Next steps.

This project is now being developed into a chapter for a treatise on legal visual semiotics. I am inclined to focus on the issue of security in the courthouses and how making that paramount has caused us to be distanced from this aspect of our community.

Handout for Florida State Symposium - Storytelling

PILLARS OF JUSTICE: STORYTELLING, DIALOGS AND RESEARCH
Brenda Waugh and Paulette Moore
Florida State University, January 19, 2009

In creating our short film, Pillars of Justice, our goal is to explore how those who work in courthouses perceive the impact of architecture on justice. Paulette Moore is an award-winning director, producer and writer with twenty years of experience in documentaries, commercials and news. Brenda Waugh is an attorney with over twenty years of experience in civil and criminal litigation. Both of us are graduate students at the Center for Justice and Peace at Eastern Mennonite University. In bringing our diverse experience to the project, we not only explore the emerging themes, but also question the process that we employ in conducting our research. We are working to create a just process that promotes dialog between equal participants, “researcher” and “subject”, in the film.

We began the project in the fall of 2008 by scouting locations and visiting courthouses in the Eastern Panhandle of West Virginia and the northern Shenandoah Valley in Virginia. Since a new “state of the art” judicial center had recently been erected in Martinsburg, West Virginia, that locale provided participants with a broad historical perspective of courthouse design. As we followed suggestions of storytellers and pure chance, we discussed the issues with judges, prosecutors, clerks, defense attorneys, courthouse employees, security officers and litigants. We toured five courthouses and visited several courthouses which are no longer in use. Themes quickly emerged such as the impact of buildings which focus on security, shared bathrooms, and the creation of space and intimacy in the courtroom. In the course of our work, we employed the following research methods in order to explore justice both in themes and in the development of Pillars of Justice.
Analysis. We employed an organic, non-linear and inclusive review of the stories. As much as possible, we avoided imposition of categorization of the stories which runs the risk of reshaping the experience of the storytellers.

Equal relationship between storytellers. Our intention was to mindfully assess our questions, our methods, our own stories and our views during each step of the process to maintain equality with the storytellers, who were not technically creating the film. While this equality may be an impossible result, it is a worthwhile goal.
Vulnerability. In order to create a more equal relationship with the storytellers, we told our own stories. We recognize that we bring our own experiences to our examination. By revealing our own experiences, we shared in the vulnerability of the other storytellers.

Transformative Inquiry. We were committed to a process that would: (1) show respect for the storytellers, (2) be honest in our objectives to promote social action, (3) recognize the complexity of the inquiry (4) incorporate collaboration and accountability, and (5) provide for a transparency of goals and methods and motives. We therefore used a transformative inquiry in framing the dialogs.

Respect for storytellers. In an effort to show great respect for the storytellers, we have encouraged feedback as we assembled the final film and made changes in order to meet concerns of the storytellers
Incorporation of non-linear and non-verbal communication. In designing the project and in engaging in the dialogs, we attempted to employ verbal and non-verbal, as well as linear and non-linear, methods of elicitation and presentation.

Contemplative listening and knowledge of community. Within the dialogs, we employed an approach to increase the opportunity for comptemplation by the storyteller, listener and viewer of the film. We provide the space for the listener and viewer to examine the stories in their own contexts, with their own communities.
Reflective inquiry. Throughout the process, we paused for reflection. We engaged in discussions with the storytellers, ourselves and other researchers about the difficulty in maintaining a justice orientation in research. We also found that maintaining the written blog provided us with insight as to the challenge of maintaining our philosophical objectives in our research.

SELECTED RESOURCES
Atkinson, J. (2002). Trauma Trails: Recreating Songlines. Victoria: Spinfex.
Behar, R. (1996). The Vulnerable Observer. Boston, Mass: Beacon Press.
Mary Margaret Fonnow and Judith A. Cook. (1991). Beyond Methodology: Feminist Scholarship as Lived Research. Indianapolis, Indiana: Indiana University Press.
Smith, L. T. (2007). Decolonizing Methodologies. New York: St. Martin.
Zehr, H. (1998). Us and Them: a Photographer Looks at Police Pictures. Contemporary Justice Review, Vol. 1 pp. 377-385.

INTERNET RESOURCES
Center for Justice and Peace, Eastern Mennonite University: emu.edu/cjp
Pillars of Justice-Audit Trail and Blog: architectureandjustice.blogspot.com
Paulette Moore: paulettefilms.com
Brenda Waugh: brendawaugh.com

Handout for Florida State Symposium - Excerpts

Here is the document on excerpts from our film that Brenda will hand out after her talk and presentation of our film Pillars of Justice at the Florida State design symposium.


THE STORYTELLERS: EXCERPTS FROM PILLARS OF JUSTICE
Brenda Waugh and Paulette Moore
Florida State University, January 19, 2009

“Many of the ugly pages of American history have been obscured and forgotten…America owes a debt of justice which it has only begun to pay. If it loses the will to finish or slackens in its determination, history will recall its crimes and the country that would be great will lack the most indispensable element of greatness-justice.”
- Martin Luther King, Jr., “Where Do We Go From Here: Chaos or Community?” 1967.

In creating our short film, Pillars of Justice, our goal is to explore how those who work in and visit the courthouses perceive the impact of architecture on justice. Paulette Moore, an award-winning director, producer and writer collaborates with Brenda Waugh, a practicing attorney, and many courthouse visitors, employees, and litigants to discuss the physical and relational space created in the courthouse. Excerpts from the film describe some of their experiences.

