Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-t8hqh Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-22T04:49:42.808Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Engaged Research, “Goose Bumps,” and the Role of the Public Intellectual

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  02 April 2024

Kitty Calavita
Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

Core share and HTML view are not available for this content. However, as you have access to this content, a full PDF is available via the ‘Save PDF’ action button.

As I was preparing my remarks for today, I thought about other LSA Presidential Addresses that had resonated with me, from Felice Levine's (1990) description of Lily Tomlin's “Trudy,” and the “goose bumps” that she (Felice) got from sociolegal studies, to Frank Munger's (2001) appeal to law and society scholars to do engaged research.

I realized that two themes I care passionately about were implicit in several of those previous talks, and that's why I had found them so compelling. They are the importance of asking the big questions (those that give us goose bumps), and the urgent need for a commitment to engaged research. I will argue today that there are in fact close links between these two themes. And, I will suggest that making these links explicit may help us address some of the dilemmas attached to the role of the engaged intellectual.

Type
Presidential Address and Commentaries
Information
Law & Society Review , Volume 36 , Issue 1 , 2002 , pp. 5 - 20
Copyright
Copyright © 2002 Law and Society Association.

Footnotes

I would like to thank Valerie Jenness, Kim Lane Scheppele, and Carroll Seron who gave me many helpful suggestions on an early draft of this address.

