Wednesday 25 May 2011

Pupillage Interviews: The Truth

They're not that bad. Not that I've secured a pupillage yet, mind. But, still, not that bad.

Non one's taken great pleasure in tripping me up, either in argument or, even, in a physical sense as I entered the room. Everyone has been pleasant.

Because I had, as I assume you have, heard the stories. The whispered tones, the way that the storyteller won't give you a straight answer when you ask 'at which chambers were you immersed, new suit and polished shoes, into the Temple fountain before being paraded along Fleet Street, wet and drowned and despondent?' I think, I fear, that my sources may have been exaggerating.

But 'not bad' doesn't mean 'not difficult'. The questions were difficult. They've tested my logic, pushed me (gently, though) on a point, given me an advocacy exercise (argue for X, argue against X) and even asked me some HR type questions ('when have you displayed leadership qualities?). That last one- leadership- was impossible. There was no way to answer it without making myself sound like I thought myself some kind of messianic diplomat or, in a simpler term, an arse.

And I know what you may be thinking. Oh, well, whoever is writing this clearly demonstrated the aptitude of- I don't know, you can fill in that- and the interviewing chambers felt sorry for the spectacularly poor applicant and gave them an easy time. This may, indeed, be true for some of my applications; but not, however, for all. I made it through to the final four or five candidates for half of my applications so far. My experiences of the pupillage selection process are, to a point, reliable.

Really, all I wanted to say was this: the interviews really aren't that bad. The interviewing barristers seem to be very nice people indeed.

None nice enough yet to offer me a pupillage. But, anyway.

No comments:

Post a Comment