SPACE, EXPECTATIONS, FEELINGS AND JUSTICE
“It’s not just necessarily just the shape of the rooms. Architecture is more than that. Architecture is the forms we use, the language we use, our own notions and expectations and concepts. All of that is fairly architecture….A lot of the architecture is in your mind, it’s the process, the formality of it, the expectation, the knowledge of the history of the law, and the process that people bring with them.”
-Hon. David H. Sanders, Circuit Judge, 23rd Judicial Circuit, West Virginia

“When I walked into that space I was pulling all of the visual cues that I’m not represented. So when this relational thing happened with the judge and the cop where I felt supported, it was almost like an equal and opposite reaction…I had a marked sense of relief…I think at that point I felt a little bit more a part of the community.”
-Paulette Moore, filmmaker, litigant, and student

“To me, the most important thing in this courtroom is that the state’s attorney and the defense attorney are equal distance from the judge. The police officer, who will be prosecuting the case, and the defendant are equal distance to the judge. As far as access to the judge, this court feels more equal.”
-Brenda Waugh, attorney and student

INCREASED COURTHOUSE SECURITY AND PUBLIC OVERSIGHT
“For years, just as a philosophy -- I wanted it (the courtroom) to be open house. I regret the whole modern security trend that keeps people at arm’s length.”
-Hon. David H. Sanders

“Some of them tell me they feel like criminals before they get in the door…you go through a search and dump your pockets…people used to come in when they wanted a birth certificate. Now they call or else write you a letter.”
-John Small, County Clerk, Berkeley County, West Virginia

“Most people are intimidated by it and they don’t like that kind of oppressive atmosphere, so they disappear and don’t come back. In order for it to seem legitimate, it has to be open…we’re not that far in some cases from the old star chamber where judicial authorities used to drag people in private and question them and rule on them and send them off for execution without anybody knowing what was going on. So if (we) close off the court rooms, so it is just a group of insiders participating, you run the risk of that happening again.”
-Deborah Lawson, Chief Public Defender, 23rd Judicial Circuit, West Virginia

“It (the courthouse) should be a place where the people feel welcome... People have a right to be included in their government and they are being systematically excluded.”
-Chris Quasebarth, Chief Deputy Prosecuting Attorney, Berkeley County

“I’m sure they (people) don’t (feel welcome). A little public oversight couldn’t hurt. It could only improve it.”
-Kimberly Crockett, Assistant Prosecuting Attorney, Berkeley County

UNUSUAL SPACES-THE PAST: A women’s witness room in the Old Berkeley County Courthouse
“I’ve had many an opportunity to retreat into this room…it’s a place where you can escape….for whatever reason-there is something about it…The powers that be recognized this as the women’s place only.”
-Maria Childers, Fiduciary Supervisor, Berkeley County

“I hugged her in here. I couldn’t do that out there. It would have seemed unprofessional.”
-Brenda Waugh

“Sometimes it (justice) can be (a hug in the women’s witness room.) Sometimes it’s a hug in the hallway afterwards.”
-Deborah Lawson

USUSUAL SPACES-AN IDEA: Two views of a courtyard
“I would like something in the front where people could hang out, like a courtyard or a commons area, where people could come in and out.”

-Matthew Harvey, Assistant Prosecuting Attorney Berkeley County
“(It would) attract vagrants and people would vandalize it. Kids would be spray painting and skateboarding. I think it would be a problem. I really do.”
-Timothy Hellman, Assistant Prosecuting Attorney, Berkeley County





Pillars of Justice is a short documentary film by two graduate students, Brenda Waugh and Paulette Moore, attending the Center for Justice and Peace at Eastern Mennonite University in Harrisonburg Virginia. For further information visit: emu.edu/cjp/, justicandarchitecture.blogspot.com, paulettefilms.com, and brendawaugh.com.

Brenda Presents at Florida State University Interior Design Symposium

On Monday, January 19, Brenda presents our film "Pillars of Justice" to Florida State University's Architecture and Design for Social Justice Symposium. How cool is that?

http://interiordesign.fsu.edu/symposium/

The ART&DESIGN for Social Justice Symposium focuses on how the tools and inherent abilities within the areas of art and design can be utilized in addressing issues confronting less advantaged groups within our local communities, states, regions or world. The event is designed to generate synergy, spawn collaborative projects among participants, create new scholarly initiatives, and allow examination of the role that art and design plays in the telling of a broader social narrative.

2009 Art and Design for Social Justice Symposium
Florida State University
Location: HCB, “The New Classroom Building”

8:00-8:30 Late Registration, Coffee and Pastries

8:30-8:45 Welcome, Eric Wiedegreen, Dean Sally McRorie, Dave Gussak,
Room 103

8:45-9:30 Eve Blossom, Keynote Speaker, Room 103

9:45-10:15 Presentation, Room 205
“Close to Home: Studying Art and Your Community”
Pat Villeneuve & Donald Sheppard, Florida State University

Presentation, Room 210
“Separating Desire from Desperation: Parallel Existences in Sao Paulo,
Brazil”
Hannah Mendoza & Matthew Dudzik, Savannah College of Art and Design

Film, Room 213
“Pillars of Justice: An examination of courthouses and their role the
search for justice.”
Brenda Waugh & Paulette Moore, Center for Justice and Peace at Eastern
Mennonite University

10:25-10:55 Presentation, Room 205
“Art Therapy as Part of a Multidisciplinary Team: Developing an Arts in
Corrections Program”
Caroline Cook, Florida State University

