Law and the Building Blocks of the Familiar

This article draws on the insights offered by Francesca Polletta, Calvin Morrill, and Elizabeth Chiarello in their comments on my book, Caring for Our Own: Why There Is No Political Demand for New American Social Welfare Rights (2014) to further specify the conditions that unleash the emancipatory p...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:Law & social inquiry 2018, Vol.43 (1), p.258-266
1. Verfasser: Levitsky, Sandra R.
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
container_end_page 266
container_issue 1
container_start_page 258
container_title Law & social inquiry
container_volume 43
creator Levitsky, Sandra R.
description This article draws on the insights offered by Francesca Polletta, Calvin Morrill, and Elizabeth Chiarello in their comments on my book, Caring for Our Own: Why There Is No Political Demand for New American Social Welfare Rights (2014) to further specify the conditions that unleash the emancipatory potential of law. I argue that much of law's emancipatory power lies in its capacity to "construct anew"—to demonstrate new solutions to social problems by connecting the familiar with the strange. Drawing on the case of child care, I find that laws do not automatically provide the cultural resources to construct new claims for state intervention, but that existing laws—and the symbols, narratives, and norms that we associate with them—serve as grist for the political imagination and can be transposed to new contexts or institutions. In the absence of cultural resources in one institution (such as work), advocates can use legal discourse to strategically shift responsibility for a social problem to a new institution (such as education), opening up possibilities for new models, organizational actors, constituencies, and frames.
doi_str_mv 10.1111/lsi.12338
format Article
fullrecord <record><control><sourceid>jstor_proqu</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_journals_2001202201</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><jstor_id>26630939</jstor_id><sourcerecordid>26630939</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c1948-4b8d75eebb8642e65168593b27b78a1915c8311b6cf180cb9d36fef57f7b1a9e3</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNp1kE1LAzEQhoMoWKsHf4Cw4Elk20y-c7TFamHBg3oOyW6iW7fdmrSU_nvXrnpzLgPD884MD0KXgEfQ1bhJ9QgIpeoIDUAymTMm9DEaYKVlLjgTp-gspQXGmBDBB-i2sLvMrqps8-6zybZuqnr1lk2atvxIWRsO45ld1k1t4zk6CbZJ_uKnD9Hr7P5l-pgXTw_z6V2Rl6CZyplTleTeO6cEI15wEIpr6oh0UlnQwEtFAZwoAyhcOl1REXzgMkgHVns6RNf93nVsP7c-bcyi3cZVd9IQjIF0r2PoqJueKmObUvTBrGO9tHFvAJtvF6ZzYQ4uOnbcs7u68fv_QVM8z38TV31ikTZt_EsQISjWVNMv7MlnKQ</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>2001202201</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Law and the Building Blocks of the Familiar</title><source>PAIS Index</source><source>HeinOnline Law Journal Library</source><source>Cambridge Journals</source><source>Sociological Abstracts</source><source>Jstor Complete Legacy</source><creator>Levitsky, Sandra R.</creator><creatorcontrib>Levitsky, Sandra R.</creatorcontrib><description>This article draws on the insights offered by Francesca Polletta, Calvin Morrill, and Elizabeth Chiarello in their comments on my book, Caring for Our Own: Why There Is No Political Demand for New American Social Welfare Rights (2014) to further specify the conditions that unleash the emancipatory potential of law. I argue that much of law's emancipatory power lies in its capacity to "construct anew"—to demonstrate new solutions to social problems by connecting the familiar with the strange. Drawing on the case of child care, I find that laws do not automatically provide the cultural resources to construct new claims for state intervention, but that existing laws—and the symbols, narratives, and norms that we associate with them—serve as grist for the political imagination and can be transposed to new contexts or institutions. In the absence of cultural resources in one institution (such as work), advocates can use legal discourse to strategically shift responsibility for a social problem to a new institution (such as education), opening up possibilities for new models, organizational actors, constituencies, and frames.