Lawyers aren't corporate. Lawyers are corporate people's tools. No matter how high you rise, if you're still a practicing attorney you're probably little more than a gun in the holster of an even richer guy with an nicer suit.
I blame this message board. All these years spent arguing about an artform that consists of people spewing mostly-meaningless rhetoric but trying to sound fly while doing it...
I'm at Drexel, which is, I believe, the second-lowest ranked law school in the region on account of it opening and graduating its first class in the middle of a depression, and the other Philly schools knocking it down in their peer assessment surveys or whatever. Very generous with the scholarships, though. Every law school lies about its admission data, alumni employment, etc. My school got ranked for the first time this year and came out I think 30-40 spots lower than they expected, and people were upset. We've got just as many Ivy League faculty who write editorials and law review articles and go on TV and it's a recession and blahblahablahblahblahblah. Personally, IDGAF. I didn't go to law school straight out of college to delay joining the real world until I had a few more suits and a 90-160k offer. I want to practice law and bar associations have set up this three-year hoop that I have to jump through before I can be licensed to do so.
I'm working for a boutique employment law firm (so I'm suing the corporate types. For now.) this summer. At my interview, I admitted I didn't know anything about employment law, hadn't taken any classes on employment law, but I wanted to be in a tiny firm so I could see how things were run as I do want to open my own shop ASAP after I graduate. My now-boss shrugged and said it didn't matter, and he was right. In most law school classes, you read a bunch of legal opinions and argue about the legal reasoning. It's good for your critical thinking and reasoning skills but nowhere in my civil procedure class did I learn how to actually file something in court. All these appellate and supreme court cases we read don't tell us shit about the 90% of litigation that never even goes to trial, much less gets appealed. And even when you do reach lofty heights, all the scholarly reasoning and constitutional philosophizing doesn't have shit to do with the embarrassing fact that 2Pac vs. Biggie will be decided a certain way because X number of judges were appointed by a Republican and Y number of judges were appointed by a Democrat. The disconnect between what law school is and what lawyering is is annoying.