Intertextuality, as defined by Eyman, “shows that a given text always relates to preceding or simultaneously occurring discourse” (Eyman). Eyman builds on the ideas of Warnick as they both work to consider the role of intertextuality in online environments. Using Warnick as a source helps Eyman create a simpler definition or foundation for the term. The definition provided within Eyman’s chapter is built using the ideas of Warnick.
Warnick extends the primary term to multimedia compositions, leading to no major difference. There wasn’t any significant difference in how it works when in use “regardless of online or offline medium” (Eyman). Eyman may appear to agree with the majority of theories and arguments. There is a specific argument that Eyman can’t quite follow. Warnick argues that adjusting already established theories and methods is necessary to develop digital rhetoric.
Eyman counteracts this argument by establishing his own beliefs and using other sources to back this up. Rather than adjusting theories and methods, the scholar calls to “align theories and methods of classical and contemporary rhetoric to networked texts and new media as objects of study, but we also need to develop new theories and methods to account for gaps in these more traditional approaches,” (Eyman). Eyman claims that finding a connection between classical and contemporary rhetoric and new media can allow digital rhetoric to develop easily.
Examples of Intertextuality
In their published work, Warnick mentions two examples of intertextuality. Those two examples are political parody and parody advertisements. Another example is in the film The Dead Poet’s Society. When the character of Robin Williams recites a poem about the death of Abraham Lincoln, it is portraying both the death and the respect of the author for the former president.
Leave a Reply