</description><identifier>ISSN: 0897-6546</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1747-4469</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1545-696X</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1111/lsi.12338</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>Cambridge: Wiley Subscription Services Inc</publisher><subject>Child care ; Children ; Constituents ; Cultural resources ; Discourse ; Imagination ; Institutions ; Law ; Power ; Rights ; Social problems ; Social welfare ; State intervention ; SYMPOSIUM: Why Is There No Political Demand for New American Social Welfare Rights? ; Welfare rights</subject><ispartof>Law &amp; social inquiry, 2018, Vol.43 (1), p.258-266</ispartof><rights>Copyright © 2018 American Bar Foundation</rights><rights>2017 American Bar Foundation.</rights><rights>2018 American Bar Foundation.</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c1948-4b8d75eebb8642e65168593b27b78a1915c8311b6cf180cb9d36fef57f7b1a9e3</cites></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktopdf>$$Uhttps://www.jstor.org/stable/pdf/26630939$$EPDF$$P50$$Gjstor$$H</linktopdf><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://www.jstor.org/stable/26630939$$EHTML$$P50$$Gjstor$$H</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>313,314,777,781,789,800,27847,27903,27905,27906,33755,57998,58231</link.rule.ids></links><search><creatorcontrib>Levitsky, Sandra R.</creatorcontrib><title>Law and the Building Blocks of the Familiar</title><title>Law &amp; social inquiry</title><description>This article draws on the insights offered by Francesca Polletta, Calvin Morrill, and Elizabeth Chiarello in their comments on my book, Caring for Our Own: Why There Is No Political Demand for New American Social Welfare Rights (2014) to further specify the conditions that unleash the emancipatory potential of law. I argue that much of law's emancipatory power lies in its capacity to "construct anew"—to demonstrate new solutions to social problems by connecting the familiar with the strange. Drawing on the case of child care, I find that laws do not automatically provide the cultural resources to construct new claims for state intervention, but that existing laws—and the symbols, narratives, and norms that we associate with them—serve as grist for the political imagination and can be transposed to new contexts or institutions. In the absence of cultural resources in one institution (such as work), advocates can use legal discourse to strategically shift responsibility for a social problem to a new institution (such as education), opening up possibilities for new models, organizational actors, constituencies, and frames.</description><subject>Child care</subject><subject>Children</subject><subject>Constituents</subject><subject>Cultural resources</subject><subject>Discourse</subject><subject>Imagination</subject><subject>Institutions</subject><subject>Law</subject><subject>Power</subject><subject>Rights</subject><subject>Social problems</subject><subject>Social welfare</subject><subject>State intervention</subject><subject>SYMPOSIUM: Why Is There No Political Demand for New American Social Welfare Rights?</subject><subject>Welfare rights</subject><issn>0897-6546</issn><issn>1747-4469</issn><issn>1545-696X</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2018</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>7TQ</sourceid><sourceid>BHHNA</sourceid><recordid>eNp1kE1LAzEQhoMoWKsHf4Cw4Elk20y-c7TFamHBg3oOyW6iW7fdmrSU_nvXrnpzLgPD884MD0KXgEfQ1bhJ9QgIpeoIDUAymTMm9DEaYKVlLjgTp-gspQXGmBDBB-i2sLvMrqps8-6zybZuqnr1lk2atvxIWRsO45ld1k1t4zk6CbZJ_uKnD9Hr7P5l-pgXTw_z6V2Rl6CZyplTleTeO6cEI15wEIpr6oh0UlnQwEtFAZwoAyhcOl1REXzgMkgHVns6RNf93nVsP7c-bcyi3cZVd9IQjIF0r2PoqJueKmObUvTBrGO9tHFvAJtvF6ZzYQ4uOnbcs7u68fv_QVM8z38TV31ikTZt_EsQISjWVNMv7MlnKQ</recordid><startdate>2018</startdate><enddate>2018</enddate><creator>Levitsky, Sandra R.</creator><general>Wiley Subscription Services Inc</general><general>Cambridge University Press</general><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>7TQ</scope><scope>7U4</scope><scope>8BJ</scope><scope>BHHNA</scope><scope>DHY</scope><scope>DON</scope><scope>DWI</scope><scope>FQK</scope><scope>JBE</scope><scope>K7.</scope><scope>WZK</scope></search><sort><creationdate>2018</creationdate><title>Law and the Building Blocks of the Familiar</title><author>Levitsky, Sandra R.