Abstract
ABSTRACT According to Steven Lubet, documentation freezes facts in time. For this reason, it is, he thinks, more reliable than other kinds of evidence. That makes it especially useful for fact checking. However, this is not a realistic way to read for evidence in documents. It ignores or downplays a crucial fact that inheres to all paperwork, which ethnographers have long heeded: documents do not report on facts; they render them. Ethnographically informed readings of paperwork that attend both to facts and to how they are rendered are, by contrast, realistic. In this contribution, I discuss why and illustrate with reference to two studies of policing and law in Thailand.
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Similar Papers
Disclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.