Cardozo Studies In Law Research Articles

Reading the Intersections of Law and Literature in the Eighteenth Century

During its twenty-five year history, field of law and literature has attracted scholars from both law schools and English departments, generated dozens of excellent monographs, and spawned several academic journals. One key journal, Law and Literature-published as Cardozo Studies in Law and Literature from 1989 to 2001-describes field in highly interdisciplinary terms on its website, suggesting that the [law-and-literature] movement, which extols law-related literature and literary value of legal documents, provides a unique perspective on how law and literature are mutually enlightening. Despite this very real interdisciplinarity, law schools and English departments do approach combined study of law and literature differently. For legal scholars, tendency is to focus chiefly on textuality of law, using insights from literary theory to question and complicate claims for hegemony of legal discourse in a variety of situations. The focus on law as literature differentiates this approach from methods used by literary scholars, who focus mainly on law in literature-sometimes in a simple representational way (think Bleak House), but more often in a broad-based historicist way, ranging from study of role of law in print culture to more explicitly new historicist studies of how reinterpreting legal texts creates new frameworks for understanding literary ones.

Lusty Voice II

As superstition has ruled our earth for the length of human experience, so too have we sanctified time. We hang our hours in great bell towers, and we glorify the calendar with anniversaries, of births, of deaths, and of events. We mark them out in millennia, jubilees and decennials. Ten years ago, a new journal called Cardozo Studies in Law and Literature promised its readers a lively, even a lusty voice (as I presciently suggested in the journal's initial number)' in that thriving enterprise called Law and Literature. Cardozo Studies in Law and Literature has not disappointed its audience. The first issue reproduced some of the work of a Law and Humanities Institute symposium at Washington and Lee University, a body of scholarship devoted to a single slender novella just over 100 pages in length, Melville's Billy Budd, Sailor.2 In a law practice that is geared toward trial advocacy, the contemplation of literary lawyers is never absent from my thinking. The uses (and abuses) of language occupy me constantly. In fact, it is Vere, Finch, Bishop Cauchon, Darrow, Clamance, the Advokat, and Mr. Jaggers, an eclectic collection of prosecutors, of defenders, and, yes, of judges, whose excite my imagination. What do you read, my lord? asks Polonius. Words, words, words is the response of that literary lawyer, Prince Hamlet. Perhaps those are the pale substitute for the sword, his way to temporize over the regicide which would avenge his father. Perhaps are the vehicle that lawyers employ to avoid the harsh realities of a brutish society. Who are these literary lawyers? Those of the real world? Do we mean the Wallace Stevens or Archibald Macleish model, the lawyers who ultimately turn to the poetry that illuminates their lives and ours? Or do we mean the graceful prose writers who have graced our profession, the Cardozos and the Hands, that do not evade, that do not turn us from our dreams?

On the Tenth Anniversary of Cardozo Studies in Law and Literature

Last Spring I was honored to be elected President of the Law and Humanities Institute, an organization linked structurally and ideologically to the Cardozo Studies in Law and Literature. The LHI sponsors colloquia, lectures, literary and legal salons, as well as other interdisciplinary, scholarly events, which are often published in the journal as Proceedings or as individual articles. The journal, which is the repository of significant scholarly studies on a wide range of legal and literary subjects, is the inspirational and informational source for many of LHI's events. While reading a 1993 volume of the journal dedicated to The Merchant ofVenice, I was inspired to organize an international symposium on Law and the Arts, which gathered together leaders in the field of Law and Literature. They witnessed and commented on the Retrial of the Merchant of Venice: Shylock v. Antonio on Appeal. This production, staged again at the New York City Bar Association one year later, consisted of several segments: the performance of the trial scene in Act IV of the play, the writing and publication of briefs and reply briefs for the Appellant and Appellee in the New York Law Journal, the staging of the actual trial before seven judges including two federal judges, the theater critic of the Daily News, law professors, and Shakespeare scholars. The Retrial of the Merchant of Venice attracted a standing room only crowd of more than two hundred people in the Great Hall of the New York City Bar Association a testimony to the intrinsic value of the Law and Literature Movement. The two hour production was a truly memorable event in the annals of literary history simply because it focused on the legal issues of a literary masterpiece. This unusual production of The Merchant of Venice involved key players of the journal without whose intellectual rigor, experience in the law, and keen literary sensitivity this happening would not have taken place. I am truly proud to be a member of the team of the LHI and a contributor to the journal because the creative energy of these people has proven to be contagious as well as