</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c1948-4b8d75eebb8642e65168593b27b78a1915c8311b6cf180cb9d36fef57f7b1a9e3</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2018</creationdate><topic>Child care</topic><topic>Children</topic><topic>Constituents</topic><topic>Cultural resources</topic><topic>Discourse</topic><topic>Imagination</topic><topic>Institutions</topic><topic>Law</topic><topic>Power</topic><topic>Rights</topic><topic>Social problems</topic><topic>Social welfare</topic><topic>State intervention</topic><topic>SYMPOSIUM: Why Is There No Political Demand for New American Social Welfare Rights?</topic><topic>Welfare rights</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Levitsky, Sandra R.</creatorcontrib><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>PAIS Index</collection><collection>Sociological Abstracts (pre-2017)</collection><collection>International Bibliography of the Social Sciences (IBSS)</collection><collection>Sociological Abstracts</collection><collection>PAIS International</collection><collection>PAIS International (Ovid)</collection><collection>Sociological Abstracts</collection><collection>International Bibliography of the Social Sciences</collection><collection>International Bibliography of the Social Sciences</collection><collection>ProQuest Criminal Justice (Alumni)</collection><collection>Sociological Abstracts (Ovid)</collection><jtitle>Law &amp; social inquiry</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Levitsky, Sandra R.</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Law and the Building Blocks of the Familiar</atitle><jtitle>Law &amp; social inquiry</jtitle><date>2018</date><risdate>2018</risdate><volume>43</volume><issue>1</issue><spage>258</spage><epage>266</epage><pages>258-266</pages><issn>0897-6546</issn><eissn>1747-4469</eissn><eissn>1545-696X</eissn><abstract>This article draws on the insights offered by Francesca Polletta, Calvin Morrill, and Elizabeth Chiarello in their comments on my book, Caring for Our Own: Why There Is No Political Demand for New American Social Welfare Rights (2014) to further specify the conditions that unleash the emancipatory potential of law. I argue that much of law's emancipatory power lies in its capacity to "construct anew"—to demonstrate new solutions to social problems by connecting the familiar with the strange. Drawing on the case of child care, I find that laws do not automatically provide the cultural resources to construct new claims for state intervention, but that existing laws—and the symbols, narratives, and norms that we associate with them—serve as grist for the political imagination and can be transposed to new contexts or institutions. In the absence of cultural resources in one institution (such as work), advocates can use legal discourse to strategically shift responsibility for a social problem to a new institution (such as education), opening up possibilities for new models, organizational actors, constituencies, and frames.</abstract><cop>Cambridge</cop><pub>Wiley Subscription Services Inc</pub><doi>10.1111/lsi.12338</doi><tpages>9</tpages></addata></record>
fulltext fulltext
identifier ISSN: 0897-6546
ispartof Law & social inquiry, 2018, Vol.43 (1), p.258-266
issn 0897-6546
1747-4469
1545-696X
language eng
recordid cdi_proquest_journals_2001202201
source PAIS Index; HeinOnline Law Journal Library; Cambridge Journals; Sociological Abstracts; Jstor Complete Legacy
subjects Child care
Children
Constituents
Cultural resources
Discourse
Imagination
Institutions
Law
Power
Rights
Social problems
Social welfare
State intervention
SYMPOSIUM: Why Is There No Political Demand for New American Social Welfare Rights?
Welfare rights
title Law and the Building Blocks of the Familiar
url https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-01-18T19%3A58%3A27IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-jstor_proqu&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Law%20and%20the%20Building%20Blocks%20of%20the%20Familiar&rft.jtitle=Law%20&%20social%20inquiry&rft.au=Levitsky,%20Sandra%20R.&rft.date=2018&rft.volume=43&rft.issue=1&rft.spage=258&rft.epage=266&rft.pages=258-266&rft.issn=0897-6546&rft.eissn=1747-4469&rft_id=info:doi/10.1111/lsi.12338&rft_dat=%3Cjstor_proqu%3E26630939%3C/jstor_proqu%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=2001202201&rft_id=info:pmid/&rft_jstor_id=26630939&rfr_iscdi=true