This chapter explores the phenomenon of “instant justice” at the site of possible worlds. The context that accommodates this task is the English science-fiction comic Judge Dredd 2000 AD created by John Wagner and Carlos Ezquerra in the 1970s. The main character of the comic strip is action hero Judge Dredd, an officer of the law from a distant postapocalyptic future. Unlike other superheroes who act in the name of justice, Judge Dredd has justice in his name. His character is a singular embodiment of police officer, detective, judge, jailer, and executioner. Situated at the imaginary edge between text and image, the comic discloses the symbolic meaning of law and justice as “instant justice.” After a preliminary elaboration of this phenomenon with Gilles Deleuze, I offer two additional illustrations of instant justice with Franz Kafka and Fridrich Durrenmatt. In the last part of this chapter, I theorize instant justice further with Plato, Sigmund Freud, and Jacques Lacan. The main objective of this theorizing is to disclose the relationship between the idea of instant justice and its semiotic phenomenality.

Judge Dredd: Dreaming of Instant Justice

The object of semiotics is the study of signs. Signs, however, can be studied only in terms of other signs. This is both an empirical fact and a logical necessity. In most cases, the signs used to study other signs are terms from the mother tongue of the studier. And the signs studied are defined in terms of that same mother tongue. The result of semiotic study is, therefore, usually a rearrangement of the mother tongue, a mapping of itself onto itself. There is nothing to stop people from doing this, and each time they do so, it has social effects. But no knowledge is gained thereby, since it is always possible to reorganize the mapping. None has that privilege of necessity associated with knowledge. Modern science is characterized by its use of mathematical notation in the place of the partial metalanguages mentioned above. A science of semiotics could then arise only as a mathematics of signs. This science is generally called symbolic logic. Chomskyan linguistics is another such science. The virtue of mathematical symbolism is that, since it is not drawn directly from the treasure-house of signs of any mother tongue, its rules of combination, of validity, can be made independent of any semantic content. As a consequence, mathematical notation need not be translated from one language to another and would seem to constitute the ideal metalanguage, one that is universally understandable among subjects. Attempts to communicate with beings from other worlds, whether in science fiction or in actual attempts at interstellar communication, are based on this assumption. Lacan has pointed out, however, that this would-be universalism is in fact a formula for total solipsism, for although it is quite possible to develop such systems-the names Boole, Frege, Russell, Goedel, Quine, attest to that fact"nevertheless, the fact remains that they can only be transmitted with the help of language" (Encore 100). There's the rub: you must use some actual mother tongue to explain to another subject, not the semantic content, but the functioning of the mathematical notation, its rules of combination ("operations") and the relations of one symbol to another. Put the other way round, I can read

https://www.jstor.org/stable/pdfplus/3684924.pdf

Gilbert D. Chaitin

Papers

Lacan and the Object of Semiotics