Intertextuality is the reference of another work in another. Media and writing display intertextuality, examples given included Shrek and Hamilton. Academic work for students also display intertextuality. This is something students cannot escape. Many have to write at least one academic paper with references to back up certain points. It is something that brings more context to what we are reading or watching. Though it is important, many view intertextuality as a way for writers to be unoriginal with what they put out. They just bring up old texts as their own. I don’t necessarily see it as something negative. Claims made in literature become stronger when there is a reference to another work that could claim the same thing.
In media, it is just a way for watchers to build the connection in both works. Whether it was put in there for comedy purposes or metaphorical purposes. I can understand the frustration with intertextuality when it comes to simply rebranding the same thing over and over again. Some just want to see something original. It is hard to find something unique when everything is just another version of something that has already come out. But I don’t think there will ever be a time where intertextuality does not exist, as one article questioned the possibility of being able to do anything without any prior knowledge. In terms of basic living, everything we do requires some type of prior knowledge, everything would probably be impossible to complete or just take an extremely long time to figure out.
This is where intertextuality is important. Sometimes we do need that prior knowledge and references to learn new things. I see it as something that can be beneficial and fun for some areas like media and completing tasks. I can also see it as something that is slightly annoying when trying to find something original and unique. This is why intertextuality is important across media and writing.
Leave a Reply