This interview was designed to bring Louis Brandeis's ideals to life through a more personal, conversational format. I wanted to show how Brandeis's legal work was never separate from his ethical beliefs - how his crusade against monopolies, defense of privacy, and commitment to democracy all stemmed from a deeper sense of civic duty. Writing in his tone of voice challenged me to think not solely about what Brandeis did, but how he thought, and how he might speak to today's moder challenges. The interview reflects Brandeis's version of the American Dream: one rooted in accountability, humility, and service - not status or wealth. It is through this format that I hoped to make his ideals feel immediate, timeless, and deeply personal.
One of the most empowering aspects of the entire process was the ability to humanize Brandeis and paint him in a more relatable light. Academic analysis can more often than portray historical figures as an abstract or legal archetype but placing Brandeis's voice in a conversational setting allowed for a heightened multi-dimensional analysis. I wasn't just presenting what he believed - I was analyzing why he believed it, how his experiences actively reflected and informed his philosophy, and how his tone might have reflected both humility and empathy. His belief that law must serve the common people, not the elite, came through more vividly when spoken rather than abstractly analyzed in a research paper format. The format of an interview assisted me in conveying the full breadth of Brandeis's philosophy while also keeping the general tone grounded and understandable. Topics like privacy, democracy, individuality, labor reform, and economic concentration are complex and multifaceted - and yet, Brandeis always seemed to have a simplistic way of transcribing them through core values like fairness, dignity, and responsibility. This format let those values shine through without academic jargon, reflecting the clarity he himself championed in his various works.
A notable challenge of the process was making sure the interview felt natural and flowed smoothly while still rich with substance. Every line had to convey a fragment of Brandeis's identity and thus was subject to double work: sounding authentic and organic while still pointing toward significant historical ideas and texts from originating from Brandeis's profile. I referenced The Right to Privacy, Other People's Money, Muller v. Oregon, and his True American speech, but without turning the piece into a one-dimension lecture. I wanted the reader to feel as though Brandeis was genuinely answering questions in an honest, realistic manner and not reciting a prepared résumé. Achieving that delicate balanced was by far the most tenuous task in creating this genre - and was the most rewarding as a result when I finished the interview.
The inclusion of modern relevance was intentional and ultimately necessary to conveying the continuity of Brandeis's ideals. By having Brandeis reflect on the American Dream, democracy, and role of the private citizen, I was able to form a distinct line between the past and the present that still allowed for connections to be made. It reaffirmed that his voice is not an ancient artifact, outdated and expired, but a compass useful for navigating today's chaotic legal landscape. This reinforced the reflections overarching goal: not to simply revere Brandeis from afar, but to imagine how his ideals might still challenge and guide us today. Ultimately, this fabricated interview helped me move past seeing Brandeis as simply a "figure it history." He was transcended through this piece into a mentor in some regards - someone whose convictions about justice, humility, and democratic responsibility feel urgently needed in our own fractured time. Making the piece reminded me that law, in its simplest form, is a conversation between generations, almost like a game of telephone. It was through this piece that I got to carry that conversation forward in his voice and convey his ideas in an informative manner.