Intertextuality – Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Intertextuality is the shaping of texts’ meanings by other texts. It can include an author’s borrowing and transformation of a prior text or to a reader’s referencing of one text in reading another.

The term “intertextuality” has, itself, been borrowed and transformed many times since it was coined bypoststructuralist Julia Kristeva in 1966. 

Kristeva’s coinage of “intertextuality” represents an attempt to synthesize Ferdinand de Saussure’s semiotics—his study of how signs derive their meaning within the structure of a text—with Bakhtin’s dialogism—his examination of the multiple meanings, or “heteroglossia”, in each text (especially novels) and in each word.[2] 

For Kristeva,[3] “the notion of intertextuality replaces the notion of intersubjectivity” when we realize that meaning is not transferred directly from writer to reader but instead is mediated through, or filtered by, “codes” imparted to the writer and reader by other texts.

For example, when we readJames Joyce’s Ulysses we decode it as a modernist literary experiment, or as a response to the epic tradition, or as part of some other conversation, or as part of all of these conversations at once. This intertextual view of literature, as shown by Roland Barthes, supports the concept that the meaning of a text does not reside in the text, but is produced by the reader in relation not only to the text in question, but also the complex network of texts invoked in the reading process.

via Intertextuality – Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia.

Don Quixote – Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

via Don Quixote – Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia.

fully titled The Ingenious Gentleman Don Quixote of La Mancha (SpanishEl ingenioso hidalgo don Quijote de la Mancha), is a novel written byMiguel de Cervantes. The novel follows the adventures of Alonso Quijano, who reads too many chivalric novels, and sets out to revive chivalry under the name of Don Quixote. He recruits a simple farmer, Sancho Panza as his squire, who frequently deals with Don Quixote’s rhetorical orations on antiquated knighthood with a unique Earthy wit.

He is met by the world as it is, initiating themes like IntertextualityRealismMetatheatre and Literary Representation.

Metatheatre – Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Metatheatre – Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia.

The term “metatheatre“, coined by Lionel Abel, has entered into common critical usage; however, there is still much uncertainty over its proper definition and what dramatic techniques might be included in its scope. Many scholars have studied its usage as a literary technique within great works of literature.

Abel described metatheatre as reflecting comedy and tragedy, at the same time, where the audience can laugh at the protagonist while feeling empathetic simultaneously.[1] The technique reflects the world as an extension of human conscience, not accepting prescribed societal norms, but allowing for more imaginative variation, or a possible social change.[2]

Abel also relates the character of Don Quixote as the prototypical, metatheatrical, self-referring character. He looks for situations he wants to be a part of, not waiting for life, but replacing reality with imagination when the world is lacking in his desires.[3] The character is aware of his own theatricality.

Alva Ebersole adds to the idea of metatheatrical characters saying that the technique is an examination of characters within the broader scheme of life, in which they create their own desires and actions within society.[4] He adds that role-playing derives from the character not accepting his societal role and creating his own role to change his destiny.

The word “metatheatre” comes from the Greek prefix ‘meta’, which implies ‘a level beyond’ the subject that it qualifies; “metatheatricality” is generally agreed to be a device whereby a play comments on itself, drawing attention to the literal circumstances of its own production, such as the presence of the audience or the fact that the actors are actors, and/or the making explicit of the literary artifice behind the production.

Some critics use the term to refer to any play which involves explicit ‘performative’ aspects, such as dancingsinging, or role-playing by onstage characters, even if these do not arise ‘from specifically metadramatic awareness’ ; whereas others condemn its use except in very specific circumstances, feeling that it is too often used to describe phenomena which are simply ‘theatrical‘ rather than in any sense ‘meta’.

Stuart Davis suggests that “metatheatricality” should be defined by its fundamental effect of destabilizing any sense of realism:

‘Metatheatre’ is a convenient name for the quality or force in a play which challenges theatre’s claim to be simply realistic — to be nothing but a mirror in which we view the actions and sufferings of characters like ourselves, suspending our disbelief in their reality. Metatheatre begins by sharpening awareness of the unlikeness of life to dramatic art; it may end by making us aware of life’s uncanny likeness to art or illusion.

By calling attention to the strangeness, artificiality, illusoriness, or arbitrariness — in short, the theatricality — of the life we live, it marks those frames and boundaries that conventional dramatic realism would hide.”[11]

 

programming languages – Why do people hesitate using Python 3? – Programmers – Stack Exchange

Why do people hesitate using Python 3? – Programmers – Stack Exchange

Python 3 has been released in December 2008. A lot of time has passed since then but still today many developers hesitate using Python 3. Even popular frameworks like Django are not compatible with Python 3 yet but still rely on Python 2.

Sure, Python 3 has some incompatibilities to Python 2 and some people need to rely on backwards-compatibility. But hasn’t Python 3 been around long enough now for most projects to switch or start with Python 3?

Having two competing versions has so many drawbacks; two branches need to be maintained, confusion for learners and so on.

Macrocosm and microcosm – Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Macrocosm and microcosm is an ancient Greek Neo-Platonic schema of seeing the same patterns reproduced in all levels of the cosmos, from the largest scale (macrocosm or universe-level) all the way down to the smallest scale (microcosm or sub-sub-atomic or even metaphysical-level). In the system the mid-point is Man, who summarizes the cosmos.

The Greeks were philosophically concerned with a rational explanation of everything and saw the repetition of the golden ratio throughout the world and all levels of reality as a step towards this unifying theory. In short, it is the recognition that the same traits appear in entities of many different sizes, from one man to the entire human population.

Macrocosm/microcosm is a Greek compound of μακρο- “Macro-” and μικρο- “Micro-“, which are Greek respectively for “large” and “small”, and the word κόσμος kósmos which means “order” as well as “world” or “ordered world.”

Today, the concept of microcosm has been dominated by sociology to mean a small group of individuals whose behavior is typical of a larger social body encompassing it. A microcosm can be seen as a special kind of epitome. Conversely, a macrocosm is a social body made of smaller compounds.

via Macrocosm and microcosm – Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia.