Legislation: Work of art or artefact

    Research output: Contribution to journalArticleScientificpeer-review


    The title of Willem Witteveen’s 'De wet als kunstwerk' is an utter challenge for translators with a philosophical mindset. In English, the choice readily at hand for ‘kunstwerk’ would be ‘work of art’. But a different translation looms large. A ‘kunstwerk’ (in Dutch) also means a technically advanced construction in an already cultivated landscape. Let us call such constructions ‘artefacts’, to distinguish them from ‘works of art’. The latter are wrought by artists, the former by engineers. My question departs from the ambiguity inherent to ‘kunstwerk’ as it hovers between work of art and artefact. From a philosophical
    point of view, what, with regard to contemporary legislation, remains of the
    artefact as over and against the work of art?
    Original languageEnglish
    Pages (from-to)180-190
    JournalTilburg Law Review: Journal on international and comparative law
    Publication statusPublished - 2015


    Dive into the research topics of 'Legislation: Work of art or artefact'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

    Cite this