This 24-lecture course offers a wide-ranging analysis of the relationship between law and literature by examining representative moments in the long history of these two interwoven ways of ordering the world, both representations of culture through language, image, symbol systems, and action.
I see I rated this at 4 before, but now I would give it a 3. It's probably me - either my brain has aged or I'm just in a different place than I was the first time I read it, so I'll leave the 4 and call it 3.5.
good stuff, but some lectures (bleak house, lolita, the oresteia, a jury of her peers, beloved, kafka) are quite substantial at 30 mins, while others (most notably measure for measure, the merchant of venice, the winter's tale) warrant 60 or even 90 minutes to fully explore. also, my appreciation for the lectures was based in large part on my familiarity with the texts (i've read all of the former, none of the latter), as SSH's ability to effectively summarize these works is hit or miss. she's got a great british-canadian accent, though, and the penultimate lecture on maternal filicide could probably be a 24-lecture course unto itself. an agreeable enough accompaniment to the commute.
This is an interesting course. I have listened before but this time I take away the idea that for most of us we see the law as entertainment in all the crime shows, novels, etc. that we have in our world. It has not always been that way. In the past much of the literature and art around the law was to inform and encourage acceptance of the law.
I had been looking forward to this course, as I learn a lot from the Great Courses. This was not my favorite. The speaker/ writer goes into the topics so deeply, the classes are more for English Literature graduate students than for average Great Courses participants.
While I appreciated the introduction to literature I did not know, I found this course difficult to follow. It seemed like a series of commentaries on specific works and lacked a clear coherent theme that would tie everything together.
There’s some interesting stuff in here, but it often veers into straightforward literary analysis without ever really giving a compelling account of the link between literary representation and the operation of law as a material experience.
Very thought provoking, challenging the audience to view literary works as well as the law from another perspective. I would actually consider going through the lectures all over again.