It’s a wonderful book. Many people say that the English translation is a lot clearer than the German original. It also has footnotes. It made an impression, I won’t say on the legal academy generally, but on that small group of people who were interested in the law and society. It introduced them to Weber’s thought, which is still important. Yes. Again, I’m sure that most colleagues at the University of Chicago law school and elsewhere had only the vaguest idea of who Weber was, and certainly never looked into that book, but those of us who were interested in law and society saw that it was very important, very insightful, very interesting work. To this day people talk about Weber’s thought. They were my plans, but they were not the plans of the University of Chicago law school. So I went into the army, and then I went to work for a law firm, and I thought I had little or no chance ever to go into academia although that was what I really wanted. I worked for a law firm for two and a half years or so in downtown Chicago and I did mostly wills and trusts work. Which was fine. And I won’t say I hated it – no I didn’t hate it – but I didn’t love it. I thought it was fine, and I was making a living. And then I had the opportunity, almost by chance, to get a teaching job in St. Louis. That’s how I entered the academy. A friend of mine who taught at St. Louis, wanted to go on leave and was sure he wouldn’t come back, and he said to them, I can give you a good replacement. And that was me. They hiredme. And then I was there for four years and then went to Wisconsin. I had a very good time at St. Louis; they were very good to me. It was my first school and it was a good experience. Yes, I was already married and both of my children were born in St. Louis. part ii • legal cultures • kjell å modéer 106 So Weber became a discourse in the United States in the 1950s? When you graduated from Chicago, did you plan to go into academia? And by then you were married.
RkJQdWJsaXNoZXIy MjYyNDk=