Newly Published: Chenxi Tang: Imagining World Order: Literature and International Law in Early Modern Europe, 1500-1800 @CornellPress

Newly published: Chenxi Tang, Imagining World Order: Literature and International Law in Early Modern Europe, 1500-1800 (Ithaca: Cornell University press, 2018). Here, from the publisher's website, is a description of the book's contents.

In early modern Europe, international law emerged as a means of governing relations between rapidly consolidating sovereign states, purporting to establish a normative order for the perilous international world. However, it was intrinsically fragile and uncertain, for sovereign states had no acknowledged common authority that would create, change, apply, and enforce legal norms. In Imagining World Order, Chenxi Tang shows that international world order was as much a literary as a legal matter. To begin with, the poetic imagination contributed to the making of international law. As the discourse of international law coalesced, literary works from romances and tragedies to novels responded to its unfulfilled ambitions and inexorable failures, occasionally affirming it, often contesting it, always uncovering its problems and rehearsing imaginary solutions. Tang highlights the various modes in which literary texts - some highly canonical (Camões, Shakespeare, Corneille, Lohenstein, and Defoe, among many others), some largely forgotten yet worth rediscovering - engaged with legal thinking in the period from the sixteenth to the eighteenth century. In tracing such engagements, he offers a dual history of international law and European literature. As legal history, the book approaches the development of international law in this period —its so-called classical age—in terms of literary imagination. As literary history, Tang recounts how literature confronted the question of international world order and how, in the process, a set of literary forms common to major European languages (epic, tragedy, romance, novel) evolved.

 

Lacey on Women, Crime, and Character in Twentieth Century Law and Literature: In Search of the Modern Moll Flanders @LSEnews

Nicola Lacey, London School of Economics, Law Department, has published Women, Crime and Character in Twentieth Century Law and Literature: In Search of the Modern Moll Flanders as LSE Legal Studies Working Paper No. 20/2017. Here is the abstract.

The twentieth century saw decisive changes in women’s legal, social, economic and political position. But how far have these changes been reflected in women’s position as subjects of criminalisation in the courts, in legal thought or in literary fiction? This paper takes up the story of the gradual marginalisation of criminal women in both legal and literary history, asking whether a criminal heroine such as Moll Flanders (1722) is thinkable again, and what this can tell us about conceptions of women as subjects of criminal law. How far do the conceptions of, and dilemmas about, female subjectivity, agency, capacity and character which emerge successively in 20th Century literary culture reflect and illuminate the relevant patterns and debates in criminal law and philosophy?

Download the article from SSRN at the link.

Fan Fiction of the Eighteenth Century and IP

Elizabeth F. Judge, University of Ottawa Faculty of Law (Common Law Section) has published "Kidnapped and Counterfeit Characters: Eighteenth-Century Fan Fiction, Copyright Law and the Custody of Fictional Characters," at Originality and Intellectual Property in the French and English Enlightenment 22-68 (Reginald McGinnis ed.; Routledge, 2009). Here is the abstract.

Analyses of the intellectual history of eighteenth-century copyright typically focus on unauthorized printed editions (that is, the entire copying of another author’s works verbatim) and the associated copyright case law in the literary property debates, such as Millar v. Taylor and Donaldson v. Becket, which tested the status of authors’ common-law rights. This chapter turns to eighteenth-century fan fiction, to import today's term for referring to newly written fiction by fans featuring fictional characters created and made famous by another author, and especially online publication of fan fiction, in order to examine the early relationship of readers and authors to fictional characters, rather than to printed works, and the ongoing custodial interests that both readers and authors felt toward fictional characters in this period. While seemingly an anachronistic pairing to speak of “fan fiction,” which has been so strongly associated with the internet, and the eighteenth century, the characteristics that define internet fan fiction appositely describe the eighteenth-century phenomenon, excepting the medium of dissemination. As with fan fiction today, which has been at the locus of cultural and legal debates around the meanings of authorship, originality, interests, and rights, fan fiction in the eighteenth century was a focal point for unresolved and evolving views on those same issues, especially the nature of authorship, and originality, the integrity of fiction, and the reader’s role. This chapter examines the cultural discourse around fan fiction in the eighteenth century in order to shed light on eighteenth-century interpretations of originality and imitation, and the extent to which copyright law shaped (and was shaped by) cultural perceptions about the ownership and care of fictional characters and how competing interests in fictional characters contributed to the debate on copyright law. It re-considers the role that author’s rights, in the sense of moral rights and the droit d’auteur tradition played in English copyright history. Well-documented examples of extensive reader response to fictional characters that became cultural phenomena, including Samuel Richardson’s Pamela and Clarissa and Daniel Defoe’s Robinson Crusoe, spawning numerous unauthorized sequels in novels, plays, and short stories, lively correspondences between fans and the author, satires by rival established authors, and character merchandising, illustrate how appealing fictional characters who reach iconic status within a culture are subject to competing claims of ownership as well as competing affections. The chapter focuses especially on when and why popular, creative, and often even affectionate inclusions of these eighteenth-century fictional characters into works by other people were, more often than not, treated by the original authors as akin to legal wrongs against a person - ravishing, counterfeiting, and kidnapping - and treated analogously to the word-for-word copying of entire works that was condemned as “pirating,” despite the lack of legal foundation in eighteenth-century English copyright law to underlie these assertions.

