Rhetoric—the arts of practical discourse that we broadly define as the use of symbols to influence belief and action—has something to say about contemporary legal theory and practice. Law and rhetoric in the West were born together nearly 2500 years ago in the Mediterranean. American law has eschewed its rhetorical roots since the late nineteenth century. Denying law’s rhetorical nature helps to construct an impartial façade, shoring up law’s legitimacy. Admitting the rhetorical nature of law would be to admit its partiality, or the point of view inevitably inscribed with every textual choice. At the same time, rhetorical theorists have turned their attention to many subjects other than law. Though many rhetorical scholars today still study legal rhetoric, much of their focus is on high-profile court cases and Supreme Court opinions. This volume’s contributors believe it is time for an expanded conversation between law and rhetoric, placing a broader variety of legal texts in conversation with a broader variety of rhetorical traditions than is typically available. Each essay here makes a connection between one or more significant texts on rhetoric and contemporary legal texts.
August 6, 2024
Forthcoming from Cambridge University Press: Rhetorical Traditions & Contemporary Law (Brian N. Larson & Elizabeth C. Britt, eds., 2025) @CambridgeUP
Rhetorical Traditions & Contemporary Law (Brian N. Larson & Elizabeth C. Britt, eds., Cambridge University Press, 2025) (Forthcoming). Here is the abstract.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment