Comments on: The Tragic End of Wigs

By: LM

LM — Sun, 15 Jul 2007 06:50:19 +0000

Oh dear. Really? I was hoping that this post was written in jest, but…

Regarding the demystification of the law: Is this really such an awful phenomenon? Drawing a parallel between law and religion (humor me), was the Protestant Reformation such a terrible thing for religion? (Wars and religious sectarianism aside.) Perhaps this is taking an unsophisticated view, but I would argue that the law should be more, not less, accessible.

Moving on…

Regarding the relationship between ceremonial garb and judicial performance: If American judges were made to don a wig and a (more) formal robe, would that make them any less likely to fall asleep in court? Relatedly, did Rehnquist’s chevron stripes cause him to bear his role with greater solemnity? (His stripes were inspired by a costume worn in a comic opera about fairies; key word: “comic”. Hardly a deferential gesture to the solemnity of one’s role as the CJ of the Supreme Court, wouldn’t you agree?)

Those seeking to identify remnants of tradition in the U.S. legal system might take solace in the fact that the Solicitor General is still expected to play dress-up before the Supreme Court. Well, then, at least one person can be expected to take his job seriously.

By: Frank

Frank — Sat, 14 Jul 2007 00:30:52 +0000

PS: for those piqued by references to “law french,” check out this intro to Ian Shapiro’s “Flight from Reality in the Human Sciences”:

http://press.princeton.edu/chapters/i8083.pdf

By: Frank

Frank — Sat, 14 Jul 2007 00:23:42 +0000

I approve the wigs for Benthamite reasons–much cheaper to throw those on than invest in nice haircuts/”product”.

Moreover, gowns are great for hiding a cheap suit.

Anything to stop positional competition for appearance is all to the good! see

http://www.chas.uchicago.edu/documents/MD0607/Are%

20Positional%20Externalities%20Different.pdf

By: Patrick S. O'Donnell

Patrick S. O'Donnell — Fri, 13 Jul 2007 21:59:34 +0000

Instead of Edmund Burke who, after all, often mystifies tradition (tradition for tradition’s sake; i.e., I don’t think Burke really helps us appreciate why tradition(s) are of value, or what persuasive reasons might be enlisted on behalf of, say, ritual), I suggest we look at the Confucian (and neo-Confucian) conception of li (holy ritual, social norms, rituals of propriety, social ‘grammar,’ conventions, etiquette, etc.) by way of understanding what may be at stake here, in other words, for a provocative theory of “ritual” in a rather expansive sense. See, for instance:

Ames, Roger T. and Henry Rosemont, Jr., trans. (with intro.). (1998) The Analects of Confucius: A Philosophical Translation. New York: Ballantine Books.

Chong, Kim-chong. (2007) Early Confucian Ethics. Chicago, IL: Open Court.

Fingarette, Herbert. (1972) Confucius: The Secular as Sacred. New York: Harper Torchbooks.

Goldin, Paul Rakita. (1999) Rituals of the Way: The Philosophy of Xunzi. Chicago, IL: Open Court.

Hall, David L. and Roger T. Ames. (1987) Thinking Through Confucius. Albany, NY: State University of New York Press.

Liu, JeeLoo. (2006) An Introduction to Chinese Philosophy: From Ancient Philosophy to Chinese Buddhism. Malden, MA: Blackwell.

Nylan, Michael. (2001) The Five “Confucian” Classics. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.

Shun, Kwong-loi and David B. Wong, eds. (2004) Confucian Ethics: A Comparative Study of Self, Autonomy, and Community. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.

Slingerland, Edward, trans. (2003) Confucius: Analects (with selections from traditional commentaries). Indianapolis, IN: Hackett Publ.

Van Norden, Bryan W., ed. (2002) Confucius and the Analects: New Essays. New York: Oxford University Press.