‘Creative crime’ and the phytological analogy

Abstract

If criminologists intend to expand the conception of crime to include ‘socially injurious acts’ that are not proscribed by civil or criminal statutes, then we must also contemplate the responses to those ‘socially injurious acts.’ One such response is ‘creative crime.’ This paper outlines some of the characteristics and defining features of three categories of ‘creative crime’ — culture jamming, interventionism, and sabotage. In so doing, it identifies a phytological analogy for understanding and articulating the role of creative crime in society and its system of governance. Through a discussion of the possibilities and problems of placing ‘creative crime’ within the rubric of the various ‘branches’ of government, or as a rhizome of the same theoretical plant, kudzu is presented as the most appropriate analogy. But whether ‘creative crime’ serves as an end in itself or as part of a broader movement for change, its contributions to the ‘marketplace of ideas’ cannot be discounted.