From The Law and Politics Book Review

Vol. 9 No. 2 (February 1999) pp. 47-49.

 

PRIME TIME LAW: FICTIONAL TELEVISION AS LEGAL NARRATIVE by Robert M. Jarvis and Paul R. Joseph (Editors). Durham, North Carolina: Carolina Academic Press, 1998. 336 pp. Cloth $32.50. Paper $17.50. ISBN 0-89089-808-1.

 

Reviewed by Jennifer A. Segal, Department of Political Science, University of Kentucky. Email: jsegal1@pop.uky.edu.

 

When asked to review PRIME TIME LAW: FICTIONAL TELEVISION AS LEGAL NARRATIVE, I jumped at the opportunity. I am a HUGE "Law & Order" and "The Practice" fan. I have seen nearly every episode of each series (and have been known to watch even the reruns of "Law & Order" in syndication on A&E, which by the way air several times a day). In fact, I know how to program my VCR largely because I can’t stand to miss an episode of either show. I have a rather extensive "library" of various episodes that I think are particularly well suited for the purposes of the courses that I teach; the occasional "Law & Order Friday" has become standard fare in my judicial process course that students (and I) look forward to every semester. In other words, I am someone (as a viewer and a teacher) who is extremely appreciative of the efforts that executives, writers, actors, and producers and directors have made to put lawyers, judges, plaintiffs and defendants, and police officers on television. Like the editors and authors who have contributed to PRIME TIME LAW, I am intrigued by the popularity of this genre of television programming and am interested in understanding the nature and purpose of such shows, and how they reflect and influence our attitudes about the law and the justice system.

My thoughts about PRIME TIME LAW are mixed. As the subtitle of the book suggests, its primary goal is to illustrate how legal themes are portrayed by television. By describing the main characters, including dialogue from several of the episodes, and providing some historical, political, and legal context for television’s treatment of this genre, the authors fulfill this purpose. For the most part, their essays provide interesting interpretations of the way television has dramatized legal relationships and the nature and process of law.

PRIME TIME LAW is organized into seventeen chapters written by professors of law, history, communication, political science, and English. Each of the first eleven chapters focuses on a particular television show in the legal genre (in order of appearance, "The Defenders", "Hill Street Blues", "L.A. Law", "Law & Order", "Matlock", "Murder One", "NYPD Blue", "Paper Chase", "Perry Mason", "Picket Fences", and "Rumpole of the Bailey"). The next four essays focus on other genres that also portray the law and legal characters or topics (science fiction, situation comedies, soap operas, and westerns). The two remaining essays address television’s depiction of particular types of lawyers (one focuses on female lawyers, the other on young lawyers).

Readers of PRIME TIME LAW learn that these shows have at times supported a particular political ideology (e.g. the liberalism in "The Defenders" and "L.A. Law") and have sought to teach civics lessons to their viewers (e.g. "Picket Fences"). Additionally, they have featured the nature of legal education (e.g. "Paper Chase"), and demonstrated the complexity of the legal system (e.g. "The Defenders", "Law & Order", "Murder One") as well as legal actors and issues (e.g. "Law & Order", "Picket Fences", "Rumpole of the Bailey"). Some shows have emphasized the characters and character development in their effort to portray the law (e.g. "Hill Street Blues", "L.A. Law", "Perry Mason"), while others have focused on plot lines that emphasize disputes and dispute resolution (e.g. "Law & Order"). Some of the plots have been based on real-life court cases (e.g. "Law & Order"), and some have been based on many of the pressing legal, political and social issues of the day, such as abortion, the death penalty, and sexual orientation (e.g. "Law & Order", "Picket Fences"). And, many of the shows, at least according to the television writers and producers, make a concerted attempt to accurately depict the people and processes of the legal system (e.g. "Murder One", "Law and Order", "NYPD Blue"), while others are less concerned with such realism (e.g. "Perry Mason").

The issue of realism in television’s treatment of law is addressed most specifically and clearly in the essays about different genres. This is particularly so in the chapter on science fiction, in which the author thoughtfully considers how and, importantly, why science fiction should include legal topics in its story lines. It is especially obvious from the essays on soap operas, westerns and sitcoms that viewers of these shows are not likely to come away from them with very realistic perspectives on the law. As for the essays on female and young lawyers, they suggest television characterizes the law and the legal system as patriarchal and sexist.

