Some (Brief) Reflections About Law and Literature

My own work in regard to "law and literature" has involved far more the intersections of literary theory than, say, the potential contribution of literature to enhancing the sensitivity of lawyers to issues of justice. Although there continue to be some holdouts, I take it that most contemporary legal theorists will concede, albeit some of them reluctantly, the importance of some familiarity with the work of literary theorists, even if it is also necessary to take into account the differences, as well as the similarities, between legal and literary documents. This (relative) consensus is something to cheer, and the editors of (and contributors to) the Cardozo Studies in Law and Literature are certainly entitled to take justifiable pride in their own role over the past decade in this important development within the legal and, for that matter, the wider academy. All of this being conceded, indeed, applauded, it also seems time, as is appropriate on anniversaries, to reflect on where the relationship is headed, as well as where it has been. All relationships face the problem of stagnation and the endless repetition of familiar, perhaps even comfortable, routines; there is no reason to believe that legal analysts who have become involved, in whatever fashion, with literature are immune from such ruts.