En savoir plus
This book examines social aspects of humour relating to the judiciary, judicial behaviour, and judicial work across different cultures and eras, identifying how traditionally recorded wit and humorous portrayals of judges reflect social attitudes to the judiciary over time. It contributes to cultural studies and social science/socio-legal studies of both humour and the role of emotions in the judiciary and in judging. It explores the surprisingly varied intersections between humour and the judiciary in several legal systems: judges as the target of humour; legal decisions regulating humour; the use of humour to manage aspects of judicial work and courtroom procedure; and judicial/legal figures and customs featuring in comic and satiric entertainment through the ages.
Delving into the multi-layered connections between the seriousness of the work of the judiciary on the one hand, and the lightness of humour on the other hand, this fascinating collection will be of particular interest to scholars of the legal system, the criminal justice system, humour studies, and cultural studies.
Table des matières
Chapter 1. Thinking about Judges, Judging and Humour; Sharyn Roach Anleu and Jessica Milner Davis.- Part I Humour about Judges.- Chapter 2. Judges and Humour in Britain: From Anecdotes to Jokes; Christie Davies.- Chapter 3. Funny Judges; Marc Galanter.- Chapter 4. Justices on Stage; Jessica Milner Davis.- Part II Judges' use of Humour in the Courtroom.- Chapter 5. Judicial Humour and Inter-professional Relations in the Courtroom; Sharyn Roach Anleu and Kathy Mack.- Chapter 6. Humour in the Swedish Court; Åsa Wettergren and Stina Bergman Blix.- Chapter 7. What's a Box of "Bakewell Tarts" Got to Do with It?; Leslie J. Moran.- Part III Judicial Decisions about Humour.- Chapter 8. How Judges Handle Humour Cases in Brazilian Courts; João Paulo Capelotti.- Chapter 9. Judicial Regulation of Humour in the United States; Laura E. Little.
A propos de l'auteur
Jessica Milner Davis FRSN is a member of Clare Hall Cambridge, UK; a research associate at the University of Sydney, Australia, and Brunel University’s Centre for Comedy Studies Research, UK; and past President of the International Society for Humor Studies.
Sharyn Roach Anleu is Matthew Flinders Distinguished Professor in the College of Humanities and Social Sciences at Flinders University, Adelaide, Australia; a Fellow of the Academy of the Social Sciences in Australia; and past President of The Australian Sociological Association.
Résumé
This book examines social aspects of humour relating to the judiciary, judicial behaviour, and judicial work across different cultures and eras, identifying how traditionally recorded wit and humorous portrayals of judges reflect social attitudes to the judiciary over time. It contributes to cultural studies and social science/socio-legal studies of both humour and the role of emotions in the judiciary and in judging. It explores the surprisingly varied intersections between humour and the judiciary in several legal systems: judges as the target of humour; legal decisions regulating humour; the use of humour to manage aspects of judicial work and courtroom procedure; and judicial/legal figures and customs featuring in comic and satiric entertainment through the ages.
Delving into the multi-layered connections between the seriousness of the work of the judiciary on the one hand, and the lightness of humour on the other hand, this fascinating collection will be of particular interest to scholars of the legal system, the criminal justice system, humour studies, and cultural studies.
Texte suppl.
“The collection is made accessible to scholars of all fields thanks to the succinct and detailed way through which the editors outline classical theories of humour.” (Rebecca Rose Nocella, RISU, Rivista Italiana di Studi sull’Umorismo, Vol. 14 (2), June, 2021)
“Judges, Judging and Humour is filled with wonderful yarns and jokes about judges and the law. … It is a great read and would make the perfect gift for anyone with an interest in the law.” (Pauline Spencer, Alternative Law Journal, Vol. 44 (4), 2019)
“For those interested in the use of humour in and around courts this is a trove of studies, analysis and anecdotes. It is replete with endnotes for each essay and the lists of references together with an excellent index make it a valuable, if lonely, resource for those seeking some understanding of the vexing combination of judges, judging and humour.” (Glenn Martin AM, Australian Law Journal, Vol. 93 (8), August, 2019)
“Judges, Judging and Humourdiscusses both jokes and tales about judges and the way humour is sometimes used by judges in court. … contain gems which will be of interest to general readers, … I would suggest most other forms of humour- is to get the biggest possible laugh.” (Brian Eassty, The Salisbury Review, 2019)
Commentaire
"The collection is made accessible to scholars of all fields thanks to the succinct and detailed way through which the editors outline classical theories of humour." (Rebecca Rose Nocella, RISU, Rivista Italiana di Studi sull'Umorismo, Vol. 14 (2), June, 2021)
"Judges, Judging and Humour is filled with wonderful yarns and jokes about judges and the law. ... It is a great read and would make the perfect gift for anyone with an interest in the law." (Pauline Spencer, Alternative Law Journal, Vol. 44 (4), 2019)
"For those interested in the use of humour in and around courts this is a trove of studies, analysis and anecdotes. It is replete with endnotes for each essay and the lists of references together with an excellent index make it a valuable, if lonely, resource for those seeking some understanding of the vexing combination of judges, judging and humour." (Glenn Martin AM, Australian Law Journal, Vol. 93 (8), August, 2019)
"Judges, Judging and Humour discusses both jokes and tales about judges and the way humour is sometimes used by judges in court. ... contain gems which will be of interest to general readers, ... I would suggest most other forms of humour- is to get the biggest possible laugh." (Brian Eassty, The Salisbury Review, 2019)