Presentation, Room 210
“From Sheltered Students to Sheltering Others”
Patrick Lee Lucas & Suzanne Cabrera, The University of North Carolina-
Greensboro

11:05-11:35 Presentation, Room 205
“Art and Place Relationship: Evaluating Sense of Place in a Community
Based Public Art Installation”
Marlo Ransdell, Florida State University

Presentation, Room 210
“i+TiBET: A Community Effort to Preserve Tibetan Culture-in-Exile”
Angela Tank & Carrie Ann Christensen, University of Minnesota-Twin
Cities

11:45-12:15 Presentation, Room 205
“The Darkest Hour is Just Before Dawn: Research and Optimism in
Community-Based Art”
Owen Mundy & Joelle Dietrick, Florida State University

Presentation, Room 210
“Incorporating Civic and Social Responsibility into Design Curriculum”
Jillissa Moorman, University of Northern Iowa

12:15- 1:30 Lunch (with Music by Charles Atkins)

1:40- 2:10 Presentation, Room 205
“Integrating Social Justice in the Thesis”
Alison Keohane, Jessica Menrath, Cheryl Watson, Hannah Mendoza,
Savannah College of Art and Design

Presentation, Room 210
“Research to Application: How an Innovative Arts in Corrections Program
Was Developed”
Dave Gussak, Florida State University

2:20-2:50 Presentation, Room 205
“The Cradle of Hope: One Year Later”
Jill Pable, Rachelle McClure, Sean Coyne, Florida State University

Presentation, Room 210
“A Place of Their Own: Shaping Behavior Through Design in an Arts-
Based Community Center”
Tracie Kelly, Florida State University

3:00- 3:45 Endnote Speaker, Joan Frosch

3:45- 4:00 Closing Remarks

UNHCR Colleague's Reprise to Architecture and Justice Film

...Cristina Villarino with a wonderful anecdote about the International Court of Justice at the Hague.

Pillars of Justice - The Final!!

I doubt this will be our final post, but here is our final project for our Qualitative Analysis class.


Pillars of Justice from Paulette Moore on Vimeo.

Public Property

When I reflect on the dialogs today, other thoughts and themes, which are really variations on some that others have discussed, unfold. One thing that strikes me is that the buildings in Berkeley and Jefferson County that have been built as courthouses since the 1800’s have been converted buildings. In order to make room for Magistrates when the Supreme Court said that they could no longer work out of their houses, they converted the John Street School. John Small attended there and he was one of the people who designed the modifications. Later a bowling alley and a bank became courtrooms, near the “old courthouse.” Most recently, in Jefferson County, the old jail was converted. The new judicial center started out as a woolen mill/factory and was then an outlet mall? Does the former use say anything about the location? The structure? The memories? The way the buildings function?
Another thing that strikes me is the growing lack of public access to the courts. That was not a theme I went in aware of, but it emerged so clearly and is perhaps the crisis in judicial architecture. How can we create spaces where the public feels both welcome and safe to use to address their conflicts? After a recent crisis in Yolo County, California where the public was locked out of an open proceeding, one legislator proposed rules to provide public access to courts. Her legislation provides, in part: “Each court security plan must address how the presiding judge and sheriff will ensure that security services are provided in a manner that protects the Sixth Amendment right of criminal defendants to a public trial and the right of public access to court proceedings under the First Amendment and Section 124 of the Code of Civil Procedure…(the plan must) describe policies and procedures for ensuring that security services are provided in a manner that protects the Sixth Amendment right of criminal defendants to a public trial and the right of public access to court proceedings under the First Amendment and Section 124 of the Code of Civil Procedure. Describe the training to be provided to ensure that courtrooms remain open to the public unless a lawful court order authorizes closure. Describe outreach efforts to local media and any Bench-Bar-Media Committee to facilitate discussion of concerns about fair trials, the free press, and other key issues affecting the courts, the media, and the public."http://www.californiaprogressreport.com/2008/07/state_senate_ma.html

This story and the access issue that our community members who care about justice have raised sent me searching through some old legal opinions. There is a quote from U.S. Supreme Court decision that may perfectly describe the issue of the public nature of the courthouse. “What transpires in the court room is public property." Craig v. Harney, 331 U.S. 367, 374 (1947).
This rather overriding issue about access to courts and the important part that the courthouse plays in community, does not overshadow the others. It may be the most concrete. (Pardon the pun.) But probably one of the most important messages I’m hearing is that the issues are not the courtrooms, it’s the courthouse. That shouldn’t be a surprise. As a lawyer, I know that most cases settle and never see the inside of a courtroom. However, the place, the experience of knowing that this building is “public property” is important. The courthouse doesn’t just house an isolated chamber someplace where bad things happen. It is a place where the community meets to resolve their conflicts. It is a place where relationships are created and mended. In short, the relationship between justice and architecture is this: the architecture must be mindful of creating a space where the citizens and judiciary of the community are respected, where they may be challenged to be a member of that community, and where they have room to talk openly and freely, with full participation of one another.

