Advertisement

Laughing at the Law: A Socio-semiotic Analysis of Legal Comedy on Japanese Prime-Time Television

  • Leon WolffEmail author
Article
  • 32 Downloads

Abstract

This article highlights the growing mainstream preoccupation with law, lawyers and litigation on Japanese prime-time television. Specifically, the article focuses on the recent shift from the dramatic and serious in 1990s productions to the more comic (in both on scripted shows and infotainment law-themed shows) in the 2000s and beyond. Linking the semiotics of humour, sociolegal studies and socio-semiotics more broadly, the article argues that an analysis of law-themed comic scenes and skits highlights Japanese society’s heightened interest in the law (mirroring twenty first century legal system reforms) and yet an enduring social sense that the law, especially legal resolution of conflict, is something incongruous and unrelated to people’s lived realities (which reflects ongoing low rates of litigation). Despite Ramseyer’s thesis that “rational” Japanese avoid the law because they bargain in its shadow, this article concludes that the Japanese draw on their emotional intelligence to accept the possibilities of the law for achieving social justice but acknowledge its limits for resolving satisfactorily everyday disputes.

Keywords

Japanese law Litigiousness Popular culture Prime-time television Semiotics of humor Socio-semiotics 

Notes

References

  1. 1.
    Allen, Matthew, and Rumi Sakamoto. 2006. Introduction: Inside-out Japan? Popular culture and globalization in the context of Japan. In Popular culture, globalization and Japan, ed. Matthew Allen and Rumi Sakamoto, 1–12. London and New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Aronson, Bruce. 2007. The brave new world of lawyers in Japan. Columbia Journal of Asian Law 21: 45–86.Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Asimow, Michael. 2009. Preface: Popular culture matters. In Lawyers in your living room! Law on television, ed. Michael Asimow, ix–xxvi. Chicago: ABA Publishing.Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Asimow, Michael, and Shannon Mader. 2004. Law and popular culture: A course book. New York: Peter Lang.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Cobley, Paul, and Anti Randivir. 2009. Introduction: What is sociosemiotics? Semiotica 173: 1–39.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Colombo, Giorgio Fabio. 2018. Debts, family, and identity after the collapse of the bubble: Miyabe Miyuki’s All She Was Worth. In Law and justice in Japanese popular culture: From crime fighting robots to duelling pocket monsters, ed. Ashley Pearson, Thomas Giddens, and Kieran Tranter, 227–237. Oxford and New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Coombe, Rosemary J. 1990. Context, tradition, and convention: The politics of constructing legal cultures. APLA Newsletter 13: 15–25.Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Craig, Timothy J. 2000. Introduction. In Japan pop! Inside the world of Japanese popular culture, ed. Timothy J. Craig, 3–23. London and New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Daniel, E. Valentine. 2015. Semiotics. In International encyclopedia of social sciences, vol. 7, 2nd ed, ed. William A. Darity Jr., 436–438. Detroit: Macmillan.Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Dean, Meryll. 2018. Second-best justice: The virtue of Japanese private law by J. Mark Ramseyer (review). Journal of Japanese Studies 44(1): 241–244.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Dissanayake, Wimal. 2012. Asian television dramas and Asian theories of communication. Journal of Multicultural Discourses 7(2): 191–196.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Feldman, Eric. 2000. The ritual of rights in Japan: Law, society, and health policy. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Figiel, Agata. 2015. British humour as the art of contemporary homo ridens: Based on an exploration of the comedy series Fawlty Towers. Styles of Communication 7(1): 39–58.Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Fineman, Stephen. 1993. Understanding emotion at work. London: Sage.Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Foote, Daniel H. 2007. Introduction and overview: Japanese law at a turning point. In Law in Japan: A turning point, ed. Daniel H. Foote, xix–xxix. Washington: University of Washington Press.Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Friedman, Lawrence. 1989. Law, lawyers and popular culture. Yale Law Journal 98(8): 1579–1606.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Galanter, Marc. 1993. Real world torts: An antidote to anecdote. Maryland Law Review 55: 1093–1160.Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Ginsburg, Mark, and Glenn Hoetker. 2006. The unreluctant litigant? An empirical analysis of Japan’s turn to litigation. Journal of Legal Studies 35: 31–59.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Glendon, Mary Ann. 1991. Rights talk: The impoverishment of political discourse. New York: Free Press.Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Haley, John O. 2002. Litigation in Japan: A new look at old problems. Williamette Journal of International Law & Dispute Resolution 10: 121–142.Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Haley, John O. 1978. The myth of the reluctant litigant. Journal of Japanese Studies 4: 359–390.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Hayne, Kenneth. 2004. Restricting litigiousness. Australian Law Journal 78: 381–388.Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    Hōgaku Seminā. 2006. Heroin-wa bengoshi no tamago, 494: 127.Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    Inoue, Tatsuo. 1993. The poverty of rights-blind communality: Looking through the window of Japan. Brigham Young University Law Review 2: 517–551.Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    Ishikawa, Hirotoshi. 2004. Shiroi Kyoutou ni Torikunde. Jiyuu to Seigi 55 (9): 5–7.Google Scholar
  26. 26.
    Janosik, Robert J. 1987. Rethinking the culture-negotiation link. Negotiation Journal 3(4): 385–395.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Johnson, David T. 2002. The Japanese way of justice: Prosecuting crime in Japan. Oxford and New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  28. 28.
    Kamir, Orit. 2006. Honor and dignity in the film unforgiven: Implications for sociolegal theory. Law & Society Review 40(1): 207.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Kawashima, Takeyoshi. 1963. Dispute resolution in contemporary Japan. In Law in Japan: The legal order in a changing society, ed. Arthur von Mehren, 41. Boston: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
  30. 30.
    Keith-Spiegel, Patricia C. 1972. Early conceptions of humor: Varieties and issues. In The psychology of humor: Theoretical perspectives and empirical issues, ed. Jeffrey Goldstein and Paul McGhee, 4–39. New York: Academic Press.Google Scholar
  31. 31.
    Kim, Chin, and Craig M. Lawson. 1979. The law of the subtle mind: The traditional Japanese conception of law. International & Comparative Law Quarterly 28: 491–513.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Lieberman, Jethro. 1981. The litigious society. New York: Basic Books.Google Scholar
  33. 33.
    Majirox News. 2012. Too many lawyers in Japan, says Ministry of Internal Affairs. 23 April 2012.Google Scholar
  34. 34.
    Manning, Peter K. 2004. Semiotics and data analysis. In Handbook of data analysis, ed. Melissa Hardy and Alan Bryman, 567–587. London: Sage.Google Scholar
  35. 35.
    Marais, Kobus. 2019. A (bio)semiotic theory of translation: The emergence of social-cultural reality. London and New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
  36. 36.
    Matanle, Peter, Kuniko Ishiguro, and Leo McCann. 2014. Popular culture and workplace gendering among varieties of capitalism: Working women and their representation in Japanese manga. Gender, Work and Organization.  https://doi.org/10.1111/gwao.12050.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. 37.
    McCracken, Paul W. 1991. The big domestic issues: Slow growth. Wall St Journal, 4 October 1991, A14.Google Scholar
  38. 38.
    Mertz, Elizabeth. 2013. Semiotics. In Theory in social and cultural anthropology: An encyclopedia, ed. R. Jon McGee and R.L. Warms, 764–768. Los Angeles: Sage.Google Scholar
  39. 39.
    Mitchell, Dale. 2018. Masterful trainers and villainous liberators: law and justice in Pokemon Black and White. In Law and justice in Japanese popular culture: From crime fighting robots to duelling pocket monsters, ed. Ashley Pearson, Thomas Giddens, and Kieran Tranter, 74–92. Oxford and New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
  40. 40.
    Nakamura, Hisao. 2007. Dorama: Shimane no Bengoshi. Jiyuu to Seigi 58(7): 6–7.Google Scholar
  41. 41.
    Nelson, Robert L. 1998. Ideology, scholarship, and sociolegal change: Lessons from Galanter and the ‘litigation crisis’. Law and Society Review 21(5): 677–693.Google Scholar
  42. 42.
    Noda Yoshiyuki. 1976. Introduction to Japanese law (trans. Anthony H Angelo). Tokyo: University of Tokyo Press.Google Scholar
  43. 43.
    Olsen, Walter K. 1992. The litigation explosion: What happened when America unleashed the lawsuit. New York: Truman Talley Books/Plume.Google Scholar
  44. 44.
