Twitter, King Lear, and the Freedom of Speech, by John Curtis, and Judicial Allusion as Ornament: A Response to John Curtis’s, ‘Twitter, King Lear, and the Freedom of Speech’ by Professor Gary Watt

J. Curtis, Gary Watt
{"title":"Twitter, King Lear, and the Freedom of Speech, by John Curtis, and Judicial Allusion as Ornament: A Response to John Curtis’s, ‘Twitter, King Lear, and the Freedom of Speech’ by Professor Gary Watt","authors":"J. Curtis, Gary Watt","doi":"10.31273/EIRJ.V1I2.90","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"On 27 July 2012, in his judgment following ‘The Twitter Joke Trial’, the Lord Chief Justice of England & Wales quoted from King Lear (Folio).  The trial was the first time a British Court had considered the use of Twitter in the context of a bomb hoax.  The judgment was hailed as ‘a victory for common sense’, reversing decisions of two lower courts.  It now provides authority against similar prosecutions.  This paper argues that the use of a four-hundred-year-old Shakespearean text in negotiating modern legal principles is of considerable cultural significance – both through using the familiar to respond to the new – and by invoking Shakespeare’s voice within the powerful social mechanism of the law courts.  It also considers the advantages and disadvantages of literary allusions within legal proceedings, contrasting these two widely reported judgments. This piece is adapted from a transcript of: King Lear, Twitter and the Da Vinci Code given as part of the Sidelights on Shakespeare lecture series at University of Warwick on 29 November 2013. Professor Gary Watt provides a response to Curtis's critical reflection, considering judicial allusion as logic or ornament.  Image: Cordelia in the Court of King Lear , Sir John Gilbert (1873)","PeriodicalId":268124,"journal":{"name":"Exchanges: The Warwick Research Journal","volume":"2 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2014-03-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Exchanges: The Warwick Research Journal","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.31273/EIRJ.V1I2.90","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

On 27 July 2012, in his judgment following ‘The Twitter Joke Trial’, the Lord Chief Justice of England & Wales quoted from King Lear (Folio).  The trial was the first time a British Court had considered the use of Twitter in the context of a bomb hoax.  The judgment was hailed as ‘a victory for common sense’, reversing decisions of two lower courts.  It now provides authority against similar prosecutions.  This paper argues that the use of a four-hundred-year-old Shakespearean text in negotiating modern legal principles is of considerable cultural significance – both through using the familiar to respond to the new – and by invoking Shakespeare’s voice within the powerful social mechanism of the law courts.  It also considers the advantages and disadvantages of literary allusions within legal proceedings, contrasting these two widely reported judgments. This piece is adapted from a transcript of: King Lear, Twitter and the Da Vinci Code given as part of the Sidelights on Shakespeare lecture series at University of Warwick on 29 November 2013. Professor Gary Watt provides a response to Curtis's critical reflection, considering judicial allusion as logic or ornament.  Image: Cordelia in the Court of King Lear , Sir John Gilbert (1873)
约翰·柯蒂斯的《推特、李尔王和言论自由》,以及加里·瓦特教授的《作为点缀的司法暗示:对约翰·柯蒂斯的《推特、李尔王和言论自由》的回应》
2012年7月27日,在“推特笑话审判”之后的判决中,英格兰和威尔士首席大法官引用了《李尔王》(开本)。这次审判是英国法院第一次考虑在炸弹骗局的背景下使用Twitter。这一判决被誉为“常识的胜利”,推翻了两个下级法院的判决。它现在提供了反对类似起诉的权力。本文认为,在协商现代法律原则时,使用四百年前的莎士比亚文本具有相当大的文化意义——既通过用熟悉的事物回应新的事物,又通过在法院这一强大的社会机制中援引莎士比亚的声音。它还考虑了法律诉讼中文学典籍的利弊,对比了这两种广泛报道的判决。这篇文章改编自2013年11月29日华威大学莎士比亚系列讲座的一部分:李尔王、推特和达芬奇密码。加里·瓦特教授对柯蒂斯的批判性反思做出了回应,认为司法典藏是一种逻辑或装饰。图片:《李尔王宫廷中的科迪莉亚》,约翰·吉尔伯特爵士(1873)
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信
小红书