Search Results

You are looking at 1 - 6 of 6 items for

  • Author or Editor: Angela Condello x
  • Search level: All x
Clear All
Author: Angela Condello
What is the relationship between the general, abstract norm and the singular, concrete case that sometimes affirms a parallel, contrasting, norm? The present essay engages with this question. The argument stems from an analysis of extraordinary singular cases that sometimes emerge, sometimes are “produced” or “promoted” as exemplary (for strategic reasons, like in law). In this essay Angela Condello argues that approaching normativity in art and law from the perspective of the singular case also illustrates the theoretical importance of interdisciplinary legal scholarship, since the singularity creates room for extra-legal values to emerge as legitimate demands, desires, and needs.
Author: Angela Condello

Abstract

What is the relationship between the general, abstract norm and the singular, concrete case that sometimes affirms a parallel, contrasting, norm? The present book engages with this question. The argument stems from an analysis of extraordinary singular cases that sometimes emerge, sometimes are “produced” or “promoted” as exemplary (for strategic reasons, like in law). I argue that approaching normativity in art and law from the perspective of the singular case also illustrates the theoretical importance of interdisciplinary legal scholarship, since the singularity creates room for extra-legal values to emerge as legitimate demands, desires, needs.

In: Brill Research Perspectives in Art and Law
Author: Angela Condello

Abstract

What is the relationship between the general, abstract norm and the singular, concrete case that sometimes affirms a parallel, contrasting, norm? The present book engages with this question. The argument stems from an analysis of extraordinary singular cases that sometimes emerge, sometimes are “produced” or “promoted” as exemplary (for strategic reasons, like in law). I argue that approaching normativity in art and law from the perspective of the singular case also illustrates the theoretical importance of interdisciplinary legal scholarship, since the singularity creates room for extra-legal values to emerge as legitimate demands, desires, needs.

In: Between Ordinary and Extraordinary
In the present work, a legal philosopher (Angela Condello) and a literaray scholar (Tiziano Toracca) develop the idea that a comparison between law and literature must be framed starting from the modes in which law and literature function. In this sense, they read law and literature as arts of compromising characterized by an analogous and yet, at the same time, profoundly different structure. Both, in fact, mediate conflicts between norms and transgressions, and more precisely between a principle of normativity (repression), on the one hand; and a principle of counternormativity (repressed), on the other hand. Through a progression in three steps, aimed at clarifying some peculiarities of law (1) and literature (2), by referring to examples of their interaction (3), the authors finally sketch some relevant hypotheses on why a placement across these two arts of compromising suggests some theoretical itineraries on their threshold.

Abstract

The present publication stems from the idea that a comparison between law and literature must be framed starting from the modes in which law and literature function. In this sense, we read law and literature as arts of compromising characterised by an analogous and yet, at the same time, profoundly different structure. Both, in fact, mediate conflicts between norms and transgressions, and more precisely between a principle of normativity (repression) on the one hand, and a principle of counternormativity (repressed) on the other hand. Through a progression in three steps, aimed at clarifying some peculiarities of law (1) and literature (2), and by referring to examples of their interaction (3), some hypotheses are sketched on why a placement across these two arts of compromising suggests some theoretical itineraries on their threshold.

In: A Theory of Law and Literature

Abstract

The present publication stems from the idea that a comparison between law and literature must be framed starting from the modes in which law and literature function. In this sense, we read law and literature as arts of compromising characterised by an analogous and yet, at the same time, profoundly different structure. Both, in fact, mediate conflicts between norms and transgressions, and more precisely between a principle of normativity (repression) on the one hand, and a principle of counternormativity (repressed) on the other hand. Through a progression in three steps, aimed at clarifying some peculiarities of law (1) and literature (2), and by referring to examples of their interaction (3), some hypotheses are sketched on why a placement across these two arts of compromising suggests some theoretical itineraries on their threshold.

In: Brill Research Perspectives in Art and Law