TLC: Another Source
Snarkdom has found its way into the comments section of this blog as regards the Trial Lawyers College and Gerry Spence. We have a new anonymous writer obsessed with me. It is to the point that when I pass gas the poor fellow, or gal, gets an ear ache. In TLC-speak, the writer has given up his power; urban readers might note that I have a new, er, um, well, let's bust say witch with a "b". Thank you for the gift, I suppose. But must it come in the form of a dead fish, wrapped in anonymous paper?
I am wondering about the wisdom of anonymous posts, and I am distressed that so many folks write with passion but then fail to own what they say. When I have raised questions about this, writers have responded that fear governs. They don't want to offend friends, or they are afraid they will become the target of scorn, or that they won't be invited back to serve as staff at college events. The college, it seems, breeds something less than confidence.
All this hush, hush sweet Charlotte chatter has the feel of whispering in a convent: the nuns are unchaste and enjoy their lasciviousness. But if they own their pleasures they'll be forced out on to the street. I am close to a decision to refuse acceptance of anonymous comments, but, being a good whore myself, I like the company of other unchaste souls.
Here's some miscellany about the college for those needing a fix of fresh information:
1. Multiple sources confirm that R. Rex Parris is now counsel to the college. Parris is also mayor of the Town of Lancaster in California. He is a member of the college board. He has been a go-to player for Gerry Spence in recent years. I'm told by two sources that he was asked to resign from the TLC board, but refused to do so. One wag commented today that Parris was punished by being promoted. I'd like to discuss it with Parris, who reached out a few weeks ago to talk. Our schedules have not yet permitted that. Rex: I know you're reading. Give me a call. I promise I will not tell. It is a promise I have thus far kept with regards to correspondence from another TLC powerhouse who has asked me to keep his missive a secret.
2. The TLC web site still does not reflect the recent blood bath of those removed from the board: Communication is slow at the college these days. I'm told by a person familiar with the recent history of the college that the removal of Bettinger, Sison, Bratcher and Larimer is widely unpopular among alumni. These folks are revered as stars by many. Larimer, a long-time psychodramatist is said to be on the endangered staff list, and may well be saying good bye to the college forever, or so I am told. She doesn't want to go.
3. One correspondent has speculated that one or more board members is an anonymous commenter on this blog page, and, perhaps, on the blog page of former Executive Director, Joane Garcia-Colson. When I responded by saying that this couldn't possibly be true as the comments are loopy and poorly written, I was told it almost certainly could be true as several of the current board members write English as though it were a second language. My suspicion is that a close friend or relative of Spence's is writing anonymously: the writer bosts of their senior status, is a cloying and uncreative sycophant, and is possessed of a long and ancient memory of all things Gerry. Could it be a former board member close to the master? It is a wifely sort of loyalty. You can check out Garcia-Colson's blog for more TLC stuff at: http://www.ljgc.wordpress.com/
4. Expect to see staffing of psychodramatists reduced at forthcoming events. At the creation, there were two at each of the summer sessions. There was grumbling a plenty about the costs when the number was increased to three.
5. I don't subscribe to the Warrior, so I don't know if the new administration has yet to place its imprimatur on the publication. Jude Basile, the new nominal president, is said to have a new vision for the future of the college. What is it?
6. As yet, the college has ignored the question that led me to rake the fetid muck of hypocrisy: Why does the Spence Foundation own the ranch, renting it to the college under terms of a lease that can be revoked unilaterally by the foundation? What would become of the $2 million or so in the TLC coffers if this happened? TLC would still possess the funds, unless the organization folded, in which case it would be required to transfer those funds to a like institution. Hmm? The Spence Foundation revokes the lease. TLC decided to fold its tent. TLC's money goes to the Spence Foundation? Even I am not that cynical.
But now for the best news of all: I am losing interest in the college. Those who counsel that ignoring critics will yield silence are right. I'll be attending a new trial practice seminar this spring; invitations will soon be sent I am told. Another group of 20 or so folks met recently under auspices independent of hero worship and cant.
So, keep the comments coming. But please own them. Or is that too much to ask?