Dr. Fernando de Toro

1. Dr. Fernando de Toro Intertextuality and Double-Codification: Theories and Practices and Double Codification

2. Intertextuality and Double-Codification • 'Intertextuality' is a term coined by July Kristeva, but which we shall use to cover a somewhat broader range of theories than those which she expounds in her seminal work on intertextuality, Word, dialogue and novel (1966) or Problémes de la structuration du texte and Le text du roman (1970). • The theory of intertextuality insists that a text (for the moment to be understood in the narrower sense) cannot exist as a hermetic or self-sufficient whole, and does not function as a closed system.

3. Intertextuality and Double-Codification • This is for two reasons. • Firstly, the writer is a reader of texts (in the broadest sense) before s/he is a creator of texts, and therefore the work of art is inevitably shot through with references, quotations and influences of every kind. • Rousseau, for example, does not entitle his autobiography The Confessionsin ignorance of church practices of St. Augustine's work of the same name.

4. Intertextuality and Double-Codification • This repetition of past or of contemporary texts can range from the most conscious and sophisticated elaboration of other poets' work, to a scholarly use of sources, or the quotation (with or without the use of quotation marks) of snatches of conversation typical of a certain social milieu at a certain historical moment. • Secondly, a text is available only through some process of reading; what is produced at the moment of reading is due to the cross-fertilisation of the packaged textual material (say, a book) by all the texts which the reader brings to it.

5. Intertextuality and Double-Codification • A delicate allusion to a work unknown to the reader, which therefore goes unnoticed, will have a dominant existence in that reading. • On the other hand, the reader's experience of some practice or theory unknown to the author may lead to a fresh interpretation.

6. Intertextuality and Double-Codification • Two axes of intertextuality: • texts entering via authors (who are, first, readers) and • texts entering via readers (co-producers), are, we would argue, emotionally and politically charged.

7. Intertextuality and Double-Codification • Although the term intertextualityfrom the 1960, the phenomenon, in some form, is at least as old as recorded human society.

8. Intertextuality and Double-Codification • Therefore, we can find theories of intertextuality wherever there has been discourse about texts - both because thinkers were aware of intertextual relations and because our knowledge ofthe theory makes us, as readers, keen to re-read our source texts in that light. • It would be a lengthy task to survey all or even the majority of theories. Consequently we shall focus Bakhtin, Kristeva, Barthes and Genette. • First, some preliminary aspects from antiquity:

9. Intertextuality and Double-Codification • The form of the Socratic dialogue (Vbc) embodies a Bakhtinian intertextuality: Imitation is thus not repetition, but the completion of an act of interpretation – and a mode of interpretation which is, as Gadamer says, a highlighting in which the reading and writing translator declares her/himself, while also engaging in the process of self-alienation. (as in Don Quixote by Miguel de Cervantes: XVII) • Imitation as theory and practice presupposes a virtual simultaneity and identification of reading and writing, but it also implies and depends upon a process of transformation.

10. Intertextuality and Double-Codification • Bakhtin locates in the Socratic dialogues one of the earliest forms of what he terms variously the novel, heteroglossia, dialogism - what Kristeva will christen intertextuality. • Every literary imitation is a supplementwhich seeks to complete and supplant the original and which functions at times for later readers as the pre-text of the 'original'. • Inevitably a fragment and displacement, every quotation distorts and redefines the 'primary' utterance by relocating it within another linguistic and cultural context.

11. Intertextuality and Double-Codification • Like Erasmus (1469-1536) for whom writers can assert and maintain their independence only by multiplying and fragmenting their models, thereby avoiding the dominance of one single precursor, Montainge (1533-1592) chooses a diversity of sources, engaging in an active conversation with them rather than in a passive absorption. • Imitation and translation may usefully be seen as textual modalities of recognition and transgression of the Law (canon).

12. Intertextuality and Double-Codification • Kristeva has argued that every text is under the jurisdiction of other discourses, and I would further suggest that imitation and translation should also be considered as forms of creative splitting. (Brossard) • In addition the text demands the reader to perceive not only the genetic determination of any individual text but also the fact that all Law (canon) is textual ideology and consequently not timeless or universal but subject to prevailing cultural codes. • Thus, the text alerts the reader to the existence of an already-read, to intertexts which may or may not be locatable.