Another day-another dialog

Paulette has been sick and I’m exhausted. We are feeling like we need So we load up into Paulette’s car and drive for another day of shooting, learning and talking. We start off at the Martinsburg City Municipal building. We selected that venue because Judge Sanders had spoken about the photos of police officers that hung in the hallways. The City Manager gave us permission to film, and we did. The photographs turned out to be a group of kind of rag-tag hodge-podge photos which seem to date from the early twentieth century. We also explored the experience of the defendant in this courtroom, and found that a defendant wouldn’t be able to see the witness testifying. The bench is so big in the small space, that Paulette could only see about half of my face over the bench.
From there, we went to stop at Patterson’s Drug Store. You may recall that we stopped her before for Paulette to get her ammonia coke-a rite of passage into the bar. I remembered that when I first became a member of the Morgantown bar that the attorneys and judge would meet at Murphy’s in the morning before court. I had heard that the judge used to do the same thing at Pattersons. I was telling the story and Paulette was filming when one of Martinsburg’s old timers who I’ve seen stopped. He wanted to be on tape and wanted to flirt with Paulette and I. We did for a while, and then I asked him about the judge. He remembered that Judge Scinscendiver would “hold court” there before the beginning of the business day.
About that time, a group of assistant prosecutors, most of whom we did early interviews with, were coming back from lunch. They stopped and it was a perfect backdrop to discuss the sense of community among lawyers and the space to develop that sense. We then returned to some of the issues we had identified that we wanted to discuss, including the openness of the courthouse, the public property nature of the courthouse, and of course, the women’s witness room. One of the prosecutors had used the women’s witness room to talk to all of her witnesses, including men, before they moved to the new courthouse. One of the youngest prosecutors thought it would be great to have courtyard near the courthouse for the community to gather. Another thought that was a terrible idea, and would just attract vagrants.
After that very dynamic and vibrant dialog concluded, we returned to the old courthouse to revisit the courtroom, reshoot some of the Women’s witness room and dialog with John Small, the county clerk. It was here, in the Berkeley County Courthouse, that Paulette got the great idea to make a trailer, Extreme Courtroom Makeover. She was feeling puny, so I went along.
The dialog with John Small was beyond wonderful. It was kind of like everything we done to that point lead to our meeting. He told so many important stories, but the one theme was that the courthouse is a place that belongs to the people. When he was growing up, the public toilets downtown were in the courthouse. Both the ladies’ room and the men’s room had attendants. His mother would stop and visit with the attendant when they came to town. When a jury trial was starting, the janitor rang the bell. And the only time Mr. Small ever goes into the women’s witness room is when the toilet is stopped up and he needs to unclog it with the plunger. His stories were so rich and insightful, I could go on forever, but you’ll just have to see the film.
One of the things that Mr. Small brought up and that we knew we needed further footage of was the new elaborate security at the judicial building. So that was our last stop. The judicial building is no longer in the center of town, but it’s just a few blocks away, surrounded by a giant parking lot and across the street from the cemetery.
The bailiffs and the head of the security couldn’t have been nicer, more polite nor more efficient. While they were not willing to be interviewed, they told us about the process for the security which involved national standards and an architect from the city. They reported that people do complain about what they have to go through to get into the building, but the bailiffs recognized how important it is for folks to feel safe in the courthouse. It is such a difficult tension. When we got into the courtroom, I was reminded of how I do like the physical space of those rooms, being circular and spacious, well let, comfortable. However, I couldn’t ignore what it took to get there.

Extreme Courtroom Makeover - The Trailer

One good project naturally begets others... here's an option for a series that might follow our recent adventures. Watch 30 seconds now on YouTube:

Additional Emerging Themes

Additional emerging themes:
-steps in the courtroom and the shackled defendant
-courthouses as the "center of town"/part of the community
-courthouses as gathering places for attorneys and judges-forming that community
-the divergent ideas on a dignity in the courthouse and respect for the process
-justice as a theoretical space, the architecture of the mind, and whether or not justice might mean a hug.
-deference to the judge in how the courthouse is designed
-what does security mean?

Dealing with the Material - Sunday Reflections

In our project, we are not writing down transcripts word for word. In the editing process we have culled each of the original interviews which range from 5 - 60 minutes long, down to a "string out" form - what we consider outstanding soundbites. We will include each of these first "culls" on a CD in the form of quick time movies so our process and progress can be tracked (and if we can include them online - we will do that as well.)

Now we are taking each of the "culled" interviews and placing them on the edit timeline - where themes begin to emerge. This will take several days and we intend for the final edit to run about 25 minutes. So far themes include:

-What works in a courtroom (mainly intimacy - access to the players)
-Anecdotes of what does not work.
-A scene of Brenda and me walking around the Berryville courtroom and examining a defendent's chair and how that might effect the process of justice.
-Security issues - post 9/11 and how they have effected the justice process.
-The bathroom and its place in the concept of justice.

More soon on this...

A Little Ammonia with that M'am?

A rite of passage into the Berkeley County Judicial Process is to have an Ammonia Coke at Patterson’s Drug Store. Paulette’s in.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=R9Gh3CPuVEU

Still confused? Check out http://www.thriftyfun.com/tf602427.tip.html for a review of the numerous benefits (and literary references) to the Ammonia Coke.

Actually, the ammonia coke does tell a story about architecture and justice. From the stories I've heard, judges, lawyers, and local folks would gather for lunch or coffee before court at Patterson's Drug Store a few years back. When I graduated from law school in 1987 and practiced in Morgantown, at least one of the judges and a whole slew of lawyers gathered at Murphy's (across the street from the courthouse) in the morning before court. As a young mother with two children, it would have been impossible for me to add that meeting onto my day. As a matter of fact, I'm not sure that any of the women bar members felt comfortable or welcome in those morning sessions. However, it does seem important that this part of the day has been eliminated. At the new courthouse in Berkeley County, there is no place to walk to across the street from the courthouse to have coffee together. During one of our dialogs, one lawyer suggested that an informal gathering place for attorneys at the courthouse would be nice. I wonder if we could relocate Patterson's?

