Response to Frauley, Simecek, Slugan, and Whitecross

The purpose of this article is to conclude this special issue of the Journal of Theoretical and Philosophical Criminology by responding to Jon Frauley, Karen Simecek, Mario Slugan, and Rosalchen Whitecross’ criticisms of A Criminology of Narrative Fiction. I am very grateful to editor-in-chief David Polizzi for this opportunity and, as always, flattered that my peers have devoted so much time to reading the monograph and writing about it, regardless of whether their evaluations are encouraging or disparaging. A response to each of the issues raised by each of the critics at a corresponding level of detail is not possible within the confines of a journal article so I have restricted my reply to the most compelling objections against my argument from each critic.