    Pearson, Ashley. 2018. ‘The world is rotten’: Execution and power in Death Note. In Law and justice in Japanese popular culture: From crime fighting robots to duelling pocket monsters, ed. Ashley Pearson, Thomas Giddens, and Kieran Tranter, 218–226. Oxford and New York: Routledge.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. 45.
    Pearson, Ashley, Thomas Giddens, and Kieran Tranter. 2018. Crime fighting robots and duelling pocket monsters: Law and justice in Japanese popular culture. In Law and justice in Japanese popular culture: From crime fighting robots to duelling pocket monsters, ed. Ashley Pearson, Thomas Giddens, and Kieran Tranter, 1–15. Oxford and New York: Routledge.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. 46.
    Port, Kenneth L. 1994. The case for teaching Japanese law at American law schools. Depaul Law Review 43: 643–671.Google Scholar
  47. 47.
    Prager, Dennis. 2001. Here’s an idea, let’s bean all the lawyers. LA Times 9: B15.Google Scholar
  48. 48.
    Price, Lucien. 1954. Dialogues with Alfred North Whitehead. Boston: Little Brown and Company.Google Scholar
  49. 49.
    Ramseyer, J.Mark. 2015. Second-best justice: The virtues of Japanese private law. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. 50.
    Ramseyer, J.Mark, and Minoru Nakazato. 1999. Japanese law: An economic approach. Boston: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
  51. 51.
    Reiffenstein, Tim. 2012. How does US educational experience shape the everyday work environment of Japanese legal professionals? In Spaces of international economy and management: Launching new perspectives on management and geography, ed. Rolf D. Schlunze, Nathaniel O. Agola, and William W. Baber, 155–175. London and New York: Palgrave Macmillan.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. 52.
    Rhode, Deborah L. 2002. Legal scholarship. Harvard Law Review 155: 1327–1361.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. 53.
    Robson, Peter, and Jessica Silbey. 2012. Introduction. In Law and justice on the small screen, ed. Peter Robson and Jessica Silbey, 1–11. Oxford and Portland: Hart.Google Scholar
  54. 54.
    Sato, Iwao. 2002. Judicial reform in Japan in the 1990s: Increase of the legal profession, reinforcement of judicial functions and expansion of the rule of law. Social Science Japan Journal 5(1): 71–83.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. 55.
    Sebonius, James K. 2002. Caveats for cross-border negotiators. Negotiation Journal 18(2): 121–133.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  56. 56.
    Shūkan Joshi. 2019. Konki-dakede 3-banme bengoshi dorama ga kyuuzou, riigaru buumu ga okotta haikei. 1 February 2012. https://www.jprime.jp/articles/-/14365?page=2. Accessed 22 June 2019.
  57. 57.
    Shultz, Thomas R. 1976. A cognitive-developmental analysis of humour. In Humor and laughter: Theory, research, and applications, ed. Tony Chapman and Hugh Foot, 11–36. London: Wiley.Google Scholar
  58. 58.
    Tanase, Takao. 2010. Community and the law: A critical reassessment of American liberalism and Japanese modernity (translated by Luke Nottage and Leon Wolff), Cheltenham and Northampton: Edward Elgar.Google Scholar
  59. 59.
    Tiefenbrun, Susan. 2010. Decoding international law: Semiotics and the humanities. Oxford and New York: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  60. 60.
    Upham, Frank K. 1987. Law and social change in postwar Japan. Boston: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
  61. 61.
    van Leeuwen, Theo. 2005. Introducing social semiotics. London and New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
  62. 62.
    West, Mark. 1994. The pricing of shareholder derivative actions in Japan and the United States. Northwestern University Law Review 88: 1436–1507.Google Scholar
  63. 63.
    West, Mark. 2005. Law in everyday Japan: Sex, sumo, suicide, and statute. Boston: University of Chicago Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  64. 64.
    Wolff, Leon. 2014. Japanese law goes pop. Acta Asiatica Varsovensia 27: 165–183.Google Scholar
  65. 65.
    Wolff, Leon. 2015. When Japanese law goes pop. In Who ‘rules’ Japan? Popular participation in the Japanese legal process, ed. Leon Wolff, Luke Nottage, and Kent Anderson, 185–206. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar.Google Scholar
  66. 66.
    Yamanouchi, Nobutoshi, and Samuel J. Cohen. 1990. Understanding the incidence of litigation in Japan: A structural analysis. The International Lawyer 25(2): 443–454.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature B.V. 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Queensland University of TechnologyBrisbaneAustralia

Personalised recommendations