Free Speech Beyond Words

More about the book

The Supreme Court has unanimously affirmed that Jackson Pollock's paintings, Arnold Schönberg's music, and Lewis Carroll's poem 'Jabberwocky' are protected by the First Amendment. This ruling extends constitutional coverage to nonrepresentational art, instrumental music, and nonsense, despite their lack of traditional language or conveyance of clear meaning. While the Court's conclusion is legally sound, its underlying premises are complex, raising challenging questions about the interplay between law and expression. Nonrepresentational art and instrumental music do not use language in a conventional sense, which complicates their classification as 'speech' under constitutional law. This ambiguity prompts inquiries into the implications for First Amendment law and theory and whether legal frameworks can address these issues without delving into aesthetics, ethics, and philosophy. This book provides a thorough exploration of these concepts, focusing on the constitutional status of these forms of expression, which have been insufficiently examined. By integrating legal doctrine, aesthetics, and analytical philosophy, three distinguished law scholars illuminate the significance of non-verbal forms of communication in understanding the First Amendment.