Is it possible to “enjoy” the law? And, if so, how does one engage in such practices of enjoyment? Such are the questions that one might pose and engage with having read Daniel Hourigan’s bookLaw and Enjoyment. However, to understand enjoy- ment here is to recognize, as the subtitle indicates, not simply a hedonistic desire but rather the technical framing of the discourse of psychoanalysis. 1 Hourigan’s work, situated within the field of cultural legal studies, takes up specifically the challenge of the field of law and psychoanalysis through a series of engaging inter- ventions in both popular texts (from China Mieville’s speculative fiction to the online gaming communityEve Online) as well as discussions in continental and legal philosophy (from the debate over necessity and contingency in speculative realism to the question of legal knowledge and jurisprudence as a science). This is an exciting and engaging contribution to the fields of both cultural legal studies, and psychoanalysis and law. In addition, one of its key claims intersects with those two fields arguing that any engagement orreadingof “law psychoanalytically [...] will eventually arrive at the other side of the discourse: a legal reading of psycho- analysis” (12). This insight of the reversal of analysis is one that also applies to cul- tural legal studies that undertake not only legal readings of popular culture texts but also pop culture readings of law and legal theory. This doubling, which Houri- gan performs throughout the book, also goes to the way in which he situates law within the realm of fantasy and the fantasmatic – a fantasy that is essential to the operation and efficacy of the law, be it in the courtroom, legal office, negotiating room, trial film, police procedural, or law school.