The word is not only the supporting pillar of literature but also of law: without words, law could not be objectified, understood, interpreted, applied, and ‘spoken’. As Jacob Grimm noted, the word makes law and literature possible in the first place: “It is not hard to believe that law and poetry rose from the same bed together.” Both are rooted in human life and coexistence, to which they relate by narrating and observing (literature) or ‘narrating’ and standardising (law). Every legal case is based on a ‘story’ to which legal texts are applied, the wording of which must be interpreted to lead to a judicial decision, which in turn—how could it be otherwise—is formulated in words. Every literary text must be understood and interpreted in words. Kieran Dolin therefore justifies the close link between law and literature with the fact that law is expressed through words, albeit more stringently than in literature: “The law can only be articulated in words. While the order of a court will be imposed […], it will originally have been spoken as a sentence. This is the fundamental connection between law and literature.” According to Dolin, the narrative of law and jurisprudence involves not only language but also cultural references that are conveyed through literature and language. References to literature in legal judgements therefore seem to clarify the understanding of legal texts: “Literature and law, it seems, can work together in the production of cultural ideals and values” because “no set of legal institutions or prescriptions exists apart from the narratives that locate it and give it meaning.” Claudio Magris, on the other hand, weakens Dolin’s strongly affirmative position to the extent that he recognises not only relationships between law and literature that promote understanding but also possible barriers between the disciplines. However, it cannot be overlooked that law and literature make use of the word, with law exercising a stringent function of ‘prescribing’, ‘threatening’, and ‘sanctioning’, while literature entertains, explains, describes, fantasises, or imaginaries. Law appears in literature through the discourse that results from the combination and recurrence of certain words, whether explicitly or implicitly. Thanks to narrative techniques, literature can convey knowledge about law as a factor in certain cultural, historical, social, societal, or political circumstances, it can raise philosophical and ethical questions, or it can become a source of legal history, e.g. if the law has not been documented in writing in history. According to Thomas Weitin, further similarities between law and literature arise not only from the word as a unifying ‘raw material’, but also from methodological overlaps in the field of hermeneutics.

Law and Literature, with a Special Focus on Law in Literature

章节
发表日期：

2025年

查看全文

Alexandra Juster

摘要

The word is not only the supporting pillar of literature but also of law: without words, law could not be objectified, understood, interpreted, applied, and ‘spoken’. As Jacob Grimm noted, the word makes law and literature possible in the first place: “It is not hard to believe that law and poetry rose from the same bed together.” Both are rooted in human life and coexistence, to which they relate by narrating and observing (literature) or ‘narrating’ and standardising (law). Every legal case is based on a ‘story’ to which legal texts are applied, the wording of which must be interpreted to lead to a judicial decision, which in turn—how could it be otherwise—is formulated in words. Every literary text must be understood and interpreted in words. Kieran Dolin therefore justifies the close link between law and literature with the fact that law is expressed through words, albeit more stringently than in literature: “The law can only be articulated in words. While the order of a court will be imposed […], it will originally have been spoken as a sentence. This is the fundamental connection between law and literature.” According to Dolin, the narrative of law and jurisprudence involves not only language but also cultural references that are conveyed through literature and language. References to literature in legal judgements therefore seem to clarify the understanding of legal texts: “Literature and law, it seems, can work together in the production of cultural ideals and values” because “no set of legal institutions or prescriptions exists apart from the narratives that locate it and give it meaning.” Claudio Magris, on the other hand, weakens Dolin’s strongly affirmative position to the extent that he recognises not only relationships between law and literature that promote understanding but also possible barriers between the disciplines. However, it cannot be overlooked that law and literature make use of the word, with law exercising a stringent function of ‘prescribing’, ‘threatening’, and ‘sanctioning’, while literature entertains, explains, describes, fantasises, or imaginaries. Law appears in literature through the discourse that results from the combination and recurrence of certain words, whether explicitly or implicitly. Thanks to narrative techniques, literature can convey knowledge about law as a factor in certain cultural, historical, social, societal, or political circumstances, it can raise philosophical and ethical questions, or it can become a source of legal history, e.g. if the law has not been documented in writing in history. According to Thomas Weitin, further similarities between law and literature arise not only from the word as a unifying ‘raw material’, but also from methodological overlaps in the field of hermeneutics.