
It would seem that the poster from the 1920's Joan Crawford flick which had set off an earlier blog post found a way of staying with me until I could exorcise it !
A quasi stream-of-consciousness dumping ground for my thoughts, so I can make room for new thoughts.
“ The noble art (of law), which had once been preserved as the sacred inheritance of the patricians, was fallen into the hands of freedmen and plebeians, who, with cunning rather than with skill, exercised a sordid and pernicious trade. Some of them procured admittance into families for the purpose of fomenting differences, of encouraging suits, and of preparing a harvest of gain for themselves or their brethren. Others, recluse in their chambers, maintained the gravity of legal professors, by furnishing a rich client with subtleties to confound the plainest truth, and with arguments to colour the most unjustifiable pretensions. The splendid and popular class was composed of the advocates, who filled the Forum with the sound of their turgid and loquacious rhetoric. Careless of fame and justice, they are described for the most part as ignorant and rapacious guides, who conducted their clients through a maze of expense, delay, and of disappointment; from whence, after a tedious series of years, they were at length dismissed, when their patience and fortune were almost exhausted. “
" To exercise high command successfully one has to have an infinite capacity for taking pains and for careful preparation; and one has also to have an inner conviction which at times will transcend reason. Having fought, possibly over a long period, for the advantage and gained it, there then comes the moment for boldness. When that moment comes, will you throw your bonnet over the mill and soar from the known to seize the unknown ? In the answer to this question lies the supreme test of generalship in high command. "
My friend Sherman's take on this is worth sharing: