Last year, before starting my first year of law school, I received from Osgoode information concerning my courses and the professors who were teaching them. I eagerly searched each of them on Osgoode’s website. I remember reading Professor Mandel’s bio and thinking how interestingly odd it was (odd in a good way of course). I am not able to recall the details and could not go back to the website to refresh my mind (it seems like it has been taken down). However, anyone who knew Professor Mandel would probably agree with me that he was anything but conventional.
Indeed, his class ended up being the most interesting one of all. For one, it was the only one in my section where heated debates took place. Despite the crudeness of the cases covered, there is nothing about criminal law that is notoriously more controversial than other courses. Whether a course instigates debate or not is pretty much dependent on the way the topics are presented. That is to say, courses can be taught mechanically or they can be taught polemically. After all, this is law school. Any issue, no matter how simple, can be turned into a big debate.
And that is how Professor Mandel taught his class. He was daring, critical and sometimes eccentric. However, despite its wittiness, his teaching style was not of the like of everyone. Certainly, I would often find myself wishing that his class were a little more straightforward. However, Professor Mandel was a man with complex ideas and he was not one who would make the material simple. Eventually, I learned to appreciate his style. I approached him a few times to discuss some of the course materials. Despite the fact that he would sometimes challenge my ideas, he was always incredibly kind.
One day in class, he talked about an article published on the Toronto Star. It was published after a number of sexual assaults had occurred in Toronto’s Christie Pitts area. The author of the article was critical about the adoption of the term “sexual assault” in criminal law and was calling for a re-examination of the language used in this context. Professor Mandel was not in agreement with the article and, as per his usual style, he fervently explained the class why. While some seemed puzzled by his statements, others expressed some criticism. As usual, Professor Mandel had accomplished to instigate controversy. In the end, however, he cleverly confronted his opponents.
A few days before that class, I had read the article and I instantly knew that he would have something to say about it. I decided to email him the link and asked him what he thought about it. To my surprise, he actually responded and said: “You know, I clipped that article this morning for possible discussion in class, since we’re talking about sexual assault. I think there’s a lot of confusion on the part of journalists and police about the reasons for and implications of the change…it’s worth a minute to talk about in class when we talk about the change in the law.” After class, him and I had a further discussion about it. Not only did he explain to me why he thought the journalist’s point of view was mistaken, but he also told me about the fallacies he had repeatedly found on her newspaper articles. For example, he told me about this article she wrote once, and pointed out that, in spite of her Italian background, she had no idea about Italian grammar.
This episode is personally memorable for a number of reasons, but overall, I think it says a lot about who Professor Mandel was. As an academic, it shows the profoundness of his intellect. Indeed, I was certainly not expecting a lesson in Italian grammar. As a teacher, it shows how approachable he was and his dedication to his students. Although he could have done otherwise, he took the time to read my email and share his ideas with me, personally, and with the rest of the class. In fact, Professor Mandel’s dedication was nothing short of extreme. He was answering emails from students up to the night before our final exam.
Regrettably, it is during the days after his passing that I have learned more about the person he was. A piece published on the Toronto Star by Dean Sossin, talks about his love for music and his service to the Osgoode community for almost 40 years. I now know that he formed a group called Lawyers against the War and that he wrote a somewhat controversial book. I have also seen interviews he gave where he expressed some of his political ideas and read that letter he sent to our Prime Minister requesting that President Bush were not let into the country. I have also read the messages from many of his students and colleagues expressing their sadness and sharing stories that depict how much he was admired and esteemed. Michael Bryant, former Attorney General, tweeted: “Michael Mandel… An original. Extraordinary. Changed me…”
Learning about his passing was a total shock. I was not personally aware of his health condition, although it seems like not many people were. While it is understandable why his condition was not made publicly known, it is certainly regrettable to find out about it now. I do not pretend to possess a special entitlement. On the contrary, I cannot help but feel like we, as part of the Osgoode community, had a duty to show him our support and esteem during this difficult time. Be that as it may, I feel very lucky to have been his student. This is far from the homage Professor Mandel deserves. Yet, I hope that those who did not get to meet him know, through this piece, what a remarkable person he was and how much he will be missed.