19世纪的法律、文学和鸦片

IF 0.3 0 HUMANITIES, MULTIDISCIPLINARY
Chris Dent
{"title":"19世纪的法律、文学和鸦片","authors":"Chris Dent","doi":"10.16995/olh.465","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"It is not news to suggest that the law treated drugs like opium differently in the nineteenth century compared to today. These days, opium falls within the category of psychoactive drugs, for the purposes of the Psychoactive Substances Act 2016. This is because it ‘produces a psychoactive effect in a person … by stimulating or depressing the person’s central nervous system … [thereby] affect[ing] the person’s mental functioning or emotional state’ (section 2(2)).[i] There was no equivalent provision in any nineteenth-century law. The suggestion here is that the law of the time – specifically, the law in England – was incapable of regulating the use of such drugs because lawmakers did not have a conception of what “mental functioning” was; and, without such an idea, they had no basis upon which to seek to control the impact of the drugs. Expressed differently, without an understanding of the mind of the legal subject, those applying the law were limited in their capacity to understand the threats, posed by opium, to that subject’s mind. While the law was almost completely silent on this drug, popular culture was not. In this article I will sample a number of literary works that referred to opium use in order to explore the popular understanding of opium in English culture – including texts by Thomas De Quincey, Wilkie Collins and Arthur Conan Doyle. Taken together, a particular trajectory of attitudes may be deduced. A key benefit of looking at these examples is evident in the assessment that ‘novelists are quick to respond to the movement of our times, they know that we are ready to analyse our inner experience with an intimacy that our forefathers would have felt to be intolerable’ (Terman, 1919: ix). I will demonstrate that these authors, in turn, presage the changes to the regulation of drugs in the early twentieth century.","PeriodicalId":43026,"journal":{"name":"Open Library of Humanities","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.3000,"publicationDate":"2019-11-25","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Nineteenth-Century Law, Literature and Opium\",\"authors\":\"Chris Dent\",\"doi\":\"10.16995/olh.465\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"It is not news to suggest that the law treated drugs like opium differently in the nineteenth century compared to today. These days, opium falls within the category of psychoactive drugs, for the purposes of the Psychoactive Substances Act 2016. This is because it ‘produces a psychoactive effect in a person … by stimulating or depressing the person’s central nervous system … [thereby] affect[ing] the person’s mental functioning or emotional state’ (section 2(2)).[i] There was no equivalent provision in any nineteenth-century law. The suggestion here is that the law of the time – specifically, the law in England – was incapable of regulating the use of such drugs because lawmakers did not have a conception of what “mental functioning” was; and, without such an idea, they had no basis upon which to seek to control the impact of the drugs. Expressed differently, without an understanding of the mind of the legal subject, those applying the law were limited in their capacity to understand the threats, posed by opium, to that subject’s mind. While the law was almost completely silent on this drug, popular culture was not. In this article I will sample a number of literary works that referred to opium use in order to explore the popular understanding of opium in English culture – including texts by Thomas De Quincey, Wilkie Collins and Arthur Conan Doyle. Taken together, a particular trajectory of attitudes may be deduced. A key benefit of looking at these examples is evident in the assessment that ‘novelists are quick to respond to the movement of our times, they know that we are ready to analyse our inner experience with an intimacy that our forefathers would have felt to be intolerable’ (Terman, 1919: ix). I will demonstrate that these authors, in turn, presage the changes to the regulation of drugs in the early twentieth century.\",\"PeriodicalId\":43026,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Open Library of Humanities\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.3000,\"publicationDate\":\"2019-11-25\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Open Library of Humanities\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.16995/olh.465\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"0\",\"JCRName\":\"HUMANITIES, MULTIDISCIPLINARY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Open Library of Humanities","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.16995/olh.465","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"0","JCRName":"HUMANITIES, MULTIDISCIPLINARY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

与今天相比,19世纪的法律对鸦片等毒品的处理有所不同,这并不是什么新闻。目前,就《2016年精神活性物质法》而言,鸦片属于精神活性药物类别。这是因为它“通过刺激或抑制人的中枢神经系统……从而影响人的心理功能或情绪状态,在人身上产生心理作用”(第2(2)节)。[i] 在19世纪的任何法律中都没有类似的规定。这里的建议是,当时的法律——特别是英格兰的法律——无法规范此类药物的使用,因为立法者对什么是“精神功能”没有概念;而且,如果没有这样的想法,他们就没有寻求控制药物影响的依据。换言之,在不了解法律主体思想的情况下,适用法律的人理解鸦片对该主体思想构成的威胁的能力有限。虽然法律对这种药物几乎完全沉默,但流行文化却并非如此。在这篇文章中,我将挑选一些提到鸦片使用的文学作品,以探索英国文化中对鸦片的普遍理解——包括托马斯·德·昆西、威尔基·柯林斯和阿瑟·柯南·道尔的作品。综合起来,可以推断出态度的特定轨迹。研究这些例子的一个关键好处是,“小说家对我们时代的运动反应迅速,他们知道我们已经准备好用我们的祖先会感到无法忍受的亲密感来分析我们的内心体验”(Terman,1919:ix)。我将证明,这些作者反过来预示着20世纪初药物监管的变化。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Nineteenth-Century Law, Literature and Opium
It is not news to suggest that the law treated drugs like opium differently in the nineteenth century compared to today. These days, opium falls within the category of psychoactive drugs, for the purposes of the Psychoactive Substances Act 2016. This is because it ‘produces a psychoactive effect in a person … by stimulating or depressing the person’s central nervous system … [thereby] affect[ing] the person’s mental functioning or emotional state’ (section 2(2)).[i] There was no equivalent provision in any nineteenth-century law. The suggestion here is that the law of the time – specifically, the law in England – was incapable of regulating the use of such drugs because lawmakers did not have a conception of what “mental functioning” was; and, without such an idea, they had no basis upon which to seek to control the impact of the drugs. Expressed differently, without an understanding of the mind of the legal subject, those applying the law were limited in their capacity to understand the threats, posed by opium, to that subject’s mind. While the law was almost completely silent on this drug, popular culture was not. In this article I will sample a number of literary works that referred to opium use in order to explore the popular understanding of opium in English culture – including texts by Thomas De Quincey, Wilkie Collins and Arthur Conan Doyle. Taken together, a particular trajectory of attitudes may be deduced. A key benefit of looking at these examples is evident in the assessment that ‘novelists are quick to respond to the movement of our times, they know that we are ready to analyse our inner experience with an intimacy that our forefathers would have felt to be intolerable’ (Terman, 1919: ix). I will demonstrate that these authors, in turn, presage the changes to the regulation of drugs in the early twentieth century.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Open Library of Humanities
Open Library of Humanities HUMANITIES, MULTIDISCIPLINARY-
CiteScore
1.30
自引率
20.00%
发文量
24
审稿时长
15 weeks
期刊介绍: The Open Library of Humanities is a peer-reviewed, open-access journal open to submissions from researchers working in any humanities'' discipline in any language. The journal is funded by an international library consortium and has no charges to authors or readers. The Open Library of Humanities is digitally preserved in the CLOCKSS archive.
×
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