Recital: Difference between revisions
Amwelladmin (talk | contribs) No edit summary |
Amwelladmin (talk | contribs) No edit summary |
||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
{{a|boilerplate|}} | {{a|boilerplate|}}A [[legal eagle]]’s nugatory attempt at ''[[design]]''. | ||
WHEREAS: | WHEREAS: | ||
The legal eagle’s opportunity to tell a bit of a story, using the juridical version of “once upon a time”: basically, an integrated passage (that, if it doesn’t start with “[[once upon a time]]” or “[[whereas]]” or “[[background]]” is sometimes called a “[[preamble]]”) which leads you into the meat of [[contract]] — or in a perfect world, would do, but the juridical magisterium being what it is — an imperfect fiefdom designed for the pleasure of [[Pedantry|pedant]]s — it will lead you instead into a thicket of [[tedious]] preliminaries. | |||
Thus, having been primed with this tantalising backdrop, expect to spend your next half-hour hacking through a dense undergrowth of [[Definitions|definition]]s, matters of [[interpretation]], [[construction]], [[hierarchy of documents]] and superfluous extemporisations on [[Singular|singulars]], [[Plural|plurals]], masculine, feminine and neuter, and the socio-economic power structures implicit in gendered legal language<ref>Ok: not really that likely yet, but we ''are'' heading that way.</ref> before you get there, by which time you will be tired, hungry, scratched, possibly injured, desperately needing a pee and really wanting to go home. | |||
{{sa}} | {{sa}} | ||
* | *{{br|Cynical Theories: How Activist Scholarship Made Everything about Race Gender and Identity}} | ||
{{ref}} | |||
Revision as of 17:53, 22 December 2020
|
Boilerplate Anatomy™
|
A legal eagle’s nugatory attempt at design.
WHEREAS:
The legal eagle’s opportunity to tell a bit of a story, using the juridical version of “once upon a time”: basically, an integrated passage (that, if it doesn’t start with “once upon a time” or “whereas” or “background” is sometimes called a “preamble”) which leads you into the meat of contract — or in a perfect world, would do, but the juridical magisterium being what it is — an imperfect fiefdom designed for the pleasure of pedants — it will lead you instead into a thicket of tedious preliminaries.
Thus, having been primed with this tantalising backdrop, expect to spend your next half-hour hacking through a dense undergrowth of definitions, matters of interpretation, construction, hierarchy of documents and superfluous extemporisations on singulars, plurals, masculine, feminine and neuter, and the socio-economic power structures implicit in gendered legal language[1] before you get there, by which time you will be tired, hungry, scratched, possibly injured, desperately needing a pee and really wanting to go home.
See also
References
- ↑ Ok: not really that likely yet, but we are heading that way.