To save content items to your account,
please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies.
If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account.
Find out more about saving content to .
To save content items to your Kindle, first ensure no-reply@cambridge.org
is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings
on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part
of your Kindle email address below.
Find out more about saving to your Kindle.
Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations.
‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi.
‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.
About nine tenths of the way through Derrida, the 2002 documentary film by Kirby Dick and Amy Ziering Kofman, Kofman decides to ask Derrida what he would like to see in a documentary about a philosopher such as Heidegger, Kant or Hegel. After pausing for ten seconds to scratch his ear, stare into space, and draw his hand down across his cheeks and mouth, Derrida replies that he would like to see consideration of ‘their sex lives [leur vie sexuelle]’. He adds to the quip somewhat glibly – ‘if you want a quick answer, okay?’ – before expanding upon it more seriously:
That they talk about their sex lives … or that [in the film] one talks about their sex life … Because it's what they don't talk about. I’d like them to talk about what they don't talk about. Why are these philosophers presented as asexual [asexués] in their work? Why have they erased their sexual life from their work, and why have they never taken into account their private lives – when I say ‘sex life’ I mean ‘private’, their private lives? There is nothing more important in private life than love … I want them to talk about the part played by love in their private life.
And in response to the follow-up question concerning whether he would like to be asked to do the same in the documentary being filmed, he replies that he didn't say he would answer such a question, but:
There are in the texts I have published quite a few things; they are also disguised [dissimulées] of course, but I haven't practiced the same type of dissimulation as … the great philosophers you have just named. I’ve dissimulated of course, I’ve dissimulated like everybody else, but not in the same way … I talk about it when I want to, and when I can.
Allen Ginsberg visited China in 1984, first as part of an American delegation of writers and then as a private traveler. He visited many cities over a period of several months and spent time lecturing on American poetry. He found China oppressive and, in many ways, disappointing, and also he suffered many health problems owing to the pollution there; but nonetheless his time in China was a creatively fertile period for him, resulting in a number of important poems. This chapter details his travels around China, focusing on a sense of paranoia that plagued him because he was in a totalitarian state where he was constantly observed. It also looks at the poems that emerged from his trip, examining the various influences his inquiries into Chinese poetry had on his own work.
This chapter examines the imbrication of whiteness, racialisation and conversion in the Middle English romance The King of Tars. The scopic regime of Christianity operates like a facial recognition system, whose limitations reflect ideological biases: faith determines whether an animate assemblage is a formless lump of flesh or an enfaced human body. Racialisation and conversion are somatechnologisations of the human, in which the figure of the turn enacts the interpellation of the white Christian subject. But the turn towards whiteness necessitates a backward turn – a dorsal turn – to the flesh, before the production of the body. It is a public secret whose revelation is only possible through the defacement of whiteness that has become normalised and social. Moreover, racialisation materialises as a double inscription of violence: first, on the flesh, then the body. Both articulations leave behind ineradicable hieroglyphics of brutality upon the material surface. Conversion imposes a white body upon the flesh, yet in medieval medicine, the natural colour of flesh is conceived as white. The white of the flesh therefore stands before the whiteness of the racialised and converted body. Whiteness as racial property defines the white melancholic subject, whose self-impoverishment is indistinguishable from their act of self-fashioning. The drive to fabricate and possess a white, racialised and Christian identity is the compulsion of habeas album: the production of the white melancholic body as thing and property. But before the making of property, the dorsality of whiteness is the structure of flesh behind the contours of the body.
The 9th Willi Steiner Memorial Lecture took place during the BIALL Annual Conference at the Queens Hotel, Leeds on Thursday 13 June 2024. David Wills delivered the lecture and looked back over the last three decades and reflected on the many changes and challenges, especially with regard to technological developments, that have impacted on the law library and legal information world. His focus then shifted to more recent times and developments in law at a global level and the associated challenges of curating resources and collections to match the wide variety of interests across legal scholarship. The lecture touched on the demands in legal education, changes to publishing models, the financial challenges facing higher education and, most recently, the impact of the Covid-19 pandemic that altered research and study patterns, and which accelerated the demand for digital resources. Finally, the lecture looked to the next 30 years and the unstoppable rise of artificial intelligence (AI), in order to determine what AI would mean for the future of law librarianship. The lecture identified the part law librarians and legal information professionals could play concerning AI and how they could help to protect academic integrity.
Francis Noel-Baker (1920–2009) was an English Philhellene politician and self-proclaimed benevolent landowner in Euboea whose relationship in his later years with Greek governments and people descended into acrimony and litigation. This stemmed from the decision he took to effectively become an apologist for the military junta which seized power in Athens between 1967 and 1974. This was despite London being a centre for Greek resistance-in-exile, the opposition to the regime shown by many of his fellow MPs and Labour Party colleagues, and his own earlier left-wing sympathies, including his support for the communist-backed partisans in Greece during the Second World War. Noel-Baker's advocacy of the Colonels reflected not merely political reality and economic expediency, as with the similar stance of the British government, but stemmed from his outdated convictions that Greece required saving from international communism and internal weakness.
In this article David Wills, the Librarian of the Squire Law Library, offers a brief description of the extraordinary range of architecture at the University of Cambridge with particular reference to the David Williams Building, designed by the world-renowned architects Foster + Partners. He suggests that, in the context of the Squire Law Library, which occupies the top three floors of the David Williams Building, the building has truly come of age; he looks at some of the features and challenges of its modern design; and notes that the building looks set to play a major part in the education and research activity of legal scholars and university students into the distant future. This article is a personal reflection based on the author's experience of using and working in the building for some 26 years since it was constructed and opened in the mid-1990s.
Legal Information Management has reached 50 years since it was launched, under a different name, by the British and Irish Association of Law Librarians (BIALL). In this article the current editor of the journal, David Wills, reviews the history of the journal from its launch in spring 1970 when it took the name The Law Librarian, and describes how it has evolved, often reflecting the changing nature of the legal information profession in those intervening years. He follows the journey as this periodical developed from small beginnings, explains how it was enhanced by successive editors, why it became necessary to change its title in 2001 and describes the move to the current publisher, Cambridge University Press in 2004. He reflects on the current status of the journal, as an electronic product while also retaining its profile in print and, finally, he draws attention to some possible challenges for the future.