Law school at times seems like no more than an overhyped trade school, with the constant talk of jobs, networking and career planning that serve as a frequent reminder that its fundamental purpose is to train and funnel us into a specific profession.

The means to that end can feel convoluted and nonsensical as a 1L, reading cases involving cattle and trains and lighted squibs, then taking exams testing our ability to spot the most obscure of legal issues and being graded relative to the scores of our fellow classmates. Without any practical legal experience, yet in a clinic or an internship, the idea of being a real-life lawyer seems distant.

Of course, we have no choice but to trust the process. Plus, there is a certain comfort to knowing (at least in theory) that the concrete career of “lawyer” lies at the end of the tunnel, offering a degree of clarity that I certainly lacked as a liberal arts major in undergrad. At the same time, though, I mourn my undergraduate freedom to study something solely because it might be interesting.

Now, I find myself worrying about how a given course or extracurricular might or might not help me do the kind of legal work I eventually want to do or figure out what exactly that work is.

In contrast, I used precious little strategy in plotting my undergraduate courseload, taking classes ranging from “Witnessing the Sixties” and “Europe at War” to “Earth Focus” and “Religion and American Radicalism.” Did these courses make me more informed and intellectually curious about the world? I like to think so. Did they make me more marketable? Almost certainly not.

Fortunately, there are several ways to learn about interesting things without being forced to contemplate my entire professional future. My personal favorite is the Michigan Law institution we creatively call “lunch talks.”

I have no idea if this concept extends to other law schools, but at Michigan, various student groups, administrative offices and visiting law firms regularly organize lectures or presentations by faculty members and practicing attorneys during the hour of the day left open in all student schedules for lunch. A particularly zealous student could probably find a lunch talk to attend every day Monday through Friday. I often go to two per week.

The topics of these talks are always somehow related to the law, but one thing I've learned by now is that there's a legal angle to practically every subject—especially controversial ones. You may wonder, are law students really so sadistic to spend even their lunch hour thinking about law? To which I respond: Yes, as long as it's in a setting with no gunners and no assigned reading, and with compelling speakers and food.

That's right. In a nod to the budget struggles of law students everywhere, these events have catered lunches from local restaurants. This will come as no surprise to law school and law firm recruiters, but free food is an embarrassingly effective strategy when it comes to coercing the attendance and attention of law students.

A small selection of talks I've been to this semester:

• Social Media as an Instrument for Violence. Hosted by the Privacy and Technology Law Association and other student groups, featuring professors Monica Hakimi and Cliff Lampe to talk about how extremist groups use social media to perpetrate violence, looking at practices of alt-right groups in the U.S. and of ISIS.
• Asylum in 2019. Hosted by the Michigan Immigration and Labor Law Association, featuring Human Rights First legal director Hardy Vieux to discuss the dynamics surrounding the U.S. asylum process in light of recent developments in U.S. policy.
• Hamama v. Adducci–What Now? Hosted by the Middle Eastern Law Students Association, featuring professor Margo Schlanger and other attorneys who have worked on the class-action law suit Hamama v. Adducci, exploring the origins of the case, implications for immigration and civil rights law, and where the case stands now.
• Do You Want a Career as a Trial Lawyer? Hosted by Trial Advocacy Society, featuring John Zavitsanos, managing partner at Houston litigation boutique AZA, to discuss life as a trial attorney from voir dire to closing arguments.
• Litigating Trump's Environmental Deregulation. Hosted by the Environmental Law and Policy Program, featuring Sean Donahue of Donahue, Goldberg & Weaver, to discuss some of the major Trump administration deregulatory actions and the recurring legal issues and practical challenges of litigating those cases.
• The Happy Lawyers and Other Unicorns. Hosted by Williams & Connolly LLP, featuring a panel of three attorneys from the firm to talk about working at a law firm while still being a “whole person.”

That list is random enough to rival even the assortment of class titles that grace my undergraduate transcript, and the food ranged from Middle Eastern cuisine to Obama-recommended sandwiches from Zingerman's Deli. Have I made you wish you were back in law school yet?

Granted, there's technically no such thing as a free lunch. I can only assume our tuition dollars are covering these costs with room to spare when university groups host the lunches, and law firms get valuable visibility when they serve as hosts. But these lunches sure feel free. And, while the food is the initial motivation for showing up, I've been pleased to find that the discussion can be the highlight.

I wouldn't go so far as to say these talks cancel out the drudgery of 1L doctrinals. However, they do remind me that I came to law school not just to learn to be a lawyer, but because the law is everywhere – and it can, in fact, be interesting.

Renee Griffin is a first-year student at University of Michigan Law School.