(no subject)

[sigmaleph]

it's always felt weird that the most common form of the saying goes "the man who represents himself has a fool for a client".

like, I'm sure lawyers would rather have non-foolish clients if at all possible, but surely the warning is a lot more dire if you say you have a fool for a lawyer. seems like a suboptimal phrasing!

Comments

[contrarianarchon]

I mean you also have one of them, the transitive property of foolishness exists! That's what makes it a good *joke* and not just a good saying? The fact that it takes making a connection between where the insult is and where it *should* be?

[sigmaleph]

i don't think it actually helps the joke!

someone evaluating whether they'll hire a lawyer or represent themself is always the client and only sometimes the lawyer, so i'd argue "fool for a lawyer" is the one that requires a connection-making step ("oh, wait, you're calling *me* a fool") which i think is better for the stealth insult