To send 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 sending content to .
To send content items to your Kindle, first ensure firstname.lastname@example.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 sending to your Kindle.
Note you can select to send to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations.
‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be sent 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.
This chapter concerns the translation of the rule of law by and through intermediaries. The intermediaries change and distort the messages from their global employers and funders in order to make them palatable to local and national actors – and also to build their own local career trajectories. The chapter highlights the main translation challenges that rule of law practitioners experience and presents intermediaries’ insider perspectives on how they translate rule of law. By analysing the strategies that intermediaries use, the chapter concludes that intermediaries become influential in their role as translators. While Myanmar’s political history and reality have produced a semi-authoritarian form of rule of law, associations with formal aspects of the concept were initially enhanced by foreign promoters who brought in their versions of a concept they deemed modelled on international standards that were universal and non-negotiable.
Emmalon Davis has offered an insightful analysis of an under-theorized form of epistemic oppression called epistemic appropriation. This occurs when an epistemic resource developed within marginalized situatedness gains inter-communal uptake, but the author of the epistemic resource is unacknowledged. In this paper, I argue that Davis's definition of epistemic appropriation is not exhaustive. In particular, she misses out on explaining cases of epistemic appropriation in which an intra-communal epistemic resource is obscured through inter-communal uptake. Being attentive to this form of epistemic appropriation allows us to identify unique forms of epistemic oppression that emerge as a result of socially maintained active ignorance.
The anti-colonial movements of the twentieth century created new interpretative contexts that drew attention to the racializations at play in Shakespeare’s work, as well as their disruptions. Using The Tempest as a case study, this chapter demonstrates how Shakespeare can be an ally in the struggle against racist abuse of power. Post-colonial methodologies teach us to notice how language secures the interests of the powerful and legitimizes colonial violence. In The Tempest the antagonism between the colonizer and those whose lands are invaded manifests in the battle between Caliban and Prospero: This is Shakespeare’s subject. But post-colonial theory affirms that the opportunity to attend to the vulnerabilities of the disempowered is available to scholars and audiences of every work. Post-colonial approaches do more than simply diversify the creative palette available to theater-makers; they provide the tools and the vocabulary to confront power and privilege, and affirm the possibility of a more just world.
This chapter explores the controversial relationship of magical realism to indigeneity from its beginnings in indigenismo in mid-twentieth century Latin America to that of contemporary indigenous writers in Australia and the Americas. It reveals that the relationship of magical realism to both indigeneity and indigenous writing is fraught with cultural politics that reflect the political challenges faced by indigenous communities in relation to settler culture. This is explored in three parts: firstly, through considering the appropriation of indigenous ideas and motifs into early magical realist; secondly, through the propensity of critics in postcolonial studies to identify works by indigenous writers incorporating traditional stories as magical realist; and finally, through the writing of Alexis Wright (Waanyi) and Eden Robinson (Haisla), who create a new direction in magical realism that is embedded in local indigenous cultural systems and simultaneously draws upon the transcultural hybridity within contemporary indigenous life.
Nineteen Eighty-Four does not seem to offer the most promising material for singers, rock stars, and opera performers. There is, nevertheless, a vast history of adaptation and appropriation of Orwell’s text, a sub-genre referred to here as ‘rock’n’prole’. This afterlife in music encompasses a wide range of forms and styles, from albums such as David Bowie’s Diamond Dogs (1974), Rage Against The Machine’s The Battle Of Los Angeles (1999), and Muse’s The Resistance (2009) to individual songs such as John Lennon’s ‘Only People’ (1973) and Radiohead’s ‘2+2=5’ (2003). There is also the controversial opera 1984 (2005), composed by Lorin Maazel, which demonstrates yet another vector for musical response to Orwellian dystopia. This chapter traces the history of these responses to Nineteen Eighty-Four in order to consider how musical adaptation brings into focus a key tension in dystopia more generally: that between entertainment and instruction. Does the act of taking Orwell’s novel as source material strip it of its critical content, once transmuted into song? Or does the act of adaptation reveal and make possible new kinds of criticism, aided and abetted by the confluence of text and music?