Time and Space in Conflict

While we are working on editing, reviewing the themes, and refining what is missing from our research, I’m reading Decolonizing Methodologies: Research and Indigenous Peoples by Linda Tuhiwai Smith. She discusses the “western” concept of time and space and notes that the Maori word for time and space are the same word. She states that other indigenous languages have no related word for time and space but a series of precise words for parts of these terms. This becomes an issue for me in this project since I imagine that we are studying “space” and ventured into this project with an idea that the concept of space was primarily a physical one. As we began the dialog (especially when Judge Sanders discussed the “architecture of the mind”, a far larger concept of space emerged: a concept that includes a psychological or theoretical space for community, intimacy, empathy, compassion. But even now I am beginning to wonder if we are still too narrow. Ms. Tuhiwai Smith:

Conceptions of space were articulated through the ways in which people arranged their homes and towns, collected and displayed objects of significance, organized warfare, set out agriculture fields and arranged gardens, conducted business, displayed art and performed drama, separated out one form of human activity from anther. Spatial arrangements are an important part of social life. Western classifications of space include such notions as architectural space, physical space, psychological space, theoretical space and so forth. Foucault’s metaphor of the cultural archive is an architectural image. The archive not only contains artifacts of culture, but it itself an artifact and a construct of culture. (Smith, 51.)

Is the courthouse an object of significance? A cultural artifact bearing testament to what our society has found important in different periods of time? If so what does the women’s witness room say? What does it mean when the courthouse moves away from the center of town? What is the psychological space and theoretical space that is created? What needs to be created? How is that associated with the physical space?
And then: what does it mean if time and space are the same? OJ Simpson was sentenced yesterday and I’ve seen a bunch of reports on his sentencing. Every reporter states the sentence as a different amount of time. I watched the judge announce the sentence on ESPN and without knowing the laws in Nevada, (whether or not each sentence is determinate or runs consecutive or concurrent to other sentences) I have no idea what his mandatory minimums or maximums may be. What is the relationship of time and space-- in the courtroom? Does it, as in Einstein’s Dreams, (Lightman, 1993) change when we move from the square into the courtroom? What does it mean to the passage of time when the space where we watch, or wait, or talk, or deliberate is crafted with diverse intentions which may be unrelated to the psychological or theoretical spaces?

Happy Thanksgiving Day!

Professor Frank Pommershierm in his article, A Snapshot from the Field, (1996)(21 Vermont L. Rev. 7.) includes the following quote in a reference to the development of “tribal jurisprudence.” “As noted by the Irish Poet Seamus Heaney, recent recipient of the Noble Prize in Literature, ‘In any movement towards liberation, it will be necessary to deny the normative authority of the dominant language or literary tradition.” He further states, “Although literature is not law in periods of liberation, law too will confront dominant norms.”
Does the dominant language of the “Western” researcher gain normative authority? To what end? To redefine experience? To justify projects which may actually further US imperialism in the name of charitable good? In the name of international development?
During my last year of law school, many of my “radical” friends went to work for large corporate law firms. They didn’t want to, but the financial obligations were crushing. Many of them said that it would be okay. They could change the system from within. Or-- it was just for a few years. Twenty five years later, they are still in the firms. The firms are still the same.
Can we do one research project accepting the normative authority of the dominant language? Or will we find it just easier next time to rely on our now familiar method? And the next time…and the next? Does it really matter? Is this a period of liberation? For whom?

Art is No Luxury

In this morning’s New York Times, I am reminded of Paulette’s recent post about art and science. Of course, I think this question has everything to do with research and research methods. In our current project we are trying to respect the steps of a more scientific approach towards research but at the same time, recognize the limitations of that method. The article is by Jori Finkel about artist Enriques Martinez Celaya. Mr. Celaya is a painter and sculptor who is exhibiting at his Venice studio. The article caught my eye being titled ‘Layers of Devotion (and the Scars to Prove It) wondering if that title might also describe my quest for an understanding of justice. Mr. Martinez Celaya was trained as a physicist. While a graduate student at the University of California, Berkeley, he found himself spending more time painting. He described this fascination. “I found that the kinds of questions I wanted to tackle were not the questions of physics...Art is usually described as a luxury, but I felt the opposite. I just couldn’t go to the lab anymore and ignore everything going on emotionally with me.”
At EMU, we are, after all, earning a Master of Arts degree. I hope that with this project, we can explore the art of research as we seek answers to the difficult question of justice.

The Future of Science is Art

As we continue to define our methods for this project - I found an article by Jonah Lehrer in the December 2007 Seed magazine helpful in its exploration of the limitations of reductionism. Lehrer asserts that only by heeding the wisdom of the arts can science gain new insights and perspectives that are the seeds of scientific process...

Here are a few excerpts and some summary:

When we think about the scientific process, a specific vocabulary comes to mind: objectivity, experiments, facts. In the passive tense of the scientific paper, we imagine a perfect reflection of the real world.

But the trajectory of science has proven to be a little more complicated. The more we know about reality - about its quantum mechanics and neural origins - the more palpable its paradoxes become. As Vladimir Nabokov, the novelist and lepidopterist, once put it, "The greater one's science, the deeper the sense of mystery."

The fundamental point is that modern science has made little progress toward any unified understanding of everything. Our unknowns have not dramatically receded. In many instances, the opposite has happened, so that our most fundamental sciences are bracketed by utter mystery. It's not that we don't have all the answers. It's that we don't even know the questions.



