficult decision of the royal prince.
I enjoy being a grunt.
Okay, okay, I know little enough of anything, and I try not to "sharpshoot" and constantly correct people (especially our generous and gracious host)...but..."To locate, close with, and destroy the enemy by fire and maneuver; and to repel the enemy's assault by fire and close combat." is the "Mission of the Marine Rifle Squad".
The "Infantryman's Creed" is that little ditty that the Army puts out that goes: "I AM THE INFANTRY!
FOLLOW ME!"
It's different.
Just wanted to distinguish those two from one another.
USMC 79-82
0351
Posted by: PerGynt | January 02, 2008 at 11:01 PM