Bringing together leading Jonson scholars, Ben Jonson and Posterity provides new insights into this remarkable writer's reception and legacy over four centuries. Jonson was recognised as the outstanding English writer of his day and has had a powerful influence on later generations, yet his reputation is one of the most multifaceted and conflicted for any writer of the early modern period. The volume brings together multiple critical perspectives, addressing book history, the practice of reading, theatrical influence and adaptation, the history of performance, cultural representation in portraiture, film, fiction, and anecdotes to interrogate Jonson's 'myth'. The collection will be of great interest to all Jonson scholars, as well as having a wider appeal among early modern literary scholars, theatre historians, and scholars interested in intertextuality and reception from the Renaissance to the present day.
This chapter provides an historical analysis of the UK judiciary's limited role in central government public finance throughout the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries. Tax litigation represented the high point of judicial involvement in public finance, but judges' hostility to fiscal legislation did little to bolster Parliament's revenue-raising interests. Mid-nineteenth century explorations with judicial review of appropriation legislation never became a settled practice and the judiciary imposed no discernible constraints on the legal limits of public borrowing (by the Treasury) or lending (by the Bank of England). By the conclusion of the nineteenth century, it was clear that the common law judiciary would not have a prominent role in the model of parliamentary public finance which was exported throughout the common law world. Various celebrated and important cases are critiqued, including: Auckland Harbour Board v The King; Bowles v Bank of England; the Bankers' Case; and The Queen v The Lords Commissioners of the Treasury.
This chapter describes the export of the model of parliamentary public finance developed in the UK to the colonies, dominions and independent states which emerged from the British Empire. It opens by surveying the critical similarities and differences between public finance in the British and US constitutional traditions, before moving to explain how finance was treated in Canadian and Australasian colonial constitutions. Thereafter, the chapter explains how finance provisions became a form of 'constitutional boilerplate', adopted by independent dominions and republics in the twentieth century. By the conclusion of that constitutional itinerary, it is observed that the distribution of financial authority between Parliament and the executive government in nineteenth century Britain became the norm prevailing in the parliamentary constitutional world. Close attention is paid to the drafting history and provisions of constitutional documents from a number of parliamentary jurisdictions (including Australia, Canada, Indian, Malaysia, Nepal and Nigeria), as well as judicial decisions on public finance throughout the Commonwealth of Nations.
This chapter evaluates the limited function of common law judiciaries in public finance by reference to UK and Australian case studies. It opens by observing and explaining the asymmetrical involvement of judiciaries in public finance law: why disputes concerning tax legislation are more justiciable than disputes concerning appropriation, debt and monetary finance. The chapter then analyses the only modern attempt by a common law judiciary to expand its involvement in disputes concerning public expenditure, Williams v The Commonwealth of Australia, and its aftermath. That Australian case study neatly illustrates the judiciary's inability to effect a meaningful re-distribution of financial authority away from treasury departments and towards parliaments. The chapter then examines the problems with understanding common law courts as systemically reliable mechanisms to enforce parliamentary authority over taxation by reference to the UK judiciary's tax law and tax agency practice. The chapter concludes that the presence of judicial power does not substantially impact the distribution of financial authority between executive governments and parliaments.
This chapter commences a case study analysis into the influence of economic and financial conditions on the operation of public finance law and the constitutional distribution of authority between parliaments and executive governments. The fiscal activities (taxing and spending) of the central governments of the UK and the Commonwealth of Australian between 2005 and 2016 are selected for analysis. The chapter begins with a detailed examination of appropriation and taxation legislation in the two jurisdictions, including the respective financing contribution of annual and standing statutes and their role in delegating authority to treasury departments. The chapter then examines the influence of expansions and contractions in economic output on the balance of constitutional authority possessed by parliaments, with a special focus on the impact of the financial crisis. Thereafter, the often-hidden reality of public spending in breach of appropriation legislation is studied, along with the legal frameworks governing public accounts and audit. The chapter concludes by observing the vast amount of fiscal authority delegated to treasury departments by public finance law.
