(8):TV Show review: Suits; The game of Law.

At the time when the iconic written-by George RR Martin; Game of thrones TV-series was airing, another great written-by Aaron Korsh TV-series; Suits, was airing too. However, the series was marginalized and relatively overlooked by watchers, receiving less audience than it deserved. For surely it should have gotten a lot more than that. Though that may be fairly understandable, because any TV-series that engaged Game of thrones can be victimized and dumped by its greatness, its audience number and pulling power, even if the engagement is a mere common airing time. Game of Thrones - the epic adventure and medieval political fantasy whose poetic prowess and artistic product, in addition to the cinematographic, theme, semantic and filmic power would leave watchers reminiscing in a decades to come, is something never its like has been seen before. Irrespective of the ratings on Rotten Tomatoes, IMDB, etc. Therefore Suits, paid the price of being in the shadow of the greatest TV series of all time. Both in cash and in kind. And that's without respectfully taking anything away from the respective show. Still, the TV series isn't far off in the succession line of the icons. For if RR Martin's epic fantasy is Game of thrones, Aaron Korsh's American law drama, Suits, is Game of counsel. And if Game of thrones is game of power, Suits is game of Law. And power directly inclines towards law, just as law directly inclines towards power. Produced by Universal Cable Productions, Suits is a well-presented briefing about the essence and mind-boggling aspects of law practice.

Suits is an American Law drama that is based around a very proud and determined Harvard Law School graduate, and a core corporate attorney by the name of Harvey Specter, who knew and pursue nothing in his life apart from winning. The love and obsession that Harvey has for winning makes his blood cold, and his veins freeze amidst the argument that he doesn't have normal emotions as any attorney. Winning means to Harvey better than the Law itself, for not only in Law does he apply his mentality, even in a boxing ring, Harvey would not allow his biological father to make him touch the ground. In two years, Harvey Specter handled 18,362 cases. Averaging 36 cases a day. Out of which only 147 went to trial, all of which he won. The rest were handled in a settlement. And some disrupted by attorney-client privilege, or intercepted by a sudden change of heart from the accusers or defendants.

That equipped him to be a self-acclaimed best broker in the city of New York, and the most notorious corporate lawyer in United States. Most of those wins that Harvey records came while he works as a partner in Pearson-Hardman law firm, later Pearson-Specter, later Pearson-Specter-Litt. And some while he was working as an assistant district attorney of the southern county of New York, being mentored by Cameron Dennis - the infamous Attorney General who specializes in burying evidence. Which is quite a CV. 

Harvey's closest partner was his counsel-boss who turned into counsel-partner, Jessica Pearson - a black-American woman who aggressively refused to succumb to the corporate status quo in the city New York, which has it that women never last long in corporate counsel. Jessica paid for Harvey's bill while studying at Harvard Law school. And no attorney knows Harvey as an attorney as Jessica does. She's as ruthless as any competent manager, and conscious of the consequences that follow every decision taken in the law firm. She's an excellent attorney too. 

The third on the list is Harvey's partner, and one of the firm's senior associates, Louis Litt. An excellent attorney who worshipped Law. Litt eats litigation as a breakfast, launch and dinner. Nobody feels better spirit of Law. And no one has better expertise in financial Law. Not even Harvey. However, Litt has one problem; he is weak and exposed to emotions. Louis is vulnerable to his obsession with nominal actors of the Law, rather than the real success of the endeavor. Specifically Harvey Specter. He revolves his career around one thing; to be better than Harvey Specter. A goal that hurts his professional career massively. And hides his incredible quality as an attorney. The 7 stages of Litt meltdown that could get one to get Litt up (as in lit up)  is not forgotten. 

The fourth in the list must be Harvey's blessed-with-graphic-memory associate, by the name of Michael Ross, a poignant intellectual and talented Youngman who remembers everything he reads, and a synecdoche or a textbook definition of smart person, with an immeasurable observational skill. Mike was raised by his Grandmother after the death of his parents. He was a good kid who was ruined by his childhood best friend, Trevor, which along the way saw to it that he never graduates from college, let alone go to Law school. Yet he bosses the best in the game at Pearson-Specter. Him getting hired into a highly reputed Law firm without going to Law school just summarized the tenacity of Harvey specter's courage, and volume of Mike's knowledge and training. The iconic saying: "What if I tell you I consume knowledge better than anyone you've ever met" by Mike to Specter was the scene that highlights the season one. The duo of Mike and Harvey brought to the New York, the most ruthless Law practice the city has ever seen. With the famous trademark of Harvey's winning mentality and Counsel experience, coupled with Mike's incredible observation skills and knowledge of Law.