Thus, for those who are interested in providing students with various perspectives on what these shows are about, how different genres incorporate legal themes, and, in some instances, what the role of television is in communicating this information, PRIME TIME LAW will be a useful addition to communications, political science, law, or criminology courses. The essays are easy and enjoyable to read, and will make suitable supplementary reading for undergraduates in any of these disciplines.

However, those who are interested in more than the contributors’ individual interpretations of the "facts" presented in these shows will find this collection of essays incomplete. Despite many of the compelling questions introduced by the editors and authors, these essays do not go as far as they might (or at all, in some instances) to address many important issues. For instance, the editors (in the Preface) state that, "More than just another form of entertainment, television serves at once as teacher, companion, and friend, influencing both what we see and how we see it." (p. vii) While their volume addresses the "what", the "how" is notably absent. Additionally, the Forward suggests a number of interesting questions, such as "When popular shows about lawyers are gone, what is left behind? Does television create attitudes and perceptions about lawyers or simply deliver and embellish attitudes and perceptions that already exist? Put more broadly, does television create culture or is it simply created by the culture around it?" (p. xi). These are excellent questions – empirical questions – that are not addressed in any kind of systematic or analytical way by the essays included in this volume.

Certainly, the assumption that these television shows have an impact on their viewers is a reasonable one. Indeed, the purpose for showing "Law & Order" and "The Practice" episodes in my courses is because I believe that they are useful learning tools for students. But what has become increasingly obvious to me from these experiences is that students often get very different information than I do from watching these programs, and that students vary in their understanding of the messages contained in the episodes. So, the most interesting question about these types of shows is not what they’re about (or what the contributors say they’re about) in some kind of objective sense (if that is even discernable), but what viewers believe these shows are about. Additionally, and perhaps even more important, is the question about how viewers’ beliefs, as they develop from watching these shows, influence the law and legal system. But these are not addressed in particularly meaningful or well-developed ways by PRIME TIME LAW.

With a few exceptions, where some evidence is brought to bear on the question about public attitudes and television’s impact (e.g. the essay on "Picket Fences") and where the author hasn’t made claims about what viewers are likely to learn about the law from watching these television shows (e.g. the essay on science fiction), most of the essays make some claims about the influence of television without providing any evidence to buttress their claims. For instance, the statement, "Although we cannot be sure of the cultural significance of its representation of the legal system, on the whole it is a positive one that reflects some level of confidence in the legal system, and may also in some small measure, improve the public’s perceptions of legal process." (p. 85), and others like it in several of the essays, is simply not persuasive in the

absence of data about the public’s perceptions. Additionally, there is very little comprehensive or critical discussion of how the portrayal of legal subjects by television has changed. A careful reading of the essays suggests that over time television has approached the treatment of the law differently, and that there have been a variety of factors that have influenced the relative success and failure of these programs. But it is difficult to get a strong sense of these discussions because they are not particularly cohesive within or between essays.

Finally, and related, most of the difficulties might have been mitigated to some degree by an introductory chapter similar to (but much more extensive than) the Epilogue to the book. Such a chapter, written by the editors, might have provided substantive and analytical links between the essays. It might have drawn contrasts between them, set them in historical context, provided a brief literature review of the research that addresses the links between television and public attitudes about various subjects, as well as the research that emphasizes the more general role of television and the factors that affect its ability to portray topics such as the law and legal system. At the very least, some basic foundation might have been established to make the essays more convincing and compelling. In the absence of such a chapter (the existing Forward really does not provide this type of information), readers will be left to fill in the blanks on their own.

 ****************************************************************

Copyright 1999 by the author.

Readers may redistribute this article to other individuals for

noncommerical use, provided that the text and this notice remain

intact and unaltered in any way. This article may not be resold,

reprinted, or redistributed for compensation of any kind without

prior permission from the author. If you have any questions

about permissions, please contact C. Neal Tate, Editor, THE LAW

AND POLITICS BOOK REVIEW (ntate@unt.edu), Toulouse School of

Graduate Studies, University of North Texas,Denton,TX 76203-5459

or by phone at (940) 565-3946 or (940) 369-7486 (fax).

****************************************************************