Law and violence
in Sovereignty and superheroes
Abstract only
Log-in for full text

You are not authenticated to view the full text of this chapter or article.

manchesterhive requires a subscription or purchase to access the full text of books or journals - to see content that you/your institution should have access to, please log in through your library system or with your personal username and password.

If you are authenticated and think you should have access to this title, please contact your librarian.

Non-subscribers can freely search the site, view abstracts/extracts and download selected front and end matter. 

Institutions can purchase access to individual titles; please contact manchesterhive@manchester.ac.uk for pricing options.

ACCESS TOKENS

If you have an access token for this content, you can redeem this via the link below:

Redeem token

This chapter explores the central claim regarding the sovereign’s monopoly on violence. This monopoly is supposed to produce peace and hence sovereignty is understood to be pacific and yet the sovereign retains an intimate proximity to violence throughout a time of peace, most notable in the capacity to pronounce a death sentence on a criminal. The chapter explores the connection through the work of Robert Cover, Giorgio Agamben and Jacques Derrida, and is primarily focussed on the character of Batman. It examines the law’s violence as well as the proximity of the sovereign to the beast in order to destabilise the division between these supposedly antithetical principles.

Metrics

All Time Past Year Past 30 Days
Abstract Views 55 29 1
Full Text Views 33 4 0
PDF Downloads 15 1 0