Intertextuality of Text

1. Definition of Intertextuality
Intertextuality is first defined by the French semiotician Julia Kristeva in
the 1960s. She created the term intertextuality from the Latin word intertexto; to
intermingle while weaving. Kristeva argued that all works of literature being
produced contemporarily are intertextual with the works that came before it: ‘any
text is a mosaic of quotations; any text is the absorption and transformation of
another’ (Kristeva, 1986, p.37).
Intertextuality claims that texts are not existed independently yet they
stand in relation to one another to produce meaning. In fact, when readers read the
new text with reflection on another literary work, all related assumptions, effects,
and ideas of the other text provide them a different meaning, and changes the
technique of interpretation of the original piece. Since readers take influence from
other texts, and while reading new texts they shift through archives, this device
gives them relevance and clarifies their understanding of the new texts. For
writers, intertextuality allows them to open new perspectives and possibilities to
construct their stories. Thus, writers may explore a particular ideology in their
narrative by discussing recent rhetoric in the original text. In line with this, John
Fiske (1988), the concept of intertextuality, furthermore, implies that the
interpretation of ‘text’ is also dependent on its relation to other texts and Jeanine
Parisier Plottel and Hanna Kurz Charney (1978), Interpretation is shaped by a
complex of relationships between the text, the reader, reading, writing, printing,
publishing and history: the history that is inscribed in the language of the text and
in the history that is carried in the reader's reading. Such a history has been given
a name: intertextuality. Judith Still and Michael Worton in Intertextuality:
Theories and Practice (1990) explained that every writer or speaker is a reader of
texts before. He or she is a creator of texts, and therefore the work of art is
inevitably shot through with references, quotations, and influences of every kind.
 Referring to the explanation above, Intertextuality is the relationship
between different texts, specifically literary ones. It is the way that texts refer to
and influence other texts. Intertextuality is an important stage in understanding a
piece of literature, as it is necessary to see how other works have influenced the
author and how different texts are employed in the piece to convey certain
meanings. Examples of intertextuality are an author's borrowing and
transformation of a prior text, and a reader's referencing of one text in reading
another. Intertextuality can be a direct borrowing such as a quotation or
plagiarism, or slightly more indirect such as parody, pastiche, allusion, or
translation.
2. Types of Intertextuality
Intertextuality and intertextual relationships can be separated into three
types: obligatory, optional and accidental. These variations depend on two key
factors: the intention of the writer, and the significance of the reference. The
distinctions between these types and those differences between categories are not
absolute and exclusive but instead, are manipulated in a way that allows them to
exist within the same text.
a. Obligatory
Obligatory intertextuality is related to references as crucial notions
for readers to understand what the author means or to recognize the
meaning of the text completely. It is when the writer deliberately invokes a
comparison or association between two or more texts. Without this pre-
understanding or success to grasp the link, the reader's understanding of
the text is regarded as inadequate. Obligatory intertextuality relies on the
reading or understanding of a prior hypotext, before full comprehension of
the hypertext can be achieved.
b. Optional intertextuality
Intertextuality has a less vital impact on the significance of the
hypertext. Optional Intertextuality means it is possible to find a connection
to multiple texts of a single phrase or no connection at all. The intent of
the writer when using optional intertextuality is to pay homage to the
 original writers or to reward those who have read the hypotext. However,
the reading of this hypotext is not necessary to the understanding of the
hypertext.
c. Accidental Intertextuality
Accidental intertextuality is when readers often connect a text with
another text, cultural practice or a personal experience, without there being
any tangible anchor point within the original text. The writer has no
intention of making an intertextual reference and it is completely upon the
reader's own prior knowledge that these connections are made. Often when
reading a book or viewing a film a memory will be triggered in the
viewers' mind. For example, when reading books, a reader may use his or
her prior experiences to make a connection between what is stated in the
books and what happens in reality.
3. Examples of Intertextuality
a. Wide Sargasso Sea (By Jean Rhys)
In his novel, Wide Sargasso Sea, Jean Rhys gathers some events
that occurred in Charlotte Bronte’s Jane Eyre. Rhys presents the wife of
Mr. Rochester, who played the role of a secondary character in Jane Eyre.
Also, the setting of this novel is Jamaica, not England, and the author
develops the back-story for his major character. While spinning the novel,
Jane Eyre, Rhys gives her interpretation amid the narrative by addressing
issues such as the roles of women, colonization, and racism that Bronte did
not point out in her novel otherwise.
b. A Tempest (By Aime Cesaire)
A Tempest is an adaptation of The Tempest by William
Shakespeare. The author parodies Shakespeare’s play from a post-colonial
point of view. Cesaire also changes the occupations and races of his
characters. For example, he transforms the occupation of Prospero, who
was a magician, into a slave-owner, and also changes Ariel into a Mulatto,
though he was a spirit. Cesaire, like Rhys, makes use of a famous work of
literature, and put a spin on it in order to express the themes of power,
slavery, and colonialism.
c. Lord of the Flies (By William Golding)
William Golding, in his novel Lord of the Flies, takes the story
implicitly from Treasure Island, written by Robert Louis Stevenson.
However, Golding has utilized the concept of adventures in which young
boys love to do on the isolated island they were stranded on. He, however,
changes the narrative into a cautionary tale, rejecting the glorified stories
of Stevenson concerning exploration and swash buckling. Instead, Golding
grounds this novel in bitter realism by demonstrating negative implications
of savagery and fighting that could take control of human hearts because
characters have lost the idea of civilization.
d. The Lion, the Witch, and the Wardrobe (By C. S. Lewis)
In this case, C. S. Lewis adapts the idea of Christ’s crucifixion in
his fantasy novel, The Lion, the Witch and the Wardrobe. He, very
shrewdly, weaves together the religious and entertainment themes for a
children’s book. Lewis uses an important event from The New Testament,
transforming it into a story about redemption. In doing so, he uses
Edmund, a character that betrays his savior, Aslan. Generally, the motive
of this theme is to introduce other themes, such as evil actions, losing
innocence, and redemption.
e. For Whom the Bell Tolls (By Earnest Hemingway)
In the following example, Hemingway uses intertextuality for the
title of his novel. He takes the title of a poem, Meditation XVII, written by
John Donne. The excerpt of this poem reads:
“No man is an island … and therefore never send to know for whom the
bell tolls; it tolls for thee.”
Hemingway not only uses this excerpt for the title of his novel, he
also makes use of the idea in the novel, as he clarifies and elaborates the
abstract philosophy of Donne by using the concept of the Spanish Civil
 War. By the end, the novel expands other themes, such as loyalty, love,
and camaraderie.
REFERENCES
Fiske, J. (1988). Television Culture. London: Methuen.
Kristeva, J. (1986). Word, dialogue and the novel. New York: Columbia
University Press.

Plottel, J. K. & Charney, H. C. (1978). Introduction to Intertextuality: New

Still, J. & Worton, M. (1990). Intertextuality: Theories and Practice.