When you lose, it hurts.

It's hard to be content in a place like NALSAR. You always want more, often at the expense of others. Sometimes, you feel you deserve better than you are given. Then you ask for what you believe you deserve. Being a law student means that you know the power of a petition to the authorities, you know the power of the collective will. You also know the arbitrariness of a system, you recognise that every act is a power struggle and things often get dirty.

So you can keep clear of all of it and pretend like your life is untouched by the muck around you. You can flash a nice smile and get someone with influence to get you that academic leave you so desperately wanted.
Or you can be as presumptuous as hell and think of changing some part of the system.

Some of the nicest people I know on campus have sworn to stay clear; but I find that it's remarkably unfair to make no effort to change a rotten system but to complain about how deep the rot has set in. Some others, I know, acknowledge that the system is totally rotten but seem to have an inclination towards making it work the way they'd like it to, not standing up against it. Some try to work the system while trying to change it. Some cannot reconcile themselves with the complete arbitrariness of the way this place runs and demand to be heard - they cause all hell to break loose.

The last sort, they're the idiots. The type of people you should exhibit to kids on the first day of college and say, "Hey look! That's what you should aim not to be."

Here's why. Law school is remarkably result oriented. If those who stood up against the system could actually get anything done, then they'd be heroes. But, you see, it's a tiny set of people versus an institution that has the might to squash every word said against it (unless they wish to turn it around and use it against you). And, somehow, the fact that the system doesn't listen, is the fault of that tiny set of frustrated losers. It is not the fault of those who have not the courage or inclination to actually voice what they believe in. It is not the fault of those who've fed a fetid system and moulded it to their liking. It is certainly not the fault of those running the system. It's not even the fault of those who work behind the scenes but refuse to be identified with a certain cause.

"Why were you stupid enough to go antagonise them? I could have got it done for you." Doesn't law school teach one about independent agency? Aren't rules meant to be uniform? Isn't there something inherently contradictory in saying that you're trying to clean up a system while you continue to exploit those aspects of it that you find convenient? Isn't it a problem that if I go to Mr X with a request it is denied but the same request enunciated by you is acceded to? Do you have a right to clean up a system the survival of which you are contributing to? Is morality inherently impractical? Is taking a stance not based on pragmatism sheer foolishness? Why are we so against any moral argument? Granted that it's inherently subjective and, to the average utilitarian, pointless, but can we really discard what we believe is right in the face of overwhelming pressure to be practical. Is the end really that important?

I don't think everyone needs to stick up for the same things. Evidently, each person has her/his own concerns. But it becomes hard to swallow when the end seems like the only thing that's important. If someone's actions are inherently wrong but don't really affect my grades, I shall keep mum. The moment they do, I shall act. Do I have the right to act then? Am I not opportunistic? Shall not the system look me in the face and say, "Oh well, you have a motive and now I have an argument against you, plus the might to sit on you."

I feel like a loser today, like all that I've been wishing for over the course of two semesters was utter rubbish. I assumed that if someone can pick on me through two semesters because I chose to actually listen in his class and question him on what he says based on what he asked me to read, then some day he would be forced to account for all of his actions. I assumed that incompetence to such an extent that it cannot be tolerated would demand action against an individual. I assumed that there would be someone who would listen. Instead, we got blank stares. "He threatened you? Forget about it. No teacher can mean any ill-will against a student. It is just not possible. So what if his previous papers were unfairly judged, apprehensions are always baseless."

Now, I shall revolt/talk/whine/petition/argue into my pillows. At least they don't hit you in the face when you least expect it.

Back to Bangalore.

That sounds like I was out for the last 5 months on some kind of world tour. 

I did better.

I survived four months of law school instead. As for why it's better: world tours are fun (if they  are not, don't burst my happy bubble), law school isn't necessarily so.

When I last blogged I'd just finished CLAT. I was scared stiff about my results. I stood firmly convinced that I had blown my only chance to gain admission to the colleges of my dreams. I ranted. 

Then, on the 29th of May, when the results came out, I found out that I had managed something that I was aiming for but the pet grouch against that terrible terrible paper remained. So I wrote a facebook note that very night that ranted some more. Then I wrote a legallyindia blog about it and a huge debate ensued. The next month was spent in a flurry; being ticked off about the CLAT paper was my pet hobby. There was a little birdie that brought to my notice, every now and then, the fact that I was going to live in Hyderabad; I was going to shift out of the accepted comfort of my house into an unknown room somewhere in the middle of nowhere (that's where the NALSAR group on facebook places it). 

And then the farewell parties began. And the birdie reminded me, more often than ever, that it was getting closer to departure date. The lists began coming up (on one of which my friends sweetly mentioned the requirement of a brain to be carried as luggage) and the fantasising about college began. As did conversations with seniors and to be classmates. Facebook. Ah the horrors of excessive facebook-ing. Ask me: I know only too well. 

