On Captain Vere and the Electric Chair: Capital Punishment, Billy Budd, and Fantasies of Sovereign Power in the Late 19th Century

IF 0.4 Q3 LAW
Daniel LaChance
{"title":"On Captain Vere and the Electric Chair: Capital Punishment, Billy Budd, and Fantasies of Sovereign Power in the Late 19th Century","authors":"Daniel LaChance","doi":"10.1177/17438721231156602","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"While Herman Melville was writing Billy Bud, Sailor, political elites in his home state of New York were overhauling their state’s death penalty. Their work culminated in the Electrical Execution Act of 1888. In addition to changing the state’s execution method from hanging to electrocution, the legislation introduced new policies and execution procedures aimed at projecting an image of law as majestic and inexorable in its operation. By bringing new discipline and secrecy to executions, reformers hoped that they could exert greater control over the public’s response to them. Through a close reading of Billy Budd and archival documents related to the adoption of the electric chair, I argue that the novella grapples with a fantasy of sovereign power similar to the one that drove execution reform efforts in New York. Efforts to achieve total control over life and death, Melville suggests, are bound to fail because they require a depersonalization of both the agent and the subject of sovereign power that is unjust and, mercifully, unfeasible. Neither Billy’s death by hanging nor the first execution by electricity in New York had the effects on the public’s responses to executions that elites desired. Ironically, though, the failure of efforts to control the meaning of executions may have made capital punishment more palatable to the public than it otherwise would have been.","PeriodicalId":43886,"journal":{"name":"Law Culture and the Humanities","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.4000,"publicationDate":"2023-03-09","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Law Culture and the Humanities","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/17438721231156602","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"LAW","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

While Herman Melville was writing Billy Bud, Sailor, political elites in his home state of New York were overhauling their state’s death penalty. Their work culminated in the Electrical Execution Act of 1888. In addition to changing the state’s execution method from hanging to electrocution, the legislation introduced new policies and execution procedures aimed at projecting an image of law as majestic and inexorable in its operation. By bringing new discipline and secrecy to executions, reformers hoped that they could exert greater control over the public’s response to them. Through a close reading of Billy Budd and archival documents related to the adoption of the electric chair, I argue that the novella grapples with a fantasy of sovereign power similar to the one that drove execution reform efforts in New York. Efforts to achieve total control over life and death, Melville suggests, are bound to fail because they require a depersonalization of both the agent and the subject of sovereign power that is unjust and, mercifully, unfeasible. Neither Billy’s death by hanging nor the first execution by electricity in New York had the effects on the public’s responses to executions that elites desired. Ironically, though, the failure of efforts to control the meaning of executions may have made capital punishment more palatable to the public than it otherwise would have been.
《维尔船长和电椅:19世纪末的死刑、比利·巴德和君主权力幻想》
当赫尔曼·梅尔维尔在写《水手比利·巴德》时,他的家乡纽约州的政治精英们正在对该州的死刑进行彻底改革。他们的工作在1888年的《电气执行法》中达到了顶峰。除了将国家的处决方式从绞刑改为电刑外,该立法还引入了新的政策和执行程序,旨在展示法律在运作中的威严和不可阻挡的形象。通过给处决带来新的纪律和保密性,改革者希望他们能够对公众对处决的反应施加更大的控制。通过仔细阅读比利·巴德和与采用电椅有关的档案文件,我认为这部中篇小说与一种主权幻想作了斗争,这种幻想类似于推动纽约执行改革的幻想。梅尔维尔认为,实现对生与死的完全控制的努力注定会失败,因为它们需要对主权权力的代理人和主体进行人格化,这是不公正的,幸运的是,也是不可行的。无论是比利的绞刑还是纽约第一次电刑,都没有影响公众对精英们所期望的处决的反应。然而,具有讽刺意味的是,控制处决含义的努力的失败可能使死刑比其他情况下更受公众欢迎。
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
CiteScore
1.40
自引率
0.00%
发文量
33
期刊介绍: Our mission is to publish high quality work at the intersection of scholarship on law, culture, and the humanities. All commentaries, articles and review essays are peer reviewed. We provide a publishing vehicle for scholars engaged in interdisciplinary, humanistically oriented legal scholarship. We publish a wide range of scholarship in legal history, legal theory and jurisprudence, law and cultural studies, law and literature, and legal hermeneutics.
×
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:481959085
Book学术官方微信