Sometimes the whole is best understood in terms of the whole. William James, as usual, realized this first. The eight chapters that begin his epic 1890 textbook, The Principle of Psychology, describe the mind in the conventional third-person terms of the experimental psychologist. Everything changes, however, in with chapter nine. James starts this section, "The Stream of Thought," with a warning: "We now begin our study of the mind from within."

With that single sentence, as radical in sentiment as the modernist novel, James tried to shift the subject of psychology. He disavowed any scientific method that tried to dissect the mind into a set of elemental units, be it sensations or synapses. Such a reductionist view is the opposite of science, James argued, since it ignores our actual reality.



As the neuroscientist Semir Zeki notes, "Artists (painters) are in some sense neurologists, studying the brain with techniques that are unique to them." Monet's haystacks appeal to us, in part, because he had a practical understanding of color perception. The drip paintings of Jackson Pollock resonate precisely because they escite some peculiar circuit of cells in the visual cortex. These painters reverse-engineered the brain, discovering the laws of seeing in order to captivate the eye.

Of course the standard response of science is that such art is too incoherent and imprecise for the scientific process. But isn't such incoherence an essential aspect of the human mind? Isn't our inner experience full of gaps and non-sequiturs and inexplicable feelings? In this sense, the messiness of the novel and the abstraction of the painting is actually a mirror. As the poetry critic Randell Jarrell put it, "It is the contradictions in works of art which make them able to represent us - as logical and methodical generalizations cannot - our world and ourselves, which are so full of contradictions."



(The power of the poet is that she) compresses meaning into meter, vague feelings are translated into visceral images. It is not coincidence that many of the greatest physicists of the 20th century - eminent figures like Einstein, Feynman and Bohr - were known for their distinctly romantic method of thinking.



No scientific model of the mind will be wholly complete unless it includes what cannot be reduced. Until science sees the brain from a more holistic perspective - and such a perspective might require the artistic imagination - our scientific theories will be detached from the way we see ourselves.

Berryville District Court

The Winchester Star ran a story on the portraits in the courthouse on Tuesday, complete with photos.

http://www.winchesterstar.com/showarticle_new.php?sID=6&foldername=20081118&file=More%20portraits%20_article.html

Analyze This!

Since the beginning of this course, I’ve articulated concerns I have about power relationships between the researchers and researched. One of the ways that power is exercised is through redefining the experience through “analysis” and placement within categories, as deemed by the researcher. In seeking to research these concerns, I’ve been reading Mary Margaret Fonow and Judith A. Cook, Beyond Methodology (Indiana University Press, 1991). They’ve tackled the tough issues in research from a perspective that adopts feminist values. I’ve written about the subject/object issue and the nearly impossible problem of power within the researcher/research subject relationship. The Acker essay also address the question of analysis when they adopt a principle that research consistent with feminist values should continually develop a feminist critical perspective that questions dominant intellectual traditions and can reflect on its own development (Acker, 133.) They observe that their commitment to minimizing the power differentials of the relationship in research was further confounded when it came to analysis. They recognize the problems in attempting to produce an analysis which goes beyond the researched while granting them full subjectivity. They posed the question: “How do we explain the lives of others without violating their reality?” (Acker, 142.) In the course of trying to analyze their research, they became frustrated with the complexity of the material which did not lend itself to categorization. Acker says “Both the ways in which we were categorizing experience and the kinds of categories we then developed were still somewhat antithetical to or theoretical position” (Acker, 143.)
Ackers relies on her theoretical beginnings in Marxism, feminism and critical theory. She concludes by observing that “…in the process of analysis we refined and reshaped our initial questions, trying to make the act of objectification analogous to a moment of critical reflection. The concepts and questions that are central in our final report are different from those with which we started” (Acker, 144.)
We are just beginning the process of analysis, but like Ackers, I find my own commitment to dialectical analysis and commitment to allowing the subjects to speak their own truth to be contrary to the use of rigid categories. In following Ackers, I am struggling to make this act of objectification more a moment of critical reflection. I got this idea for this project when I was in family court in Jefferson County. I was arguing a minor point with great eloquence when the judge remarked that she couldn’t hear me. Here I was, in this spanking new expensive court and the judge can’t even hear me. What was this architect thinking?
But then, my first background interview with the architect reminded me that the architect responds to the client. So much for blaming the architects for injustice. As we’ve progressed through the interviews and I try to critically reflect, I also find that my initial inquiry was really based on a sense that the architects seem to be striving for beauty and we need function. However, in the stories that have emerged, I am hearing a lot more than function and beauty. There is an incredible, complex functioning of the space in courthouses which creates ease, intimacy, clumsiness, aloofness, or any of a thousand other spatial relationships between people. These spatial relationships in many ways reflect or create the dynamic relationships of the participants in the judicial proceedings.
Delving further into the broad notions of categories and seeking the critical reflection which is demanded by Marxism, feminism and critical theory, I also see how narrow my initial vision may have been. In the interviews that have been conducted thus far, and even in the old books in the back room, justice is not about lots of natural light, beautiful paintings or comfortable chairs. Justice is not even about poor acoustics or making the defendant sit behind a glass partition. Justice is about relationships. Those relationships are those between the judges and lawyers and litigants and jurors. But even more, the relationships that are created and sustained in the courthouse are about the community and the bonds of the citizens to one another. The creation of space for the community to facilitate relationships based in equality, fairness, and peace is the function of the courthouse.

