FRINK Linked Data Fragments server

Matches in SemOpenAlex for { <https://semopenalex.org/work/W2011133006> ?p ?o ?g. }

• W2011133006 endingPage "152" @default.
• W2011133006 startingPage "138" @default.
• W2011133006 abstract "In liberal democracies such as the United States, law emerges from core ritual of the electoral-representation system, the theater of elections. From these cyclical rituals of consent, the people (re)discover political voice in embodied agents who ultimately do the work of governing. Lawmaking as craft, or increasingly as multibillion-dollar industry (CRP 201Oa, 20 1Ob), is performed by those who first pass through an arena where political commitments are mediated by space in which mass suffrage and mass consumerism dramatically converge. The experience of popular democracy for most citizens unfolds within this secular ritual that makes lawmakers. The very phantasmagoric spectacle of elections is the muse through which social relations are translated and reified into positive law. The state regulates everyday life through the discursive and material of law. But what renders law so productive in the modern states quest to control, surveil, and differentiate populations? Per Max Weber's classic formulation, the state is the monopoly of the legitimate use of physical force (Weber 1947), totalizing fantasy at once impossible to realize and yet utterly essential for statecraft to imagine. But law is not simply unitary instrument to shape subjectivities, ideology, and cultural life. As Rosemary Coombe argues, law is nothing less than the authoritative means and medium of cultural politics in which the social is articulated. This social world itself must be represented, performatively expressed, and institutionally inscribed (1998, 36). Law then is also simultaneously social, cultural, and political process, and one that leaves behind genealogy of artifacts that help us to unpack the forces behind these modes of social regulation, ranging from outright coercion, to spontaneous consent, and counterhegemonic dissidence (Gewirtz 1996, 3). But if we begin our examination from within the courtroom, where law is interpreted, or even start our analysis within national political institutions, where law is drafted and executed, then our study falls prey to the tautological nature of state power: the law is the law because it is the law; it has distinct legal dialect, formal procedures, and institutional avenues. Hegemonic power is always self-referential But the legal sphere especially strives for autonomy and relies on its ability to strictly separate those actions backed by the coercive apparatus of the state from those that are not. Let literature borrow from law and life . . . but let law develop its own and structure and editing, declares Alan Dershowitz (1996, 104-5) in his polemic against the use of popular narrative as one strategy to combat systematic exclusions in the courtroom. For Dershowitz, the fantastic and the imaginary are external to law and should be permanently expunged in favor of the real, which exist as distinct category if there can be potential for justice. Richard Sherwin, too, worries about policing the borders between law and its other, popular culture. When Law Goes Pop overflows with concerns about systemic corruption, potential imbalance, and the negative effects of artificially enhanced passions, all pop-culturally driven tendencies that might potentially lead to a state of affairs ... in which tyranny rules (Sherwin 2000, 240-41). Sherwin observes that the culture industries progressively invade the courtroom, with an immeasurable capacity to shape popular legal consciousness and even judicial interpretation. One consequence, he suggests, is that justices, lawyers, and jurors alike are increasingly prone to conflate fiction with reality. Although Sherwin disavows the possibility of total separation between popular culture and law, he does believe that the sheer proliferation of visual imagery in film, television, and on the Internet may have permanently forced law to tipping point where it no longer finds legitimacy or consistency exclusively within its own domain. …" @default.
• W2011133006 created "2016-06-24" @default.
• W2011133006 creator A5064484944 @default.
• W2011133006 date "2010-01-01" @default.
• W2011133006 modified "2023-10-17" @default.
• W2011133006 title "Of Politicians, Populism, and Plates: Marketing the Body Politic" @default.
• W2011133006 cites W1489741305 @default.
• W2011133006 cites W1524757637 @default.
• W2011133006 cites W1535235490 @default.
• W2011133006 cites W1556801619 @default.
• W2011133006 cites W1560675797 @default.
• W2011133006 cites W1569668365 @default.
• W2011133006 cites W1578358862 @default.
• W2011133006 cites W1588721073 @default.
• W2011133006 cites W2022139404 @default.
• W2011133006 cites W2055616513 @default.
• W2011133006 cites W2062152586 @default.
• W2011133006 cites W2069958379 @default.
• W2011133006 cites W2070131762 @default.
• W2011133006 cites W2093884838 @default.
• W2011133006 cites W2153285006 @default.
• W2011133006 cites W2153656501 @default.
• W2011133006 cites W2544266489 @default.
• W2011133006 cites W2788155242 @default.
• W2011133006 cites W2788180336 @default.
• W2011133006 cites W2796585570 @default.
• W2011133006 cites W2798801343 @default.
• W2011133006 cites W382271949 @default.
• W2011133006 cites W586504259 @default.
• W2011133006 cites W601191052 @default.
• W2011133006 cites W636699855 @default.
• W2011133006 cites W2329287902 @default.
• W2011133006 doi "https://doi.org/10.1353/wsq.2010.0017" @default.
• W2011133006 hasPublicationYear "2010" @default.
• W2011133006 type Work @default.
• W2011133006 sameAs 2011133006 @default.
• W2011133006 citedByCount "0" @default.
• W2011133006 crossrefType "journal-article" @default.
• W2011133006 hasAuthorship W2011133006A5064484944 @default.
• W2011133006 hasConcept C138921699 @default.
• W2011133006 hasConcept C144024400 @default.
• W2011133006 hasConcept C17744445 @default.
• W2011133006 hasConcept C199539241 @default.
• W2011133006 hasConcept C2780230221 @default.
• W2011133006 hasConcept C526877150 @default.
• W2011133006 hasConcept C94625758 @default.
• W2011133006 hasConceptScore W2011133006C138921699 @default.
• W2011133006 hasConceptScore W2011133006C144024400 @default.
• W2011133006 hasConceptScore W2011133006C17744445 @default.
• W2011133006 hasConceptScore W2011133006C199539241 @default.
• W2011133006 hasConceptScore W2011133006C2780230221 @default.
• W2011133006 hasConceptScore W2011133006C526877150 @default.
• W2011133006 hasConceptScore W2011133006C94625758 @default.
• W2011133006 hasIssue "2" @default.
• W2011133006 hasLocation W20111330061 @default.
• W2011133006 hasOpenAccess W2011133006 @default.
• W2011133006 hasPrimaryLocation W20111330061 @default.
• W2011133006 hasRelatedWork W1487991464 @default.
• W2011133006 hasRelatedWork W1969557644 @default.
• W2011133006 hasRelatedWork W2079161473 @default.
• W2011133006 hasRelatedWork W243040562 @default.
• W2011133006 hasRelatedWork W2612846228 @default.
• W2011133006 hasRelatedWork W2765532887 @default.
• W2011133006 hasRelatedWork W2969435825 @default.
• W2011133006 hasRelatedWork W3087292914 @default.
• W2011133006 hasRelatedWork W3125187136 @default.
• W2011133006 hasRelatedWork W4300865076 @default.
• W2011133006 hasVolume "38" @default.
• W2011133006 isParatext "false" @default.
• W2011133006 isRetracted "false" @default.
• W2011133006 magId "2011133006" @default.
• W2011133006 workType "article" @default.