The next in the list is Donna Paulsen, the main plug of the machine. Donna defines the TV-series; elegant, tenacious, conscious, charming, intelligent, eloquent and competent woman. She's Harvey's secretary since his time in the district attorney's office, and in Pearson-specter too. Donna knows what Harvey's wants before he wants it, and does what Harvey wants before he wants it. When you look at an individual, you see a man or woman in suit or gown. But all Donna see is his or her skeleton, their beating of heart and what they think. She's incredible secretary, more unique than any character in Suits. Donna was perfect, as great as Harvey in his brokering prowess, and as Michael with his graphic-memory.

Then Rachel Zane, a very beautiful, and innocent-looking paralegal daughter of Law guru, Robert Zane, who wake and sleep every day with the dream of becoming a Harvard Lawyer. Rachel wants to prove her father wrong by excelling outside his shadows. She has a relationship with Mike Ross, and their love story is ahead of any other in the TV-Series. And Scottie, Harvey's classmate and lover, who was termed the "Library girl" who was proven to read every Law book in Harvard's library. 

To assert my verdicts from the lens of Aaron Korsh's drama, the law was meant to put bad people behind the prison walls. Which usually happens. Which was always meant to happen. Courtesy of an assumption and effort that's based around diligent constitutional provisions and honorable litigation, investigation, trial and recess procedure, subject to constitutional attempts of polishing, amendments, bills of rights and charters, mainly to perfect the imperfect shadow of the practice of what the theists anticipate on the doom's day. However, the fact is that the law might be diligent and constitutional, but its actors ensure that it has never stabilize as an honorable endeavor. Lawyers on their part are winners, whose ends largely justify the means, as far as it will fulfill what they believe of guilt or innocence in their opponents or clients. That, sometimes, when innocence was wrongly believed to be guilt, would maneuver the law into putting innocent people inside of prison cell, and the guilty ones, when wrongly believed to be innocent, would be set on the loose. And vice versa.

"Innocent until proven guilty beyond a reasonable doubt". That's the firm stance of the law. Yet weak, and exposed to an extremely dedicated professionals, who have every ability and willingness to erase any reasonable doubt of guilt even when there's a shadow of innocence. Or cast a shadow of innocence, even when its covered with a mountain of guilt. To Law, one is innocent until proven guilty. But to lawyers, one should take every allegation with a finch of salt. For what determines one's innocence or guilt, is one's proportional willingness to acquire the service of an invincible attorney, possibly from a highly reputed, flashy law firm, like Harvey specter from Pearson-Specter. Which is too much a burden to bear for a holy endeavor that is assumed to must be upheld. But what does upholding the law means?

Evident from Suits, its true that to put the bad guys where they belong - behind the walls, the law needs to be upheld, but not all the time. Because some bad guys have reaped way too much, and ripe way too higher of  and in the endeavor's loopholes - which must be there as far as the person drafting it was given birth by someone, that they reach the point beyond the reach of justice served through honor, diligent and constitutional process - the textbook assumption and definition of upholding the law. And the bad eggs being sent to prison is the justice, which may not happen diligently and constitutionally all the times. Which triggers the argument; since justice is the ultimate goal of the law, what should be more valuable to it; obedience to constitutional process that may not yield dividend or service of justice in anyway? One upholds the law but doesn't fulfill its ultimate objective, and the other violates it yet fulfill its ultimate objective.

Whatever the Law prefers in that case, its evident in Suits that sometimes, the best way to uphold the law is to bend it - by considering the end of product of its assumed, yet flawed procedure, which is justice. And the best way to bend the law is to uphold it - by considering radical application of its flawed aspect to convict the innocent individuals. In short, the main concern of the Law is justice delivery, which can't be done fairly or lawfully all the times. And the main concern of the bad eggs, is injustice leverage, which can be done easily through legal frameworks. At least from my grasping of Aaron Korsh's drama.

Harvey Specter and his encounter with his former teacher of ethics, Professor Henry Gerrard, was one of the most defining analysis of Law and lawyers. Gerrard was an honorable teacher who knows Law and ethics. While Harvey was seen as a dirty Lawyer. They are all very good, yet very distinct; one teaches the Law and the other practices it. Its easy for the teacher to preach when he doesn't know what it takes to practice. While any lawyer has been to college and learnt all that there its to be learnt. Which was the case for Gerrard and Harvey. He thought ethics was all that's there in being a lawyer, until he gets caught in a trap beyond the bail of honor and ethic. And that's where the student he never liked sets him free. Law practice is harder than teaching Law, just as its harder to become a billionaire than to acquire a PhD in business administration. Sometimes its difficult to deliver justice fairly, and only a Lawyer would understand that. A teacher however, would just judge, courtesy of ignorance of the spoils of the game, unless he was in the same situation as Gerrard. That's when Gerrard admitted the imperfection of the Law, the effort of lawyers in justice delivery, which is sometimes even beyond the understanding of ethics. 

