Drishti Alagh, LL.M. 2026
There is fiction in the space within the international legal discourse, which can be meaningfully revealed, contextualised and filled by objects.
It is not an astonishing notion that (international) law, along with its principles, interpretations and manifestations, is rooted in a rather chasmic linearity, a linearity so vested in mainstream traditionalist tendencies. Even the histories of international law, as well as the perspectives and narratives reverberating around it, relish an unswerving path, revealing only a selective curation of events from a conventional perspective that privilege some while marginalising ‘others’. It could further be said that the material culture associated with international law acquaints us with the stories and narratives already in place that are often controlled by the clutches of positivist scholars, authoritative states and regimes or simply those in control of a superfluous sense of prowess.[1] One then is, in such a context, gravitated towards pondering upon and reflecting strategies and methods requisite (or capable) for disrupting this legal linearity. Such a reflection illuminates the postulation whether one can employ the objects existing in or associated with the international legal regime to challenge established narratives of law and to retrospectively take control of the way international law has been told over the course of its history? Simply stating, whether is it possible to voice stories, perspectives and narratives that have never been told and lack space in legal and historical literature through objects buried in the past that very much influenced the evolution of international law but have been veiled by political or other agendas.
This postulation, whether the same is realistically possible or not, and the consequent answers underlying it unfold in a nuanced manner. Let us, for instance, adopt a contextual approach in order to understand how one can set objects in a motion of retroactivity to achieve the postulation above. In this sense, the true meaning of an object can be comprehended not only in the context of the object but is also significantly shaped by the cultural, historical and legal context of the person viewing or comprehending the object, implying that the greater the engagement of the concerned object with viewers from diverse backgrounds, the more the meanings that the object would encapsulate, thereby offering to the discourse a tapestry of interpretations emerging from one single object. Moreover, contextualism in this sense also counters historical distortion by willfully rejecting the inadvertent misconceptions of historical legal objects stemming from an interpretation which lies outside the actual context or time of these objects.[2]
These notions, therefore, again bring us back to the assertion that objects are in actuality vessels of multivalent meanings which provide the discourse of international law and legal theory with an exemplary tool to humanize itself by kindling untold stories to the surface and makes the community question whether they want to treat objects simply as aesthetic lifeless inanimate structures or embrace their timelessness.
Moving further, it may be observed that maneuvering the contextualism approach as an attempt to visualise the primary postulation based on the retroactive functions of objects within the legal discourse also propagates the notions of narrativity in international law. This is reverberated in the tapestry of interpretations that one single object offers when viewed from numerous distinct contexts, perspectives and perceptions, often in the form of contexts, stories and perspectives of the disenfranchised actors, classes or traditions, thereby offering a plurality of narratives being generated from one single object (and not just one authoritative mainstream narrative). This multiplicity of narratives has a significant impact on the manner in which one comprehends and perceives international law, as well as the manner in which the discourse evolves.[3] Furthermore, besides possessing an apparent aesthetic value, objects prove to be rather compelling in inclusively shaping the international legal narrative, for they provide a point of juncture between law and reality, thereby expressing perspectives, conveying meanings transcending language barriers and reverberating emotions and humanness in the regime.
Following this premise, it may be postulated that while the objects in international law enunciate the historical chronologies of the discipline that are already in place, the same objects simultaneously embrace the inherent nature to be methodologically immersed in order to alter the existing chronologies of law frozen in time, build a different narrative and attain a different sensibility of international law each time in the process. Undertaking this exercise would perhaps be proportional to contemporising and humanising international law, as such a ‘retrospective control’ would give one the prowess to recite the untold versions that are often absent in international legal literature, and are often buried and lost somewhere in the past, veiled by their mainstream renditions, thereby forging a reified perception of international law.
Conclusively, therefore, this method stemming out from the interplay of objects with international law would unfathomably affect the manner in which we interpret law and the way in which it affects human society, for objects open up a range of perplexions on how the histories of law are remembered by inculcating the actuality rather than its factuality and thus, redefining collective memory because at the heart of law lies the assumption that law, its principles and institutions cannot be understood within the discipline of law itself without taking into consideration the cultural processes as well as the material culture surrounding it.[4]
[1] Valentina Vadi, ‘Power, Law and Images: International Law and Material Culture’ (2018) 45(2) Syracuse Journal of International Law & Commerce 216
[2] Ignacio de la Rasilla, ‘Contextual Approaches to the History of International Law’ in International Law and History: Modern Interfaces (Cambridge University Press, 2021)
[3] Julia Otten, ‘Narratives in International Law’ (2016) 99(3) Critical Quarterly for Legislation and Law 187
[4] Maria Aristodemou, Law and literature: Journeys from Her to Eternity (Oxford University Press 2000) 10
