Intertextualiy

Inter(text)uality vs. Inter(sec)tionality

Intertextuality and Intersectionality are NOT the same thing, to my surprise. This is why I emphasized the use of parenthesis in the subheading. Intersectionality is a sociological framework for understanding the relationship between the different social identities a person has. For example, someone’s race, gender, age, sexuality. These have the power to affect a person’s privilege or oppression, and the way they’re viewed in the world. In the chapter, “Defining and Locating Digital Rhetoric,” inter(text)uality is when a  “writer references another writer’s work.” (Kristen LaBarca. Douglas. Pg 33.) It is one of the many tools used for digital rhetoric. Digital rhetoric is the use of digital media and technologies to communicate and persuade. Though we’ve all read the same thing, it was a pretty heavy read for two paragraphs. I needed some reminding myself. 

Intertextuality references are either ‘smaller’ in form, like a quote or paraphrasing of another writer. Or, larger in scale, like an entire work based/inspired by another’s. The concept of intertextuality is easy when it comes to traditional handwriting and publishing. It’s in digital spaces where the possibilities become endless: audios, memes, videos, etc. Intertextuality is not just limited to writers though. This term can be stretched to all forms of media and to be honest, it should.

Still confused? Memes…need I say more? Just kidding, I will say more. A meme in, in of itself, has intertextuality written all over it. The picture used is from somewhere else. The text within the meme, is largely a quote from another form of media (movies, books, songs, etc). Take this meme for example: 

Not only is this a reference to marvel but, it also makes you think of the particular movie and scene. It is inspired by marvel. This reference captures an extra audience (marvel fans). Further pushing the message intended even more. 

Digital Rhetoric

When it comes to digital rhetoric I strongly suggest us to think about how our identities (intersectionality) are at play. Are we always going to hide behind the walls digital platforms allow us to? When we use digital privacy to our advantage, we don’t have to. (Refer to my last blog on how to do so). Even with the knowledge of digital privacy though, using intertextuality has many layers. Depending on who you’re trying to reach, the intersectionality of the artist/writer behind the reference can impact audience reaction. If you’re talking about, let’s say something like feminism, who are you referencing? Old white men? Okay, they’ve done studies on the matter but they can never know a woman’s experience first hand. Attributes like this matter when referencing.  

The Importance of Integrating Both Intertextuality

Including intersectionality in intertextuality can also help draw out the audience you DON’T want. Who you’re trying to persuade. A queer black male, if  chosen to share that part of their identity online, homophobia’s will make themselves known. This could be beneficial as you wouldn’t want them to be a part of your audience, anyway. Or, that’s exactly what you want! You’re using your identity as part of digital rhetoric in hopes to persuade different outlooks. The third option, this is just apart of your identity. Nothing to do with what you post or who you reference.

Our social identities are at the core of who we are. Some people don’t like us simply because of who we are. That’s why it is important to know the negatives of sharing quite literally anything online. One can also make inferences of who you’re based on the types of references you choose to use. Be aware of all of this and stay cautious. 

Regardless of your reasoning, intersectionality has a part to play in digital rhetoric; in turn, intertextuality. All deal with the complexities of rhetoric. I find it interesting that intersectionality had nothing to do with the intertextuality reading…it was never even mentioned. Still, I believe it is for a reason. Safe blogging my friends.