Applied Law and Literature in Two Traditions

My office, windowless and filled with paintings, is across from Richard Weisberg's and right around the corner from the busy den of Cardozo Studies in Law and Literature. But my relationship to the journal and the Law and Literature Movement is far more than geographical. As the Director of the Legal Writing Program at Cardozo, I have to render the journal's mission of critical thinking about the role of text operational. This fall, I have taken on a related responsibility, teaching writing skills to a select group of Yeshiva University rabbinic students as part of the Bella and Harry Wexner Kollel Elyon and Smikha Honors Program at the Rabbi Isaac Elchanan Theological Seminary. My way of celebrating the tenth anniversary of Cardozo Studies in Law and Literature, therefore, is to reflect on the connections between teaching law students and teaching rabbinic students, and their connections, as well, with law and literature. What the Law and Literature Movement preaches is the allure of the mingling of mediums, the notion that a discipline is not just independently rooted but can withstand, even welcome, its confluence with another. That openness, to technique, to words, to means of expression, becomes part of the applied science of the teaching of writing. Creativity burgeons theory at the intersections of the academic pursuits and the development of practical skills. My students, in the law school and in the rabbinic academy alike, are taught to value both analytical reading and the written word. But they have much more in common. For both, cultural memory is the foundation of each of their discipline's appeal and endurance, though law has a different, perhaps more utilitarian relationship to authority. For both, there is sometimes a resistance, born of the desirable impetus to preserve knowledge, interpretation and history, to withstand the influence of other disciplines. Both thirst for ways to express the beauty of their discoveries and beliefs especially to a public that may not exactly share them. Both may fall in the trap of using what can be a derivative and spent rhetoric,

Some (Brief) Reflections About Law and Literature

My own work in regard to law and has involved far more the intersections of literary theory than, say, the potential contribution of literature to enhancing the sensitivity of lawyers to issues of justice. Although there continue to be some holdouts, I take it that most contemporary legal theorists will concede, albeit some of them reluctantly, the importance of some familiarity with the work of literary theorists, even if it is also necessary to take into account the differences, as well as the similarities, between legal and literary documents. This (relative) consensus is something to cheer, and the editors of (and contributors to) the Cardozo Studies in Law and Literature are certainly entitled to take justifiable pride in their own role over the past decade in this important development within the legal and, for that matter, the wider academy. All of this being conceded, indeed, applauded, it also seems time, as is appropriate on anniversaries, to reflect on where the relationship is headed, as well as where it has been. All relationships face the problem of stagnation and the endless repetition of familiar, perhaps even comfortable, routines; there is no reason to believe that legal analysts who have become involved, in whatever fashion, with literature are immune from such ruts.

On the Tenth Anniversary of Cardozo Studies in Law and Literature

On the Tenth Anniversary of Cardozo Studies in Law and Literature

On the Tenth Anniversary of "Cardozo Studies in Law and Literature"

On the Tenth Anniversary of "Cardozo Studies in Law and Literature"

On the Tenth Anniversary of "Cardozo Studies in Law and Literature"

On the Tenth Anniversary of "Cardozo Studies in Law and Literature"

On the Tenth Anniversary of "Cardozo Studies in Law and Literature"

On the Tenth Anniversary of "Cardozo Studies in Law and Literature"

On the Tenth Anniversary of "Cardozo Studies in Law and Literature"

On the Tenth Anniversary of "Cardozo Studies in Law and Literature"

The Place of Law in Addressing Internal Regime Conflicts

Copyright ? 1997 by Law and Contemporary Problems * Law Program/Research School of Social Sciences, The Australian National University. This article was written while the author was a Research Fellow at the International Human Rights Law Institute, DePaul University. 1. Newspaper's Director on Post-Revolution Trials, ROMPRES, Mar. 16, 1990, FBIS Daily Report (FBIS-EEU), Mar. 22, 1990, at 70, cited in IMPUNITY AND HUMAN RIGHTS IN INTERNATIONAL LAW AND PRACTICE 137 (N. ROHT-Arriaza ed., 1995). 2. Gyorgy Konrad, The Viewpoint of the Victim, 2 CARDOZO STUDIES IN LAW AND LITERATURE 9, 11 (1990). 3. For the purposes of this article, is defined as institutionalized conflict. Conflict includes of an international character (the four Geneva Conventions 1949 and Protocol I of 1977), of a non-international character (common article 3 of the four Geneva Conventions 1949 and Protocol II of 1977), and purely internal conflict, including tyrannical regime victimization (to which the Genocide Convention, the Torture Convention, and Crimes against Humanity apply). The definition corresponds with The Department of Peace and Conflict Research (Uppsala University, Sweden): An armed conflict is defined as a contested incompatibility that concerns government and/or territory where the use of force between two parties, of which at least one is the government of a state, results in at least 25 battle-related deaths. See Peter Wallensteen & Karen Axell, Conflict Resolution and the End of the Cold War, 1989-93, 31 J. PEACE RES. 33349 (1994). Clearly, deaths through internal regime victimization do not occur within the traditional concept of battle or armed conflict. That is, the victims are usually not or only minimally, have no collective cohesive nature other than that ascribed by the state as perpetrator, and can not be described as an adversary except in the terms of the ideological framework of the state. However, such internal is public (through it being state conducted), institutionalized, and armed, and therefore corresponds to the framework definition stated. 4. The data in this article is based on the preliminary results of a study of from 1945 (post-WWII) to 1996, compiled by the author at the International Human Rights Law Institute at DePaul University, under the direction of Professor M. Cherif Bassiouni.

