It’s half over. There was an annoying little man in my dreams last night; he had black spectacles and a reedy voice and followed me around rasping “interpretation, interpretation” when he wasn’t engaged in unintelligible mumbling. Without needing to don my armchair dream interpreter hat, I think I can safely say that he was very much inspired by this man, whose existence I was hoping to completely ignore in today’s jurisprudence exam due to my hatred of his Law’s Empire. I unfortunately failed in this noble endeavour, but am comforted by the fact that I only invoked his evil name in criticizing Fuller’s The Morality of Law, which richly deserved the criticism anyway.
So much for the fun exams. Today’s went fairly well compared to public international law last Thursday, where I found myself answering an essay entirely from hazy memories of the Human Rights Act, which I studied in 1999. I daresay much more has happened since then than Naomi Campbell’s grudge match with the tabloids, and I’m sure actually studying the topic would have allowed me to write an essay more than one page long, but such is life.
And now to Conflict of Laws next Monday (which I haven’t started studying for) and Company Law the day after. I think the bullshitting possibilities of these exams ran out today. Ulp.