This chapter explains how a distinct constitutional model of public finance developed in the UK between 1700 and 1900, focusing on the legal and institutional relationship between Parliament and the Treasury. After providing critical economic context regarding the financial activities of British governments, the chapter explains how the complex inter-play of taxation and appropriation legislation distributed financial authority between parliament and executive government. It then moves to survey the growth of statutory public borrowing, the law underpinning the Bank of England's public financing functions, the appointment of the Treasury at the financial apex of Westminster government and the growth of a settled system of public audit. Special attention is paid to a number of topics: appropriation legislation (annual and standing); time-limited taxation statutes; the Treasury's power to adjust parliament's approved expenditure (virement); the connection between annual appropriation legislation and the UK's 'National Debt'; the Bank of England's powers to finance government; and the complicated relationship between Treasury and Comptroller and Auditor-General.
Drawing together the book's analyses of public finance law and parliamentary constitutionalism, this chapter argues against the descriptive validity of the idea of parliamentary control of public money and observes the implications of that argument for democratic control of public finance. It begins by settling on an analytical framework for assessing whether parliament does indeed 'control' public finance built upon an idea of 'financial self-rule'. That framework is then applied to the legal and institutional practices which were observed in earlier chapters: concluding that parliaments cannot be said to have control of public finance in any studied jurisdiction. After discussing how broadly that conclusion can be generalised, the chapter evaluates different descriptive models of public finance in parliamentary constitutions: executive control, financial interdependence and parliamentary ratification. The chapter concludes that the latter 'ratification' model is most compelling and explains why that model secures a low level of financial self-rule.
For much of the twentieth century, Indigenous writers faced daunting barriers in getting their books published; indeed, lack of access, delays in publishing, inadequate distribution, institutional racism, and precarious archiving practices have shaped the history of Indigenous writing in Canada. The obstacles to publishing reflect a larger reality in which the forces of appropriation continue to attempt to dispossess Indigenous people of lands, languages, communities, and families. Particularly since the 1990s, Indigenous writers have used strategies of reframing and de-framing in order to bring stories that have been overlooked back into circulation, and to tell new stories outside of the ever-adapting box of what is expected as “Indigenous literature.” Writers shift the frame to make stories more legible—or in some cases, to deliberately foreground silence and what is not (yet) told. This struggle to re-frame, de-frame, and shatter the existing frames of stories have opened up new spaces of freedom in Indigenous literary expression.
Public Finance and Parliamentary Constitutionalism analyses constitutionalism and public finance (tax, expenditure, audit, sovereign borrowing and monetary finance) in Anglophone parliamentary systems of government. The book surveys the history of public finance law in the UK, its export throughout the British Empire, and its entrenchment in Commonwealth constitutions. It explains how modern constitutionalism was shaped by the financial impact of warfare, welfare-state programs and the growth of central banking. It then provides a case study analysis of the impact of economic conditions on governments' financial behaviour, focusing on the UK's and Australia's responses to the financial crisis, and the judiciary's position vis-à-vis the state's financial powers. Throughout, it questions orthodox accounts of financial constitutionalism (particularly the views of A. V. Dicey) and the democratic legitimacy of public finance. Currently ignored aspects of government behaviour are analysed in-depth, particularly the constitutional role of central banks and sovereign debt markets.
Chiefly focusing on Swift’s Cowleyan odes and epistles of the 1690s, this chapter demonstrates the author’s early rejection of conventional imitation in favour of a spontaneous form of appropriative writing. Railing against the accumulated habits of his seventeenth-century forebears, Swift repeatedly reveals in the early poems his own thwarted attempts to reinvent poetry for an unheroic age. Temporarily discarding the panegyric mode at the end of the decade, Swift found a new metafictional style that challenged the very medium of poetry. How can we adequately describe whispering or smells? If a table-book could talk would it have anything valuable to say? What would the petition of a barely literate waiting woman sound like? What happens if an overconfident member of your circle finishes one of your unfinishable ballads?