13. Intertextuality and Double-Codification • Therefore, despite any intentional quest on the part of the quoting author to engage in an intersubjective activity, the quotation itself generates a tension between belief both in original and originating integrity and in the possibility of (re)integration and an awareness of infinite deferral and dissemination of meaning.

14. Intertextuality and Double-Codification • Quotation as fragmentation does indeed generate centrifugality in reading, but it also generates centripetality, focusing the reader's attention on textual functioning rather than on hermeneutics. • The quote is not merely to write glosses on previous writers; it is to interrogate the chronicity of literature and philosophy, to challenge history as determining tradition and to question conventional notions of originality and difference.

15. Intertextuality and Double-Codification • History as sequence is undone, as is the notion of a single unified, individual voice - so meaning and significance are to be constructed rather than extracted. (Borges, Rulfo) • In other words, hermeneutic activity must give way to semiotic, intertextual analysis. • While all authors rewrite the work of predecessors, many post-Renaissance writers consciously imitate, quote and/or plagiarise extensively (in Modernity, Joyce, in postmodernity, Borges, etc.)

16. Intertextuality and Double-Codification • This paradox informs all intertextual reading, but it is the particular ground of the work of Jorge Luis Borges - whom we have chosen as our second enactor of intertextuality, largely because of his metapoetical exploitation of imitation as simulation. • A librarian and so supposedly a guardian of historical taxonomies, Borges chose to write texts that quote in order to deny (slavish) imitation.

17. Intertextuality and Double-Codification • However, in his complex writings of and on fictions, Borges challenges the doxa of writing asterritorialism and demarcation of property, borrowing in order tosubvert the concepts of authorial integrity and textual fixity. • For him, literature is not mimetic but a form of simulation (interpreted as an intuitive 'seeing as' which mediates between language and reality).

18. Intertextuality and Double-Codification • Consequently, he engages in a scriptural activity that is grounded in duplication - and in duplicity. • Perhaps his most influential intertextual story is 'Pierre Menard, author of Don Quixote' in which Menard, a has (re)written the 9th and 38th chapters of the first part of Don Quixote.

19. Intertextuality and Double-Codification • Menard's ambition was not to write just another version but 'the Quixote itself' - and furthermore he whished to do this not through an historical act of intersubjective understanding but by a willed, systematic (re)construction of a text which is 'originally' marked by the workings of chance and spontaneity. • GérardGenette has argued that a direct imitation of a text is impossible because it is always place in a different context and therefore acquires a different meaning.

20. Intertextuality and Double-Codification • His view is that one can parody an individual text, butimitate only a genre, since to imitate is necessarily to generalise (Palimpsestes, pp. 91-2). • For him Menard's Don Quixote is not a copy but a minimal transformation or a maximal imitation, i.e. a pastiche. • Menard's unfinished (and non-quoted) text might thus be seen as a simulacrum, as a copy without an original which problematises the dominant and domineering European concept of origination.

21. Intertextuality and Double-Codification • Jorge Luis Borges (1941) • His Ficciones are not only footnotes to imaginary texts, but postcripts to the real corpus of literature.

22. Intertextuality and Double-Codification • Jorge Luis Borges (1941) • The composition of vast books is a laborious and impoverishing extravagance. To go on for five hundred pages developing an idea whose perfect oral exposition it is possible in a few minutes! • A better course or procedure is to simulate that these books already exist, and then to offer a simulation, a commentary.

23. Intertextuality and Double-Codification • Jorge Luis Borges (1941) • More reasonable, more inept, more indolent, I have preferred to write notes upon imaginary books. Such are. Tlön, Uqbar Orbis Tertius.

24. Intertextuality and Double-Codification • Much recent fictional writing explicitly contests the intentional self-integrity of texts and explodes the traditional concept of originality. • Mikhail Bakhtin • He first published in 1919 but only became know in the early 1970s. • What interests us here is the theory of language (everyday dialogism).

