I could not help but repeatedly pause to reflect while reading Erica Schacter's "Pre-Professionals Are Not Morally Bankrupt" (Editorial, November 18). It was a well-written opinion that succintly captures the dilemma confronting all students here, especially seniors. However, when discussing the attitudes of Harvard students toward corporate professions, she seems to ignore the expectations that accompany the Harvard name. She writes that here it is "cool" to disdain those who enter corporate fields as greedy. I submit that if this is so, it is in large part because most of us face intense pressure to entere these "suitable" fields. When my parents tell me to look for "jobs that a Harvard graduate deserves," there is no need to ask what types of jobs they have in mind. I do not think that my experience in this regard is unusual. Outside these gates, the Harvard degree is expected to correspond to a certain degree of wealth, and success is largely measured by one's progress up the corporate ladder. Those who choose to bypass the corporate fast track are often met with a shake of the head and the question, "How did (s)he go wrong?"

As one who is applying to law school and will be undergoing spring recruiting, I do not think that I am too biased to defend those who pursue careers of public service (which I have by no means discarded for myself). I certainly do not consider pre-professionals to be morally bankrupt, otherwise I would not be pursing that option myself. Consulting, money management and corporate law can be exceptionally fulfilling careers, and offer opportunities to serve the community as well. I think it is safe to say, however, that public service is not the focal point of these corporate fields. Those who want to make public service the focus of their careers deserve praise for their dedication, not disdain for earning a comparatively low salary. Those who enter public service will not make as much as those in the private sector. That's the way it is, and likely will be for as long as capitalism reigns in this country. However, money need not be an insurmountable obstacle. A law school student who decides that (s)he wants to pursue civil rights litigation or work at a low-income legal aid clinic can get as much as the full amount of loan debt canceled through the school's loan repayment program. Coming out $100,000 in debt does not mean that a law school graduate has to start his/her career at Wachtell Lipton Rosen & Katz.

The larger point here is that aspiring public servants should not be in it just for the money. The very essence of public service means giving up part of one's own material benefits to work for the greater good. Those who do not want to follow this path have every right to pursue a different career. However, those who are willing to go down this road voluntarily accept a considerable income disparity for the sake of doing good. They should be considered every bit as successful as those who are skilled at climbing the corporate ladder. --Eric Hong '97