What Kind of Critique for Central and Eastern European Legal Studies? Comparison as One of the Answers

Alexandra Mercescu

doi:10.18778/0208-6069.89.04

Authors

Alexandra Mercescu Universitatea de Vest (West University), Timișoara; Centre for Legal Education and Social Theory, Wrocław University https://orcid.org/0000-0002-7889-6412

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.18778/0208-6069.89.04

Keywords:

comparative law, critique, cultural resources, critical interdisciplinarity

Abstract

This paper seeks to emphasize the merits of comparative law as a critical legal enterprise. For this purpose, it first provides a brief overview of the various forms of critique that have been advocated in the field of comparative law. Second, it discusses four epistemological concerns as regards legal comparison that are meant to orient comparatists towards a critical mode of comparative reasoning. While most of the remarks comprised in this contribution apply to legal comparisons in general, a few observations shall be made with specific reference to the stakes and limits of legal comparisons in Central and Eastern Europe.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

References

Balkin, Jack. 1996. “Interdisciplinarity as Colonization”. Washington and Lee Law Review 53: 949–970.
Google Scholar

Baxi, Upendra. 2003. “The Colonialist Heritage”. In Comparative Legal Studies: Traditions and Transitions. 46–75. Edited by Pierre Legrand, Roderick Munday. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Google Scholar

Bönnemann, Maxim. Laura Jung. 2017. “Critical Legal Studies and Comparative Constitutional Law”. Max Planck Encyclopedia of Comparative Constitutional Law. http://dann.rewi.huberlin.de/doc/oxcon_critical_legal_studies_and_comparative_constitutional_law.pdf [Accessed: 15 September 2018].
Google Scholar

Chakrabarty, Dipesh. 2000. Provincializing Europe. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
Google Scholar

Cummings, Jonathon. Sara Kiesler. 2005. “Collaborative Research Across Disciplinary and Organizational Boundaries”. Social Studies of Science 35: 703–722.
Google Scholar

Esquirol, Jorge. 1997. “The Fictions of Latin American Law (Part I)”. Utah Law Review 2: 425–470.
Google Scholar

Esquirol, Jorge. 2003. “The Fictions of Latin American Law (Part II)”. Florida Law Review 55: 41–114.
Google Scholar

Fish, Stanley. 1989. “Being Interdisciplinary Is So Very Hard to Do”. Profession 239–249.
Google Scholar

Fletcher, George. 1998. “Comparative Law as a Subversive Discipline”. The American Journal of Comparative Law 46: 683–700.
Google Scholar

Foucault, Michel. 1990. “Qu’est-ce que la critique?” Bulletin de la Société française de la philosophie 84: 35–63.
Google Scholar

Frankenberg, Günter. 2016. Comparative Law as Critique. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar.
Google Scholar

Fuller, Steve. 2010. The Sociology of Intellectual Life. London: Sage.
Google Scholar

Gibbons, Michael. Camille Limoges. Helga Nowotny. Eds. 1994. The New Production of Knowledge. The Dynamics of Science and Research in Contemporary Societies. London: Sage.
Google Scholar

Girard, Charlotte. 2009. “L’énigme du lieu commun”. In Comparer les droits, résolument. 313–346. Edited by Pierre Legrand. Paris: P.U.F.
Google Scholar

Glanert, Simone. 2011. De la traductibilité du droit. Paris: Dalloz.
Google Scholar

Glanert, Simone. 2012. “Method?”. In Methods of Comparative Law. Edited by Pier Giuseppe Monateri, 61–81. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar.
Google Scholar

Goodrich, Peter. 2009. “Intellection and Indiscipline”. Journal of Law and Society 36: 460–490.
Google Scholar

Halley, Janet. Kerry Rittich. 2010. “Critical Directions in Comparative Family Law: Genealogies and Contemporary Studies of Family Law Exceptionalism”. American Journal of Comparative Law 58: 753.
Google Scholar

Horkheimer, Max. 1993. Between Philosophy and Social Science. Translated by G. Frederick Hunter, Matthew S. Kramer, John Torpey. Cambridge: MIT Press.
Google Scholar

Iancu, Bogdan. 2013. “Book Reviews”. Romanian Journal of Comparative Law 1: 92–101.
Google Scholar