Poets are makers, etymologically speaking. In practice, they are also thieves. Over a long career, from the early 1690s to the late 1730s, Jonathan Swift thrived on a creative tension between original poetry-making and the filching of familiar material from the poetic archive. The most extensive study of Swift's verse to appear in more than thirty years, Reading Swift's Poetry offers detailed readings of dozens of major poems, as well as neglected and recently recovered pieces. This book reaffirms Swift's prominence in competing literary traditions as diverse as the pastoral and the political, the metaphysical and the satirical, and demonstrates the persistence of unlikely literary tropes across his multifaceted career. Daniel Cook also considers the audacious ways in which Swift engages with Juvenal's satires, Horace's epistles, Milton's epics, Cowley's odes, and an astonishing array of other canonical and forgotten writers.
Despite mixed reactions to the first performance of Carmen on the Russian stage in 1878 in Saint-Petersburg, it rapidly became an indispensable part of the country’s operatic repertoire.
After the Revolution, the popularity of Carmen transcended the stage, lending its name to new perfumes and the Toreador’s tune to the ‘March of the Working-Peasants Army’. In theatre, meanwhile, new trends were aligning the opera with the tastes of proletarian audiences. Seemingly embodying the ideological triangle of realism, narodnost (closeness to the ‘people’) and – by some selective argumentation – optimism, Carmen provided a benchmark for new Soviet opera.
With Carmen’s popularity came the abstraction of the heroine from the operatic context. Borrowing from Shakespeare studies and the concept of ‘Hamletism’, this chapter will coin the term ‘Carmenism’ to refer to the tendency to interpret Carmen as a symbol, which in turn influences the interpretation of Carmen the opera, and thus keeps the music and its source alive for the appropriating nation or era. Through the prism of ‘Carmenism’ and using representative case studies, this chapter seeks to demonstrate how the various Russian/Soviet adaptations not only reflected the socio-political context of the country but also had a role in forming that culture.
From the 'old world' to the 'new' and back again, this transnational history of the performance and reception of Bizet's Carmen – whose subject has become a modern myth and its heroine a symbol – provides new understanding of the opera's enduring yet ever-evolving and resituated presence and popularity. This book examines three stages of cultural transfer: the opera's establishment in the repertoire; its performance, translation, adaptation and appropriation in Europe, the Americas and Australia; its cultural 'work' in Soviet Russia, in Japan in the era of Westernisation, in southern, regionalist France and in Carmen's 'homeland', Spain. As the volume reveals the ways in which Bizet's opera swiftly travelled the globe from its Parisian premiere, readers will understand how the story, the music, the staging and the singers appealed to audiences in diverse geographical, artistic and political contexts.
This article focuses on an analysis of ways in which conflicts between dancing as an act of solidarity, a tool for self-fulfillment, or as a form of an interpretative transformation have been played out in practicing dancing derived from different “African” cultures within a Swedish context. This period embraces African-American theatrical jazz dance during the 1960s and the more contemporary interest in dances from West African countries. The examples articulate modes of cultural appropriation. The question raised is whether a focus on embodied experience of dancing can subvert the practice of appropriation, or if the two approaches are contradictory.
The three case studies in this chapter provide evidence of the integral role of communicative practices associated with the royal voice in making claims for monarchic power. After providing an overview of the concept of imposture and imitation in the period, the discussion looks at the documentation used in the attempts of Perkin Warbeck, Edward Seymour and Jane Grey as part of their attempts to claim (some aspect of) royal status. Comparison with the authentic materials illustrates the salience of particular visual and linguistic features, including handwriting, layout, formulaicity and self-reference, for the assumption of power. The chapter offers a new perspective on the so-called egotism of Edward Seymour, Lord Protector, as well as testifying to the sophistication of Warbeck and Grey's respective efforts for the English throne.