Download the essay from SSRN at the link.

Daniel Defoe and the Written Constitution

Bernadette A. Meyler, Cornell University School of Law, has published "Daniel Defoe and the Written Constitution." Here is the abstract.

Today, as constitutionalism spreads around the globe, it is embodied de rigueur in written documents. Even places that sustained polities for centuries without a written constitution have begun to succumb to the lure of writtenness. America, we think, spawned this worldwide force, inaugurating a radically new form of political organization when it adopted the U.S. Constitution as its foundational text. Yet the notion of the written constitution had, in fact, received an earlier imprimatur from the pen of Daniel Defoe, English novelist, political pamphleteer, and secret agent. Plying his trades in the early eighteenth century, Defoe, now known largely as the author of Robinson Crusoe, in a number of disparate literary and political guises advocated the development of written documents setting forth the basic principles of a governmental order and restraining the power of legislative majorities. Just as the individualist ethos of Robinson Crusoe grabbed the American imaginary from the mid-eighteenth-century onwards, a conception of written constitutionalism similar to the one promulgated by Crusoe's author took root on American soil.

My article elaborates the contours of written constitutionalism that Defoe outlined and demonstrates the close alignment of some of Defoe's arguments with the scholarship of today, an alignment that suggests the persistence of a number of the mythic ideals of written constitutionalism that Defoe elaborated in the early eighteenth century. Methodologically, the article illuminates the importance of looking to the emerging genre of the novel as well as other widely read forms -- rather than focusing exclusively on more traditional historical sources -- to discern the construction of a popular imaginary at the time of the Founding. At the same time, however, the article argues that the differences between the account of written constitutionalism that emerges out of Defoe's works and the claims made for written constitutionalism by Chief Justice Marshall in Marbury v. Madison and legal academics today illuminate the contingency of what writing may mean for constitutionalism and demonstrate the ways in which the mythic entailment's of writing are sometimes precisely that -- myths.

Download the paper from SSRN here.

Independent Women in Eighteenth and Nineteenth Century English Literature

Nicola Lacey, London School of Economics, Law Department, has published "From Moll Flanders to Tess of the d'Urbervilles: Women, Automony, and Criminal Responsibility in Eighteenth and Nineteenth Century England," as LSE Legal Studies Working Paper No. 5/2007. Here is the abstract.

In the early 18th Century, Daniel Defoe found it natural to write a novel whose heroine was a sexually adventurous, socially marginal property offender. Only half a century later, this would have been next to unthinkable. In this paper, the disappearance of Moll Flanders, and her supercession in the annals of literary female offenders by heroines like Tess of the d'Urbervilles, serves as a metaphor for fundamental changes in ideas of selfhood, gender and social order in 18th and 19th Century England. Drawing on law, literature, philosophy and social history, I argue that these broad changes underpinned a radical shift in mechanisms of responsibility-attribution, with decisive implications for the criminalisation of women. I focus in particular on the question of how the treatment and understanding of female criminality was changing during the era which saw the construction of the main building blocks of the modern criminal process, and of how these understandings related in turn to broader ideas about gender, social order and individual agency.

Download the entire paper from SSRN here.