Jullien, François. 2016. Il n’y a pas d’identité culturelle. Paris: L’Herne.
Google Scholar

Kennedy, David. 2003. “The Methods and The Politics”. In Comparative Legal Studies: Traditions and Transitions. 345–434. Edited by Pierre Legrand, Roderick Munday. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Google Scholar

Klein, Julie Thompson. 2010. “A Taxonomy of Interdisciplinarity”. In The Oxford Handbook of Interdisciplinarity. Edited by Robert Frodeman, Julie Thompson Klein, Carl Mitcham. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Google Scholar

Kukovec, Damjan. 2015. “Law and the Periphery”. European Journal of Law 21: 406–428.
Google Scholar

La Porta, Rafael. Florencio Lopez‐de‐Silanes. Andrei Shleifer. Robert W. Vishny. 1998. “Law and Finance”. Journal of Political Economy 106: 1113–1155.
Google Scholar

Legrand, Pierre. 2011. “Foreign Law: Understanding Understanding”. Journal of Comparative Law 6: 67–177.
Google Scholar

Legrand, Pierre. 2014. “Noted Publications”. Journal of Comparative Law 8: 444–459.
Google Scholar

Mańko, Rafał. Cosmin Cercel. Adam Sulikowski. Eds. 2016. Law and Critique in Central Europe. Oxford: Counterpress.
Google Scholar

Mattei, Ugo. 2006. “Comparative Law and Critical Legal Studies”. In The Oxford Handbook of Comaprative Law. Edited by Mathias Reimann, Reinhard Zimmermann. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Google Scholar

Mercescu, Alexandra. 2018. Pour une comparaison des droits indisciplinée. Basel: Helbing Lichtenhahn.
Google Scholar

Newell, William. 2003. “Apollo Meets Dionysius: Interdisciplinarity in Long-Standing Interdisciplinary Programs”. Issues in Integrative Studies 21: 9–42.
Google Scholar

Nicolescu, Basarab. 1996. La Transdisciplinarité: Manifeste. Monaco: Éditions du Rocher.
Google Scholar

Prosser, Tony. 2001. “Marketisation, Public Service and Universal Service”. In Adapting Legal Cultures. 223–240. Edited by David Nelken, Johannes Feest. Oxford: Hart Publishing.
Google Scholar

Reimann, Mathias. 2003. “Liability for Defective Products at the Beginning of the Twenty-First Century: Emergence of a Worldwide Standard?” The American Journal of Comparative Law 51: 751–838.
Google Scholar

Repko, Allen. 2012. Interdisciplinary Research. Process and Theory. Los Angeles: Sage.
Google Scholar

Resweber, Jean-Paul. 1998. “Disciplinarité, transdisciplinarité et postures du sujet”. In Du dialogue des disciplines. 19–36. Edited by Christine Maillard, Arlette Bothorel-Witz. Strasbourg: Presses Universitaires de Strasbourg.
Google Scholar

Ruskola, Teemu. 2013. Legal Orientalism. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University.
Google Scholar

Shamir, Hila. 2010. “The State of Care: Rethinking the Distributive Effects of Familial Care Policies in Liberal Welfare States”. American Journal of Comparative Law 58: 953–987.
Google Scholar

Shapiro, Martin. 1993. “The Globalization of Law”. Indiana Journal of Global Legal Studies 1: 37–64.
Google Scholar

Škop, Martin. 2016. “The Importance of Being a Linguist: Critical Legal Thought in Central Europe”. In Law and Critique in Central Europe. Edited by Rafał Mańko, Cosmin Cercel, Adam Sulikowski. Oxford: Counterpress.
Google Scholar

Stengers, Isabelle. 1987. “Complexité: effet de mode ou problème?” In D’une science à l’autre. Des concepts nomades. 331–351. Edited by Isabelle Stengers. Paris: Éditions du Seuil.
Google Scholar

Watson, Alan. 1993. Legal Transplants. Athens, GA: University of Georgia Press.
Google Scholar

Wiegand, Wolfgang. 1991. “The Reception of American Law in Europe”. American Journal of Comparative Law 30: 229–248.
Google Scholar

Zweigert, Konrad. Hein Kötz. 1998. Introduction to Comparative Law. Translated by Tony Weir. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Google Scholar