References

Agger, Ben (2000) Public Sociology: From Social Facts to Literary Acts. New York: Rowland & Littlefield.Google Scholar
Bauman, Zygmunt (1992) Intimations of Postmodernity. New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
Benda, Julien (1928) The Treason of the Intellectuals. Translated by Aldington, Richard. New York: William Morrow & Company.Google Scholar
Bourdieu, Pierre (1984) Distinction: A Social Critique of the Judgment of Taste. Cambridge, MA: Harvard Univ. Press.Google Scholar
Boynton, Robert S. (1995) “The New Intellectuals,” Atlantic Monthly 54–70 (March).Google Scholar
Chambliss, William J., ed. (1984) “Crime and Conflict Theory,” Introduction to W. J. Chambliss, ed., Criminal Law in Action, 2d Ed. New York: Macmillan.Google Scholar
Chilton, Roland (2001) “Viable Policy: The Impact of Federal Funding and the Need for Independent Research Agendas—The American Society of Criminology, 2000 Presidential Address,” 39 American Society of Criminology 1–8.Google Scholar
Cole, K. C. (2000a) “Scientists Think They've Glimpsed the 'God Particle,'” Los Angeles Times, 3 Nov., pp. A–1–A-19.Google Scholar
Cole, K. C. (2000b) “One Thing Is Perfectly Clear: Nothingness Is Perfect,” Los Angeles Times, 14 Dec, pp. B–2.Google Scholar
Comaroff, John L., & Comaroff, Joan (1997) Of Revelation and Revolution. Chicago: Univ. of Chicago Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Contemporary Sociology: A Journal of Reviews (1999) “Symposia on Half-Truths with Real Consequences: Journalism, Research, and Public Policy,” vol. 28, no. 1:1–34.Google Scholar
Coutin, Susan Bibler (1994) “Enacting Law Through Social Practice: Sanctuary as a Form of Resistance,” in Lazarus-Black, M. & Hirsch, S., eds., Contested States: Law, Hegemony, and Resistance. New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
Felstiner, William L. F. (1998) “Poor Connections: The Relationships Between Sociolegal Research and Social Policy.” Unpublished talk at Cardiff Seminar, Dec. 1998.Google Scholar
Fitzpatrick, Peter (1997) “Distant Relations: The New Constructionism in Critical and Socio-Legal Studies,” in Thomas, P. A., ed., Socio-Legal Studies. Aldershot: Dartmouth Publishing.Google Scholar
Fitzpatrick, Peter (1998) “Missing Possibility: Socialization, Culture, and Consciousness,” in Sarat, A., Constable, M., Engel, D., Hans, V., & Lawrence, S., eds., Crossing Boundaries: Traditions and Transformations in Law and Society Research. Evanston, IL: Northwestern Univ. Press.Google Scholar
Galanter, Marc (1974) “Why the 'Haves' Come Out Ahead: Speculations on the Limits on Social Change,” 9 Law & Society Rev. 95–160.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gellner, Ernest (1990) “La Trahison de la Trahison des Clercs,” in Maclean, I., Montefiore, A. & Winch, P., eds., The Political Responsibility of Intellectuals. Cambridge: Cambridge Univ. Press.Google Scholar
Gibbs, David N. (2001) “Academics and Spies: The Silence that Roars,” Los Angeles Times, 28 Jan., p. M-2.Google Scholar
Goldfarb, Jeffrey C. (1998) Civility and Subversion: The Intellectual in Democratic Society. Cambridge, England: Cambridge Univ. Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gouldner, Alvin W. (1979) The Future of Intellectuals and the Rise of the New Class. New York: Seabury Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gramsci, Antonio (1957) The Modern Prince and Other Writings. New York: International Publishers.Google Scholar
Hanchard, Michael (1996) “Intellectual Pursuit,” The Nation, 19 Feb., pp. 22–24.Google Scholar
Handler, Joel (1992) “Postmodernism, Protest, and the New Social Movements,” Presidential Address. 26 Law & Society Rev. 697–731.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Havel, Vaclav (1995) “The Responsibility of Intellectuals,” New York Review of Books, 22 June, pp. 36–37.Google Scholar
Jacoby, Russell (1987) The Last Intellectuals: American Culture in the Age of Academe. New York: Basic Books.Google Scholar
Jennings, Jeremy, & Kemp-Welch, Anthony, eds. (1997) Intellectuals in Politics: From the Dreyfus Affair to Salman Rushdie. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Kagan, Robert A. (1989) “How Much Does Law Matter?: Labor Relations in Rotterdam and U.S. Ports.” Working Paper. Berkeley, CA: Institute of Governmental Studies, Univ. of California, Berkeley.Google Scholar
Konrad, George, & Szelenyi, Ivan (1979) The Intellectuals on the Road to Class Power. Brighton, England: Harvester Press.Google Scholar
Lazarus-Black, Mindie, & Hirsch, Susan F., eds. (1994) Contested States: Law, Hegemony, and Resistance. New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
Lemert, Charles C., ed. (1991) Intellectuals and Politics: Social Theory in a Changing World. London: Sage.Google Scholar
Lempert, Richard (1988) “‘Between Cup and Lip’: Social Science Influences on Law and Policy,” 10 Law & Policy 167–200.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lempert, Richard (1989) “Humility Is a Virtue: On the Publicization of Policy-Relevant Research,” 23 Law & Society Rev. 145–61.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Leo, Richard (1996) “Police Scholarship for the Future: Resisting the Pull of the Policy Audience,” 30 Law & Society Rev. 865–79.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Levine, Felice (1990) “Goose Bumps and ‘The Search for Signs of Intelligent Life’ in Sociolegal Studies: After Twenty-Five Years,” Presidential Address. 24 Law & Society Rev. 7–33.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Macaulay, Stewart (1984) “Law and the Behavioral Sciences: Is There a There There?” 6 Law & Policy 158.Google Scholar
Merry, Sally Engle (1994) “Courts as Performances: Domestic Violence Hearings in a Hawai'i Family Court,” in Lazarus-Black, M. & Hirsch, S., eds., Contested States: Law, Hegemony, and Resistance. New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
Merry, Sally Engle (1995) “Resistance and the Cultural Power of Law,” Presidential Address. 29 Law & Society Rev. 11–26.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Michael, John (2000) Anxious Intellectuals: Academic Professionals, Public Intellectuals, and Enlightenment Values. Durham, NC: Duke Univ. Press.Google Scholar
Mills, C. Wright (1956) The Power Elite. New York: Oxford Univ. Press.Google Scholar
Mills, C. Wright (1959) The Sociological Imagination. New York: Oxford Univ. Press.Google Scholar
Mills, C. Wright (1963) “The Social Role of the Intellectual,” in Power, Politics, and People: The Collected Essays of C.Wright Mills, I. L. Horowitz, ed., New York: Oxford Univ. Press.Google Scholar
Munger, Frank (2001) “Inquiry and Activism in Law and Society,” Presidential Address. 35 Law & Society Rev. 7–20.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Neibuhr, Reinhold (1960) “Liberals and the Marxist Heresy,” in deHuszar, G. B., ed., The Intellectuals: A Controversial Portrait. Glencoe, IL: Free Press.Google Scholar
Reed, Adolph (1995) “What Are the Drums Saying, Booker?” Village Voice, 11 April, pp. 31–36.Google Scholar
Romano, Carlin (2000) “It's Time for 'Comparative Intellectuals,'” Chronicle of Higher Education, 17 Nov., pp. B–10.Google Scholar
Said, Edward W. (1994) Representations of the Intellectual: The 1993 Reith Lectures. New York: Pantheon Books.Google Scholar
Sajo, Andras (1990) “New Legalism in East Central Europe: Law as an Instrument of Social Transformation,” 17 J. of Law & Society 329–44.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sarat, Austin, & Kearns, Thomas R., eds. (1993) Law in Everyday Life. Ann Arbor: Univ. of Michigan Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sarat, Austin, & Silbey, Susan (1988) “The Pull of the Policy Audience,” 10 Law & Policy 97–166.Google Scholar
Schalk, David L. (1997) “Are Intellectuals a Dying Species?” in Jennings, J. & Kemp-Welch, A., eds., Intellectuals in Politics: From the Dreyfus Affair to Salman Rushdie. New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
Smart, Carol (1989) Feminism and the Power of Law. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Stossel, Scott (2001) “Bibliosophy,” American Prospect, 29 Jan., pp. 40–43.Google Scholar
Thompson, Ginger (2001) “Fuentes Finds His Powers Have a Will of Their Own,” New York Times, 31 Jan., p. E1.Google Scholar
Williams, Patricia J. (1991) The Alchemy of Race and Rights: Diary of a Law Professor. Cambridge, MA: Harvard Univ. Press.Google Scholar
Yngvesson, Barbara (1993) Virtuous Citizens, Disruptive Subjects: Order and Complaint in a New England Court. New York: Routledge.Google Scholar