Right. So we all know how bad I am with dates. I forget when I first walked into the NALSAR campus (no wait, we drove in but walk sounds so much better) but my first impression was: "Hey! This looks pretty, well, pretty!" 

Then we went to the exam hall (Oh joy! What a nice place to enter first.) to get done with the technicalities and then down to the ante-chamber to the VC's room (or that's what I thought it was) where I was struck by the fact that even this loo didn't have a health kit. Shock number one. 

Shock number two: meeting the VC. Details of this conversation (Or, should I say monologue?) are the same for all my batchmates.

Rhodes, Jessups, Moot, Rhodes, Number 1, Rhodes, Isports facilities, Today's generation = lazy fat buggers, Rhodes, Why Law? (He didn't really wait for an answer.), Number 1, Placements, Money, Discipline, No Peer Pressure, Rhodes, Don't listen to the Big Bad Seniors who'll tell you smoking is cool, Yah-Di-Dah.

In between somewhere, I met my roomie. Manasi Gandhi. Hell! I room with M. Gandhi! How cool is that? We started off talking a dozen to a dime and I could hear my dad telling my mother that we'd never be able to get any work accomplished if we were to be left together in a room. That probably explains why we never do study in the same room unless it's imperative that we talk.

Cool. So now I'm a NALSAR-ite. Manasi and I shifted into the hostel on the same day. Room 205, GH4. I knew no one on campus except her. Apparently a large part of the population living on campus knew of me. Not in a manner that is flattering. =/ Yes, well. The less said of the evils of excessive facebook-ing, the better. 

The next four months passed in a whirlwind of the most varied experiences. Law school was nothing that I had dreamed of and everything that I’d dreamed of, all rolled in one. It would be futile to even try to pen down all that I’ve experienced at Nalsar for it simply isn’t something you describe. It’s what one internalizes, attempts to learn from and, sometimes, tries to forget.

Classes are what you make of them. Romance, comedy, serious education or just sleep – it’s all possible in those hours, with (so far) just one exception. English, in law school, had close to nothing to do with English. It was language and the law with an overwhelming stress on law on language. It was made ambudantly (Yes, it’s a word. No kidding.) clear to us that we needed to learn things off by heart to pass our English course. My brain took some time to deal with that. History was what history classes normally are like, except a sudden interest shown by my classmates in terra-cotta horses and their riders. Political science was a whole new experience and tort law was a generally bad experience. Legal methods, on the other hand, was more of what I’d dreamt of when I told my parents that I want to study law and really understand how society works and how people think the way they think and just about where the law comes in…

If this were school, then classes would’ve been a major part of this blog post. The addition of ‘law’ before the ‘school’ changes all of that. These four months were more to do with what happened outside of class: on the lawns that adorn the campus, in the mess, in the library (apart from the usual swotting), in hostels, on the batch google group (don’t raise your eyebrows, it is the medium for much drama) and, well, elsewhere.

What happens when you have 400-odd people (I’m talking of only the LL. B. students) stuck together in an isolated campus? You have the most detailed knowledge about everyone around. So you sneeze and people begin asking you if you’re ill. Is this a good thing? Well, in the sense that you know most people around, it is. From the point of view that one has close to zero privacy, it isn’t. But then, with people who see you at your worst and at your best, is there any question of privacy in the first place?

Of course, there is a sudden routine that you’re thrust into and over a period it becomes natural. For me, wake up at 0840 and realize (with a yelp) that it’s so late! Get dressed and scoot to class. On the way grab a little breakfast if possible. Sleep through classes, wake up for the break and walk out and take a breath of fresh air, get coffee or food from ‘Needz’ during the long break and then continue sleeping through classes. Run for lunch, except on Mondays when you drag your feet to the dining hall because lunch is that bad. Go back to the hostel, dump your bag, sleep or gossip. 1630 hours – tea/coffee.

Till the above paragraph, I knew what I wanted to write about. Then I gave it a month long break. So now I no longer know. Law school’s like that, a day and everything changes. Or, from another angle, nothing ever changes. I have 9 semesters more to go. By then, I’ll cover as much of law school as I can. Promise. Before that, I shall have to master the art of using vtunnel and not losing my mind because it’s so frustratingly slow. Ah, yes. I forgot. Blogspot is blocked in college. As are most other websites that one would want to visit for entertainment. They’re very serious about keeping us studying, these folk. Poor deluded souls.

<Note: It has been brought to my notice that blogspot is no longer blocked in college. If so, I couldn't be happier.>

Also, ambudantly isn't a word. Obviously. =P