I have been wondering how lawyers have been portrayed in the popular media, and it seems that they have been on the decline (in terms of respectability) for some time.
Take the portrayal of Atticus Finch (in “To Kill A Mockingbird”)-he is portrayed as a selfless honest defender of the innocent. A similar example is the portrayal of Clarence Darrow (in “Inherit The Wind”)-an upright, honest fellow.
Now we have John Gresham’s portrayals-mostly his lawyers are sleazy, corrupt characters who commit terrible crimes.
What accounts for this trnd?
I don’t know that it is the recent trend you think it is. My first thought after reading the OP was the Shakespeare Quote “The first thing we do, let’s kill all the lawyers”
An interesting link I found while looking up the exact wording of the quote that shows other places where Shakespeare says bad things about lawyers.
Also, it’s easier to make a sleazy character sensational and interesting than it is an upright and honest one. Often people who try to write characters like Atticus end up with characters that are very Pollyanna-ish. Not that it can’t be done, or that it can’t be done well, it just takes more work. So the likes of Gresham, who are churning out book after book of pulpy lawyer fiction, have an easier time playing on the sleazy lawyer trope than the noble defender of justice trope.
I don’t know. There are plenty of portrayals of sleezy lawyers even in the past. Offhand, there’s John Garfield in Force of Evil and Humphrey Bogart in Angels with Dirty Faces, plus dozens of mob lawyers in gangster films.
There is no trend. You cherrypicked two examples from fiction and one based on a real-life case. There are tens of thousands of examples you haven’t mentioned over the past several hundred years.
Darrow isn’t even the best of examples. Yes, he was honest himself, but he also took on many cases for no other reason than the money. Which puts him somewhere in the middle of your false dichotomy.
Grisham’s heroic characters are often lawyers too.
This makes no sense. The OP says that Darrow was an honest upright fellow and you think he was something less than that because he got paid for doing work? How so? Is a plumber not quite honest because he will only fix toilets if you pay him?
Then there are lawyers who go from sleazy to noble over the course of the movie:
Philadelphia
The Verdict
A Civil Action
If a lawyer can afford to dedicate a lot of time to an indigent client or a worthy cause, it’s a safe bet he’s making a LOT of money working for other clients who aren’t so admirable.
To use one example, in the Sixties, William Kunstler was always defending various hippies and protestors, pro bono. But he made a fortune defending Mafia dons. Carlo Gambino was, in effect, subsidizing the Chicago 7.
Clarence Darrow was no different. Yes, he defended some oppressed, innocent people out of the goodness of his heart, but he earned huge paychecks defending scummy characters who were obviously guilty as sin.
No it isn’t. Many lawyers earn an extremely good living (easily good enough to take time out to take on some pro bono cases) just doing workaday insurance work or whatever.
Defending guilty people isn’t dishonest (it could conceivably involve dishonesty, and so could being a plumber) nor is it not upright. Unless you think that people you assume are guilty even though they haven’t been found guilty shouldn’t be entitled to a lawyer.
None of which make any of these lawyers dishonest, unethical, criminal, or even sleazy.
The first two lawyers that came to mind in my recent law school application process were Lionel Hutz and Matlock. I like both, frankly, but I’d say they cancel one another out. I suppose it’s sort of sad that those are the first two that come to mind, lol. 
Ok, I will give you Lionel Hutz, who IS dishonest, unethical, criminal, and sleazy. Plus incompetent. But he’s also funny!
Agreed. I miss Phil Hartman. 
It’s always a thankless chore to read one of Ralph’s OPs closely, but if you did you would have seen this:
Darrow was not always selfless or a defender of the innocent. You can’t use a fictional depiction to say anything about the real-world man. Far better that Ralph read an actual biography of Darrow, a fascinating and complex individual, than to spew forth this nonsense.
Damned straight.
I love Harrison Ford’s performance in Scott Turow’s Presumed Innocent, in particular the way he describes blow-by-blow the prosecutor’s case against him while working with Raul Julia, the defense attorney who calls him “my greatest adversary.” Since Turow is himself a retired lawyer, this portrayal is about as accurate as it gets.
Exactly. The defense lawyer in Inherit the Wind was Henry Drummond not Clarence Darrow.
Anyone looking to debunk Darrow’s reputation should read about his role in the Massie trial.
Exapno this is beneath you. I did read the OP. I read, in addition to the carefully snipped sentence you quote, the last four words you were careful to omit. Your post verges on dishonest, frankly.
It seems fashionable to say “lawyers are assholes,” even for people who don’t know any lawyers. Until they need one, of course- then they want the biggest asshole in town to be “their” asshole. 
The law is exactly like every other profession- the entire ethical spectrum will be represented. It’s just more fun to talk about the flamboyant ones.
It’s also like every other perception- people generally agree that the public school system is bad, or at the very least worsening, but they are quick to tell you that THEIR local school is great.
Meh.
I think one of the main problems lawyers have with their reputation is the inherently adversial nature of the profession. Other than athletes, what other occupations are there where members of the profession are supposed to compete directly against their peers and determine winners and losers? Occupations like doctors, engineers, bankers, plumbers, etc may compete somewhat for business but they don’t go head-to-head. But for a lawyer, in order for one to succeed in an assignment some other lawyer has to fail.
Which reminds me of the old saying: The definition of a liberal is a conservative who’s been arrested!