I had an interview for an internship yesterday. The interviewer asked me if I enjoy law school. I was fairly honest in telling him that I neither love it nor hate it. There are some aspects I enjoy, and other aspects I don’t enjoy. He told me that I was the first person he’s ever interviewed who expressed any ambivalence about law school—everyone he’s interviewed loves law school. I’m not sure if that means I violated some unwritten rule about interviews that you just always say you love law school, even though (almost) no one really does. Or, he was covertly acknowledging that most people who say they love law school are full of crap.
What’s the “right” answer to that question in an interview?
UPDATE: My answer must have been acceptable, because I got the job.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
14 comments:
Maybe ask them what they thought about law school and then tailor your answer based upon their response? That's a bit devious, though...
Potty training? Simple?
*trying not to hit the wet paint on the wall while rolling on the floor laughing*
The last I checked, the 92nd Street Y nursery school program was reserved for retards denied admission to Dalton's nursery school program.
This is rich! u of chicago law, you're going to be a grand addition to this blogging community. You're a legend in only a day.
No way! HS has to be shitting himself right now.
I can't help but think that the revelation of personal details (place of employment, law school, year, etc.) isn't either a) stupid or b) intended to get someone fired that doesn't deserve to be. Plus he reminds me of some of the twits I went to high school with. Yawn...
As for the superiority of the Y over Dalton, I have difficulty seeing the connection between lectures, exhibits, and a nursery school program. Do Ketchup head and Bubbah teach toddlers not to tinkle during nap time? I think not...
...definitely intended to get someone fired.
Didn't Phillips take in JFK Jr. after he failed out of a Manhattan prep school? Methinks it did...
I meant Junior no disrespect. Phillips, on the other hand...;-)
Good point on the cachet. However, at the time, the story goes that Junior left with his tail between his legs. These days I'm sure the school ignores his early exit in their admissions brochures. But Andover still got some sloppy seconds, even if they were "man pretty."
though i haven't had that many interviews, my policy is always to be honest. do you really want to work for a company where they expect you to love law school? you are interviewing the firm too. you need to find one that fits you. if they can't handle the fact that you aren't in love with law school, then maybe that's not the right firm for you.
Back to the topic at hand:
I think the right answer is the honest one. Regardless of the industry, if it's a good firm, the interviewer will likely have a pretty good bullshit detector, and you don't want to set it off. And even if it's not such a good firm, it's best not to be caught in any relaxation of the truth later on, should you choose to work there.
Best interview I ever had: Interviewer starts telling me how much he is angry at the lawyer down the hall for putting LA Lakers bobbleheads by his door. I say, "If Detroit wins tonight, put Bandaids over their eyes tomorrow." He says "fantastic idea!" I got the job.
Worst interview I ever had: Interviewer: "You know, the first time I read your name I almost threw your resume away because I didn't think you spoke English"
almost as bad as...
"So, you're a 3L, huh?"
"No, I'm a 2L."
"Your resume has the wrong graduation date then..." --D'OH!!!
this U Chicago guy is rich. Then again, Chicago's no Yale, Harvard, or Stanford--in fact, 99% of the world has never heard of it. I suspect those U Chicagoers probably have severe inferiority complexes, especially since most non-lawyers think Northwestern, NYU, Cornell--hell, Florida are better. Clearly the guy's joshing, but whatever, we need some faux pricks to liven things up now and then.
this U Chicago guy is rich. Then again, Chicago's no Yale, Harvard, or Stanford--in fact, 99% of the world has never heard of it. I suspect those U Chicagoers have severe inferiority complexes, especially since most non-lawyers think Northwestern, NYU, Cornell--hell, Florida are better. Clearly the guy's joshing, but whatever, we need some faux pricks to liven things up now and then. I'm always interested in the relativity of the world; there are the super honchos who should retire to a Carribean island, and yet they pull 18 hour days because they got to beat the super super honchos. We at CU are going against DU & co.--can't really even get feisty about big-time schools. Chicago types hate Yale and Harvard types because those are brand names and Chicago means nothing. Northwestern types hate Chicago because everyone knows their school but they're still #2 in Chi-town. Always clawing up the imagined social ladder. What's on top? Who gets cocky on an anonymous blog, unless they have serious tiem to kill?
I need some coffee.
Post a Comment