Intertextuality
With intertextuality, the phenomenon is known in the structuralist and poststructuralist orientated cultural and literary theory that no element of meaning - no text so - within a cultural structure without reference is conceivable to all the other texts. In literary studies and concrete connections between literary individual texts are referred to as " intertextuality ".
The text- theoretical concept of intertextuality (lat. inter for " between " ) denotes simple to highly complex relations between texts and receive depending on text or literary historical or literary theoretical context a different meaning, which can take comprehensive cultural history or cultural sociological meanings in extreme cases. Is meant by the notion of text not only a well-ordered structure of linguistic signs, but a network of culture, agricultural engineering and social systems, intertextuality can textual as well as a " dialogue with the culture" and " importing texts from the past into a 'new' context " to be understood.
- 3.1 Genette
- 3.2 Pfister
- 4.1 Literature
- 4.2 See also
- 4.3 External links
- 4.4 Notes and references
Emergence and foundations of intertextuality
The study of intertextuality is in multiple historical point of a pretty young subdiscipline, which has established itself in relation to methods of critical approaches in the literature and text science until the late 1960s; the actual terminus ( double intertextualité ) is introduced by Kristeva 1967. However, literary scholars have previously examined intertextual phenomena; so for example, was tried in the positivism of the 19th century to build by collecting data and facts, a " hermeneutic network," in order to understand individual texts appropriate. Similarly, the attempt is made in the influence and reception researchers have long track text relationships. Even literary terms such as "Quote ", " parody " or " plagiarism" refer to relationships between different texts.
The intertextuality in the narrower sense is different from the traditional literary approaches, especially by another understanding of literature. During the 19th century until well into the 20th century literary texts are always seen as a unit with their author and literary analysis or interpretation is primarily focused on the interpretation of the intentions of the author, new literature and text theories since the 1960s developed, which basically represent the adoption of solid intentions of the author in question and partly displace the classic instance of the author, the literary discussions.
This new literary theory perspective is promoted ( The aesthetics of the Word, 1979) and a number of French post-structuralists such as Barthes and Kristeva ( Criticism and Truth, 1967) and Foucault ( Writings on Literature, 1993), in particular by the Russian literary theorist Bakhtin. The focus is clearly directed to the textuality of the text; instead of focusing a staff writer intentions now, the importance of changing, " unfester " Text intentions.
The text will no longer be analyzed in its fixed final shape, but in view of its processuality examined. The viewing angle moves towards becoming the text and its different intertextual changing states of matter. In this view, each text (also in terms of cultural systems ) can be seen on each stage of its creation as a result of changes in underlying texts. The intertextuality tried accordingly reference relationships between a so-called pheno - text (ie, a specific literary text, such as a narrative ) and the underlying genotype texts ( also avant - texts, that is, cultural artifacts and works of art of various kinds ) to decipher. A phenomenon text is to be understood accordingly as a network or tissue from numerous other texts.
To illustrate the image of is " palimpsest " used partially. Under the one, to be examined text also sell other, earlier texts seem apparent. The intertextuality is also mostly not tied back to a specific author 's intention, but seen as constituting any kind of text production, even if the author should deny this decidedly.
Post-structuralist theory of intertextuality
Julia Kristeva
The term was coined by the Bulgarian- French psychoanalyst and cultural and literary theorist Julia Kristeva in her essay Bakhtine, le mot, le dialogue et le roman ( 1967), in which they Mikhail Bakhtin Dialogizitäts model on the textual status of literature as a whole transferred. In Kristeva states programmatically:
For Kristeva no text is a self-sufficient entity; each text consists of a bunch of quotes is an intersection of other texts and is for the " permutation and transformation " (conversion and transformation) under the influence of his ideological premises from the scene. The term " text" not only written texts, but cultural phenomena comprises at all, inasmuch as they are members of a structure. Such a " text" is thus not stable and clear-cut, but open to interpretations, none of which can claim finality of it. Importance therefore can not be put there by an author or creator in a text, but is only produced from the interpretation, where the interpreter 's own text, of course, just as able to control more than the writer of the source text, so this process of semiosis in principle infinite, a point of view outside of the text is impossible.
Roland Barthes
This intertextuality is an important moment of the poststructuralist deconstruction of the (Author ) subject, as in his programmatic essay operates Roland Barthes The Death of the Author:
In About myself, he writes: " The inter - text is not necessarily a field of influences; rather a music of figures, metaphors, word - thoughts; it is the signifier as siren " in Am zero point of the literature ". [ T] he literature becomes a utopia of language ".
Harold Bloom
Even Harold Bloom's The Anxiety of Influence: A Theory of Poetry 1973 ( German: Influence anxiety: A theory of poetry, 1995) and his theory of misreading ( misreading ) can be considered as intertextuality.
Building on a broad concept of intertextuality as a relation between the texts discussed Bloom especially the diachronic relation that exists between an author and a confrontation with his models. The writer is, according to Bloom striving to break away from the models, to as far away to place with his own text. Bloom sees the literary history as the scene of a battle of the great poets ( struggle in between strong poets ). Every new writer who wants to stand in it, must be determined by its (consciously or unconsciously) the prototypes work off by having them re-interpreted according to his own ideas, so failed reads. With his conception of intertextuality Bloom versa in turn back to more traditional literary theory approaches, in which intertextuality is considered and examined in a manner in which the author -intentional elements in the foreground.
Intertextuality in literary studies
Genette
The Literature Association Kristeva's model with the literary process of the sources and influence research and found his way to a Intertextualitätsmodell, which gave the universality of Kristeva's text theory to examine forms of reference between literary works. The relation between two texts is another in this case considered as a dialog that shows up at the level of the whole text as a style copy and satire, parody, Cento or Hypolepse or selectively reflected in quotations and allusions, and enriches the meaning of both texts.
Particularly influential was Gérard Genette's attempt manifestations of " Transtextualität " - so called Genette intertextuality - to categorize ( 1982 " palimpsest La littérature au second degré. "). Genette distinguishes between five different forms of intertextual relations or transtextueller:
Generally speaking, intertextuality is the relationship between texts, whereby the individual text reference specific ( integration of a text to another, for example by citation, allusion, as a parody, pastiche, travesty, etc.) of the system reference (relationship between a text and general text systems, such as literary genres ) is different. Problematic the analysis of intertextuality, when authors is working intertextually, but make no labeling ( by quotation marks or italics or attribution ). Here the limit is fluent plagiarism.
On the other hand, of course there is the possibility that an author creates unconsciously intertextual references that come to the fore through the reading skills of the reader. In this case, the intertextuality shifted from the author - text relationship to the text - reader relationship. This relationship can be described more precisely when the degree is examined intertextual marker, as suggested by Jörg Helbig. The problem intertextuality is one of the most interesting and important research topics in comparative literature, as it has expanded the notion of text and gives greater insight as to what constitutes a literary text in its essence, making it to a specific artistic activities of man.
Pfister
In an essay of which he edited anthology Manfred Pfister are six ways of scaling intertextual references to