The Continuing Relevance of Ars Poetica to Legal Scholarship and the Modern Lawyer

In this late modern era within which the basic values of life have been reordered (driven by globalisation, the corporate agenda and mass communication technologies), the individual has effectively been reduced to a mere abstraction. It might be argued that the rational, moral and humanistic concept of freedom has, to a great extent, been compromised by a consequent crisis within the intelligentsia. These groups, in particular the gatekeepers of a classical liberal approach to legal scholarship, are caught between the twin evils of increased unreflective populism and pragmatism evident within many law schools and modern legal institutions. Although a contested term, defenders of the ‘socio-legal’ tradition, who place the humanities at the heart of legal research and education, are obliged to restate with increased determination the utility of the liberal arts and literature to the law profession and wider legal community. In a normative environment, law and narrative are inextricably linked and narrative poetry is not only invaluable to explaining the origins and location of the legal tradition, but also elicits a mode of understanding which transcends the boundaries of narrowlydefined legal hermeneutics—which often only addresses issues of an operational nature. French novelist Flaubert claimed “chaque notaire porte en soi les débris d’un poète” (Flaubert in Madame bovary (trans: Wall, G.), Penguin Classics, London, 1960: 269), paraphrased by American civil rights lawyer, Clarence Darrow, as “inside every lawyer is the wreck of a poet” (Lukas in Big trouble: a murder in a small western town sets off a struggle for the soul of America, Simon & Schuster, New York, 1997: 323). In an age of disenchantment, this paper explores the poetic form as an important medium within which to understand the nature and function of law in a society of differentiated individuals.     

A just soldier's dilemma: facing a war that does not meet jus ad bellum criteria

In our challenging times individuals in military services may find themselves in the position of being called to contribute to a war whose overall justice they personally find morally suspect, or about which they have moral qualms. The right course of action in this situation can be a serious dilemma. Applying the principle of double effect to this dilemma recognizes essential state responsibility for war, but does not discount the soldier's personal moral responsibilities or individual will. This novel application of the principle of double effect treats damage produced by participating in a questionable war as a side-effect of pursuing other—clearly justifiable—intentions. The just war tradition already uses the principle of double effect when weighing the permissibility of individuals' acts in war, such as choosing bombing targets. The proposal here is to evaluate the decision to contribute to the war effort at all. This adaptation of the classic just war principle of double effect can be used to justify some—but not all—individual participation when a war's state-level justification is suspect.     

Against Myths and Traditions that Emasculate Women: Language,Literature, Law and Female Empowerment

Western literature has traditionally presented women as either passive or ultimately unhappy heroines, for example Anna Karenina, Hedda Gabler and Emma Bovary (Tolstoy in Anna Karenina, Penguin Classics, UK, 2003; Ibsen in Hedda Gabler, Nick Hern Books, UK, 1995; Flaubert in Madame Bovary, Penguin Classics, UK, 2003). Their relationships with men tend to range from deficient to hopeless, as interaction with the other often produces endless struggle and sacrifice, against the possibility of self-determination and personal fulfilment. Religious doctrine is also replete with images of heroic women dogged by an unhappy fate or the passive obedient woman condemned to a life of servitude. These tales of female subservience logically lead to the idea that for a woman, individual freedom depends on the avoidance of commitment and intimacy; as attachment becomes synonymous with enslavement and so freedom is only possible in isolation. This presumption does not hold true for same-sex lesbian relationships, only those entanglements involving males where the union serves to project largely male interests. Even though the evolution of modern law is mostly subject to social forces rather than religious considerations and the last century evidenced the emergence of many new hard won women’s rights, the male perspective still constitutes the benchmark against which others are measured. It is suggested that society, whilst cleverly concealing any bias beneath empowerment speech, continually seeks legitimacy for new forms of control over the bodies and behaviour of women. This paper examines the current axiomatically given gendered representations of women and demands transparency in the processes which too often fail to accord women the right to equal standing and equitable treatment.