This book is at odds with the presuppositions behind a received view on law as a systematic solution to social problems in the name of justice. It argues that neither do facts in law represent social reality, nor do norms represent a moral ideal. Representationalism as such, in its various legal guises, is put to the test of what is called here `the interception hypothesis'. Although it is derived from the theory of literature (the theory of narrative) and corroborated by several close reading analyses of legal texts (both decisions and statutory rules), this hypothesis aims, in the first part, at providing an alternative model for the structure and the value of legal knowledge. The second part shows how this knowledge is operative in fundamental concepts like democracy, punishment and (contractual) obligation.