Cardozo Studies in Law and Literature

Cardozo Studies in Law and Literature

Preface to the Symposium

Less than a score of years ago, my welcoming toast would have semed an impudent conceit both in the world of the law and in the world of literature. Law school curriculum committees viewed a course in Law and Literature as a frill in the rigor of traditional legal studies; likewise, literature departments found much to contemplate as to the interrelation but did not yet consider it a true sub-specialty. Now, such courses are offered in the majority of American law schools (and no small number abroad), and literary critics and theoreticians are heavily involved in the discourse. So the world moves swiftly. With the inspiration of J. Allen Smith, then of the Rutgers Law faculty, and with the energy of Richard H. Weisberg of the fledgling Benjamin N. Cardozo School, the Law and Humanities Institute was born in 1979. In its first salvo, LHI announced as an early goal the publication of a scholarly journal dedi cated to the cross-fertilization of those twin disciplines, law and litera ture. In subsequent years, LHI has staged annual international sympo sia and frequent local gatherings on topics of interest not only to scholars, but to bar, bench, artists, and the laity as well. To offer a journal has been somewhat more arduous and dis tant in accomplishment than first imagined. From the earliest days of LHI, the Cardozo family has been friendly and generous in offering its support, particularly from the office of Dean Monroe E. Price and the Jacob Burns Institute. The fruit of this collaboration is now in your hands, the new and long awaited Cardozo Studies in Law and Litera ture, edited by members of LHI, by Cardozo Law School faculty, by prominent writers, and by other distinguished academics and lawyers. One of LHI's liveliest gatherings was the October 1987 sym posium under the able direction of Professor L.H. LaRue, at the law school of Washington and Lee University, in Lexington, Virginia. For the first time, an LHI conference focused on one author, one work: Herman Melville's final creation, the enigmatic and complex Billy Budd, Sailor. From the keynote comments of Professor Harrison

Preface to the Project

I am delighted that our young law school is the home of a great new journal, Cardozo Studies in Law and Literature. The journal marks the law school's commitment to scholarship, particularly scholarship in the area of law and humanities. It is also a tribute to the memory of Benjamin N. Cardozo, after whom the law school is named. Cardozo understood, better than did any other Justice, the compelling relationship between law and literature. He wrote persuasively about law as literature; and in his practice as a judge, he drew upon his understanding to craft opinions which could gracefully shape doctrine anew.

Drama and Society in the Age of Jonson: An Alternative View

Previous articleNext article No AccessDrama and Society in the Age of Jonson: An Alternative ViewDON E. WAYNEDON E. WAYNE Search for more articles by this author PDFPDF PLUS Add to favoritesDownload CitationTrack CitationsPermissionsReprints Share onFacebookTwitterLinkedInRedditEmail SectionsMoreDetailsFiguresReferencesCited by Renaissance Drama Volume 131982 Article DOIhttps://doi.org/10.1086/rd.13.43264631 Views: 7Total views on this site Citations: 9Citations are reported from Crossref Copyright © 1982 Northwestern University PressPDF download Crossref reports the following articles citing this article:Emin YAŞ The Linking Between the Emerging Market Economy and Human Character in Volpone of Ben Jonson, Atatürk Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü Dergisi (Nov 2021).https://doi.org/10.53487/ataunisosbil.737815Peter Remien The Concept of Nature in Early Modern English Literature, 32 (Jan 2019).https://doi.org/10.1017/9781108654906Matthew Hunter City Comedy, Public Style, English Literary Renaissance 46, no.33 (Feb 2017): 401–432.https://doi.org/10.1111/1475-6757.12072Jakob Ladegaard Luxurious Laughter. Wasteful Economy in Ben Jonson’s Comedy Volpone, or the Fox (1606), European Review 24, no.11 (Feb 2016): 63–71.https://doi.org/10.1017/S1062798715000447Robert D. Hume London in Comedy from Michaelmas Term to The Beggar’s Opera, Modern Language Quarterly 74, no.33 (Sep 2013): 331–362.https://doi.org/10.1215/00267929-2153491Erica Sheen Calling Fools into a Circle: The Woman’s Prize, The Two Gentlemen of Verona, The Merchant of Venice, As You Like It, (Jan 2009): 72–96.https://doi.org/10.1057/9780230234529_5Alizon Brunning City Comedy, (Jan 2007): 132–145.https://doi.org/10.1057/9780230593206_10Julie Sanders The Commonwealth of Hell: The Devil is an Ass, (Jan 1998): 107–122.https://doi.org/10.1057/9780230389441_7Luke Wilson Ben Jonson and the Law of Contract, Cardozo Studies in Law and Literature 5, no.22 (Oct 1993): 281–306.https://doi.org/10.2307/743529