QUESTIONS, SUBJECTS, AND WHAT'S HIDING IN THE BACK ROOM

Today, we went to film at the Clarke County District Court, where Paulette appeared as a litigant. As it goes, we ended up booked to be filming at the Circuit Court and the District Court was unavailable today—being used for mediation.
As a researcher, I can’t limit my vision to what I can see. Just because I had planned to look at the older building with the paintings which would confirm some of my ideas, it doesn’t mean that’s the way it does (or should) develop.
Since we did have an appointment with the Circuit Clerk of the County, we walked over to that building and met a wonderfully charming woman who was nicely dressed in a grey suit who’d been a clerk, or deputy clerk, for forty five years. She was so kind to take a few minutes to talk with us. Joan Acker, Kate Barry, and Johanna Esseveld in their essay, Objectivity and Truth, published in Fonow and Cook, Beyond Methodology (1991, Indiana University Press) attempt to identify problems in doing feminist perspective. They seek to find modes of thinking, data collection and analysis that are more appropriate than others for studying the situation of women from a feminist perspective. In doing so, they challenge us in the theoretical reconstruction of our research to account for the investigator as well as those investigated. To locate the rsearcher in the social structure. They suggest that we ask the questions, “What are the social relations that produce this researchsituation and the enterprise of research itself? What makes it possible to raise this research problem at this time, in this place, in this society? What are the processes that have rsulted in the researched and the researchers coming together in a particular kind of social relationship?” (Fonow, et al, 146).
Today, we had our first interview with the Clerk who was a person that neither of us had a social relation. I did tell her that I was a lawyer in a neighboring county and Paulette had filled her in on her work at Shenandoah and EMU. However, we didn’t have a relationship. However, we do share a common interest—courts. This kind woman has devoted her life to seeing that the paperwork of the court is orderly addressed. And while we have no history of trust or adversity or companionship, we still share this love of justice and a fascination with the structures which are to house its producers.
The Circuit Clerk seemed a little more reserved and less likely to launch into a story as did those others with whom we have dialoged. However, she was so kind and forthcoming. She did describe the structure of this unusual courtroom and brought up a theme which has emerged. When she moved to the new courthouse in 1978, she also missed the old courthouse, and the lack of formality and community that was shared. She indicated she has gotten used to it, but I couldn’t help but think of the others who have raised this issue.
In Objectivity and Truth the researchers adopted a format of discussion similar to the transformative inquiry. However, they noted, “One strategy was encouraging the interviewee to take the lead in deciding what to talk about. This did not always work, people have ideas about what it is like to be interview end they want to be asked questions so that they can give the ‘right response” (Acker, et al., 140.) Perhaps the Clerk was in that category.
Another delightful surprise by our winding up in the Circuit Court was the unusual space. It is set up as a circle. At first I found that delightful, exciting and quite beautiful. But when I started thinking about where everyone would sit (since I knew that there are assigned seats) I noticed that the defendant would be at the side of the circle, against the glass and wood paneled wall. The prosecutor would be sitting next to the judge. Mmmm. Maybe the circle isn’t the perfect structure for the courtroom. Further physical research took us to a small room off of the main courtroom filled with volumes of “law books.” On one wall was a group of the Virginia Code, that’d be useful “good law.” However the next wall was filled with old case books dating back to 1858. Another gem was a 1939 bound report of the West Virginia Bar meeting. I recognized many names, including Judge Sander’s father. This speaks to the history of the place I suppose. The back room has a bunch of old books that someone undoubtedly donated at one point which still form the backbone of this building.
Paulette’s interview went well. It was strange to be interviewing her, but I have decided that including our own experiences is important not only to be ethical in disclosing our own positions or biases, but also in showing our commitment to our interview subjects that we are not asking them to expose themselves and more than we have. Again, relying on Acker, in their interviews they offered something about themselves to their subject at the end of the interview but reported that it was usually required, the subject had already asked (Acker, at al,141.)

From Paulette:

What struck me most about today was our "deconstruction" of the design of the circuit courtroom. As Brenda says, at first glance the built environment seemed welcoming. A circle! What could be better?! But when I sat in the defendant's chair I realized I felt trapped - actually pinned against the corner made of bullet proof class. It was the farthest point from the judge and literally "framed" - I felt anyone sitting there had the appearance of guilt - it was obvious who was being protected by that bulletproof glass.

It was interesting to be interviewed about my experience in the court. Talk about serendipity... the Winchester Star published a story this morning talking about the portraits that hang in the Berryville Courthouse. I had noted those portraits when I was there for a traffic ticket a few years ago. I felt a little oppressed by the paintings at the time because they reached from floor to ceiling and because I assumed they were all of confederate soldiers. Come to find out from the article - they were all lawyers and judges involved in the courthouse - what a cool historic thing! And an example of what Judge Sanders described as an "architecture of the mind". My assumptions were holding me back.

The relational aspect of courthouses emerged unexpectedly from my interview as well. I remember being surprised when I stood before the judge after my speeding ticket.. that he was conversational and very human... interested and amused by the fact that I received the speeding ticket on my way to Clarke Co. dog shelter. The cop that pulled me over was pulling for me not to have too strict a sentence - I had expired stickers as well as a lead foot.

Brenda asked me whether I felt I had received justice - I did because I was acknowledged, joked with and because I felt that I was trusted with some leniency. It made me respect the system - I've certainly not sped on the way into BVille again.

I also realized that my experience in that courthouse would be much different today than it was the first time because I am more a part of the community. I do yoga with a circuit judge - I know a lot of the lawyers from the Daily Grind - I go to the post office across the street nearly every day. The speeding ticket experience drew me farther into the community... today I feel that courthouse is a much more welcoming place - I no longer feel like the label of just being a northern yankee feminist... I am a contributing community member with ties to cultural, educational, environmental parts of Clarke County and ties to those who are a part of the courthouse. The courthouse is my courthouse. Perhaps that ownership and inclusive part has to do with justice.