To the Law, justice is to be delivered fairly. To lawyers, justice is to be delivered. And there's good distinction between the two. That, put the entire process into dilemma. Any attorney of empathy may live to see justifications in a wrongdoing of the accused, and sometimes unjustifiable acts in the righteousness of the accuser. And vice-versa. But not in the sight of Law. Its real, blind, un-empathetic and straight. While the people it prosecute are nominal, dynamic and evolving. Clients doing something wrong in the sight of Law that may trigger convictions despite it being something good to the humanity is just too much to deal with, or to deliver verdict upon. And that's what makes the Law the best of professions, and lawyers, the best of professionals. Becoming a lawyer is much more than a childhood dream, its an engraved spirit of inspiration, social impact and change, technical revolution and an entire way of life. Which requires high level of work rate, competence, perfection and dedication.

Suits is a one dimensional TV-show, which is one of my criticisms of it. Its predictability has bored many watchers away from watching, amidst the complaints that its too voluminous and long. Still, its one of the best things that made me fall in love with it. It proves boring for it stuck watchers in a vicious cycle. But it fulfills one of the objectives of the TV-show; for watchers to see the beyond the suits of the attorneys, beyond the bluffing of the accusers and beyond the fear of the accused. One thing that's fixed in the lessons of suits is that the only person that doesn't have a weak point is the person who isn't yet born. Through production of some of the most qualitative trials, negotiations and settlements repeatedly and consistently. Suits allow watchers to see the fallible human beings behind those invincible and spirited Law fanatics, and to see the infallible-ness of justice, no matter upon who and at what time. The back and front movement of the scenes gives an insight into why the law breakers do what they do, and why the Law is there to prove them wrong. Suits is an imperfect Law drama, but the perfection of the Law practice inside makes it perfect.

Suits wasn't a victim of an extreme love circle as its often the case in my analysis of TV-shows. But Love, become a victim of suits. The dedication of the attorneys in the TV-show won't allow any romantic fluidity that'll make watcher get carried away. The professionalism kills the emotions. The ruthlessness of the winning mentality just won't allow anyone to become vulnerable to benevolence and ambiguity that comes in loving excessively. Still, despite the disruptions of duty, any watcher can be wowed by the quality of romance produced un suits. Suits is just a textbook definition of corporate environment; where everything can be an advantage or a disadvantage. And anything can be taken advantage of. Harvey specter and Donna, him and Scottie, Rachel and Mike, Jessica and Malone, Louis and Sheila, etcetera. They're humans like any other, but they don't perceive, opine and love like any other because they're lawyers, and that makes their dedication, perception and how they love distinct. 

From the notes in suits, mentality can be a key in every human endeavor. And that's what the scramble between Specter and Litt was telling. There's no watcher with fair sense judgement that could argue Specter knows the Law better than Litt, but mentality makes him the best of the two. Never should any winner become obsessed with people, its a weakness. A winner should get obsessed with an abstract entity that makes the people who they're, like the entire process, the bigger image, the ideas and the whole stuffs, or even the success itself. That's what constitutes strength. Getting obsessed with better people could make man grow, but their position would be unreachable until one has what they had in their sight in his eyes.  Litt was obsessed with Specter, but Specter was only obsessed with winning. And their value to the Law is different. 

The power of parenting remains un-doubtful. Specter's lack of emotional attachment was born out of fear for his mother's replica is any woman he may care for. He's afraid to show care or love. As grown as he was, the consequences of his parenting keep hunting him. And the same goes to Mike. He's empathetic because of his grandma, and the fact that his parents were killed by a drunk driver. Likewise Rachel. Her competitive resilience comes from her father's way of upbringing. Just like Jessica. As for the secrets they hold for one another, it was never too late for one to start again or get reinvented. The truth would always get uncovered, no matter the weight of the blocks put upon it. The wise knows that, and that's why they stick with the truth all the times, or at least prepare for when it explodes. The role of Michael Ross is enough a lesson. Everything would come to surface one day. Its better to be what couldn't be hidden, or prepare for when it becomes common knowledge. No human is invincible, and anyone can need mental help, otherwise the consequences would be too heavy to bear. A man should make himself available for assistance, just as any man deserves an environment where his mental functioning would prosper. Litt bullying the ginger boy into the worst associate in the law firm despite being the best essay writer from his year at Harvard is an example. 

Apart from the one dimensional lapse of the series, its integrity is very questionable. In season 6 episode 3, there's a scene where Harvey specter said to Jessica: “Nigerian prince leaving you his inheritance? Because I got news for you its a scam". That's an extreme statement about Nigeria, a country that has the most productive and educated foreign people in United States. It further reiterates the notion that Nigerians are generally perceived as scammers, which is a stinking lie and a pre-conceived notion developed from the blunders of few. The producer and the company that sets the production should have done better.

Suits is very long, just as my review is. Suits is just a game of life in which counsel tactics are in open application. It has 9 seasons, and more than 140 episodes. I recommend it to any competitive man and woman, especially those in corporate  environment. And it gets a whopping 7.5/10 rating from my humble self.

Reviewed by:

MA Iliasu 

Kano state 

Nigeria.