Emotionalization of the judiciary

In the theories on legal narrative personhood – the ways in which individual persons come to constitute themselves legally before the law through the stories they are allowed to tell – one figure is conspicuously absent or only marginally theorized: that of the judge. Likewise, in the recent reconsiderations on the role of emotions and affect in relation to law, almost all actors involved in a court case have been dealt with, but only marginally so the judge. A serious consideration of the role of the judge in a spectacular, affective context is necessary, however. The chapter looks at a constellation of factors (in themselves unrelated factors that nevertheless form one constellation) that threaten the distanced and distancing reasonability that characterizes jurisdiction proper. These factors are the role of influencers, the behavior of provocateurs, the emotionalization of court cases due to the rights of victims to speak in court, and the dominance of rating and ranking in the societal forcefield. In the context of this constellation, the question is what the emotionalization of court cases is doing to the dramatic persona and authority of the judge and how it can be fortified against sensationalism.