NOVEMBER 14: A GOOD DAY FOR TRANSFORMATIVE INQUIRY

NOVEMBER 14: A GOOD DAY FOR A TRANSFORMATIVE INQUIRY
Yesterday was a productive day. Paulette and I interviewed the judge, the regional chief public defender and an assistant prosecutor. But I have to wonder if it is a true interview. I would prefer to avoid that. What we are engaging in, really, is a dialog. For video. And in doing so, we are researching, but at the same time, we are learning and changing. The incredible dialogs that we had today remind me of a quote that has been attributed to :Tich Nhat Hahn, “In true dialogue, both sides are willing to change.” I enjoyed true dialog today—I left the interviews with a changed outlook. I think that Paulette did as well.
When Howard spoke in class, he discussed the transformative inquiry. Surprisingly and predictably, we have adopted most of the guidelines and values for that research in our work. (See Howard Zehr, “Us and Them: A Photographer Looks at Police Pictures: The Photograph as Evidence.” Contemporary Justice Review, 1998, Vol 1 pp. 377-385.) Our work is aiming not only at “pure” knowledge but also social action. I think we were working on this on two levels—one is we were engaged in a dialog where we were introspectively exploring definitions of justice. At one point Paulette and Deb and I were discussing the women’s witness room and Paulette commented on how I had hugged the witness and questioned whether or not the hug was justice. Deb smiled and didn’t seem to hesitate to agree that justice might be a hug. We also left off copies of Howard’s Little Book which could lead to some future exciting projects with our participants.
The transformative inquiry also acknowledges that much knowledge is subject, constructed and interrelational (Zehr.) Part of the inquiry recognizes our own stories that we bring to this research. Paulette and I are including interviews of one another and our own perceptions on justice and architecture. During the dialogs, we frequently revisit each of our roles within the judicial processes and our experiences, even to the extent that the Judge shared his memories of attending court as a child with his father at the Mercer County Courthouse.
The transformative inquiry also recognizes the complex and limited natures of our findings. (Zehr). It is my hope that as we edit and present our “findings” that they will not be “truths” at all—but the simple stories that have been told to us, in an honest, and forthcoming means by our storytellers.
Transformative inquiry also respects “the subjects” with values such as collaboration, accountability, transparency of goals, methods of motives, benefits to subjects and opportunities for the subject to present themselves in their own voice. We have agreed with the subject not to broadcast our dialogs until they’ve had the opportunity to review them and find that our representations fairly present their stories. We have presented ourselves as students of restorative justice who are intrigued to learn what the physical space of the courthouse has to do with justice.
Another aspect of transformative inquiry is that our role is that of facilitator, collaborator, and learner more than neutral expert (Zehr.) As I’ve written consistently since 1990, I don’t have a notion how to be either neutral or an expert. What is an expert anyway? A disinterested professional who is engaged only for the money? I have never practiced law with that vision and don’t intend to conduct research any differently. The possibility of even a judge being neutral was dispelled by legal realism in the 1920s. To deny our own histories, ideas, intentions and dreams as we approach any project is a dangerous lie.
After we had the dialog with the judge, I thought about how sad it was that we are not given more opportunities to engage in a discourse in theory more frequently. I have been appearing before this judge for about twelve years. However, I have never had the opportunity to hear the deep insightful wisdom that he offered on such a theoretical basis. (As a matter of fact, during some of his rulings I have to admit that I was skeptical that he had any wisdom left—at all!) The value that am able to attach this process, where we are taking the time to sit down and talk about these very real, but at the same time, theoretical questions is consistent with Howard’s proposition that transformative research values the process, as much as the product.
As far as the issue of being attuned to the potential harms and unintended consequences for the subjects, and others (Zehr)—we are taking every step we can to remain respectful and provide those with whom we are dialoging the opportunity for a review. I am also proposing that prior to publication, we circulate our video product to others who may have an interest in this topic to help us be aware of potential unintended consequences.
Transformative research also seeks a balance of subjectivity and objectivity—where we avoid co-optation. Since this is self-funded that is not an issue. Since our dialog is with my colleagues, I suppose that we should be aware of a potential based on that relationship. However, I would add that in this profession, we disagree more often than we agree. I have filed appeals and writs against this Judge at the Supreme Court. I have argued vehemently against the public defender. Thus, while I think that our relationship provides a risk for cooptation, I do not think that it is so great to outweigh the value in working with those with whom this dialog is possible, in part, because of that relationship.
Finally, the transformative inquiry employs verbal and non-linear, as well as linear, methods of elicitation and presentation. During our dialogs, I had some burning questions and area of questions that I knew should be included. What do you like and not like about different courtrooms and why? What role does aesthetics play? How did you feel in the dilapidated John street courthouse? Your clients? How did that affect the proceedings? Justice? What experience do you have with the women’s witness room? Do you think Justice might be lurking in there somewhere? However, I didn’t know the order of the questions or even whether or not they may have meaning in each interview. What I did know that in each case, I was talking with someone who has been working for a long time for justice. I wanted them to tell me, in their time, in their own voice, in their own, what the building had to do with it, if anything.

After this full day, Paulette and I left the courthouse excited. We’d learned so much more than we had imagined. We’d heard stories that we couldn’t have anticipated. And this simple little project developed its own story, one that we didn’t write, but certainly share.