{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.019508670520231215, 'fraction_numerical': 0.004335260115606936, 'mean_word_length': 4.969827586206897, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
Book Review: Law on the Screen

possibility of a politics of acknowledgement. In Greek tragedy, true acknowledgement is rare and painful, and always comes upon one too late. If this is the phenomenon of acknowledgement, then acknowledgement may be difficult to pursue deliberately as a political project, even if that project is a modest one with no great promise of mastery. Since temporality and the drive for sovereign mastery are vital to Markell's argument, it is surprising that Markell barely mentions the work of Heidegger or Nietzsche. Such engagement might have helped illuminate what, if anything, is unique about the modern will to master time a question that Markell's analysis raises but does not address. Markell does make the point that we moderns pursue sovereign mastery through the state, which in turn is also an active seeker of sovereignty especially at those moments when it bestows recognition. (6, 12526) But aside from this treatment of modernity, Markell says very little on the matter. This omission does not diminish Markell's accomplishment. Bound by Recognition transcends its object of critique. Markell's account of the persistence of the aspiration to sovereignty and its rage against the unscripted and undetermined quality of human relations tells of the way our search for justice is sometimes an effort to relieve us of the burden of our freedom.