25. Intertextuality and Double-Codification • Bakhtin argues that when people speak they use a specific mix of discourses which they have appropriated in an attempt to communicate their intentions. • However, they inevitably suffer interference from two sources: words’ pre-existing meanings and the alien intentions of a real interlocutor. • Unity or plenitude of language can only be an illusion which covers a real excess or lack.

26. Intertextuality and Double-Codification • Writers of literature can attempt artificially to strip language of other’s intentions (philosophy), a unifying project which Bakhtin calls monologism or poetry. • On the other hand, at certain historical moments, writers have artistically elaborated and intensified this heteroglossia, creating what Bakhtin calls the (dialogic) novel.

27. Intertextuality and Double-Codification • Julia Kristeva • For Kristeva, the subject is composed of discourses, is a signifying system, a text, understood in a dynamic sense. • “What allows a dynamic dimension to structuralism is Bakhtin’s conception of the “literary word” as an intersection of textual surfaces rather than a point (a fixed meaning), as a dialogue among several writings: that of the writer, the addressee (or the character) and the contemporary or earlier cultural context”.

28. Intertextuality and Double-Codification • A structure is generated in relation to another structure: the text is in fact a structuration, that is, an apparatus which produces and transforms meaning. • Kristeva intertextuality suggests that meaning is not given nor produced by a transcendental ego. • Indeed the transcendental ego is itself an effect produced in a social context.

29. Intertextuality and Double-Codification • Roland Barthes • For Barthes, “intertextuality is the impossibility of living outside the infinite text.” • Intertextuality in the sense that the text may appear to be the spontaneous and transparent expression of a writer’s intentions, but must necessarily contain elements of other texts. • This in turn is connected to the fracturing of the reading subject, which is associated with the dissolution of the author or death of the author.

30. Intertextuality and Double-Codification • The author, like the coherent and autonomous subject, is revealed to be a necessary fiction, a reading effect. • Barthes’s theory of (inter)textuality is inseparable from his practice as writer. • Indeed he constantly blurs generic boundaries: theory or practice, criticism or creation, autobiography or fiction and so on.

31. Intertextuality and Double-Codification • Gerard Genette • Genette proposes in Introduction l'architexte that poetics should be concerned not with the (individual) text, but with the architext- which he defines as a set of categories, such as genre, thematics, etc., which determine the nature of any individual text. • Genette asserts that intertextuality is an inadequate term and proposes in its place transtextuality (or textual transcendence), by which he means everything, be it explicit or latent, that links one text to others.

32. Intertextuality and Double-Codification • As sub-categories of transtextuality, he posits not only architextuality but also metatextuality or relationships between commentary and its object, and paratextuality or the imitative or transformatory relationships that pertain between pastiches or parodies and their models. • Paratextuality, which he radically re-defines as the relations between the body of a text and its titles, epigraphs, illustrations, notes, first drafts, etc.; metatextuality; architextuality, now defined as a tacit, perhaps even unconscious, gesture to genre-demarcations; hypertextuality.

33. Intertextuality and Double-Codification • Architextuality: from where a particular text borrows its structures and themes: genre demarcations. • Transtextuality: there is a basic dissemination of textualities in all texts. • Metatextuality: commentary (metafictionality) on the process of writing and reality. • Paratextuality: the transformatory elements that pertain to pastiches or parodies and their models (body of a text and its titles, epigraphs, illustrations, notes, first drafts)

34. Intertextuality and Double-Codification • This last domain of enquiry forms the bedrock of the book. Genette defines the latecome text as thehypertext and its pre-text as the hypotext- although he distinguishes here between metatextual commentaries and literary, transformatory texts, be they imitative or revolutionary. • For him, hypertextuality is a practice which includes and informs all literary genres and he goes as far as to assert that the hypertext necessarily gains in some way or another from the reader's awareness of its signifying and determining relationship with its hypotext(s).

35. Intertextuality and Double-Codification • His work assumes intertextuality both in its articulation of theory and in its practice. • His writings exemplify inter-textual relations both in that other texts (written or otherwise, earlier or later) are read differently after the reader's exposure to the Derridean corpus, and in that he insists that 'above all it is necessary to read and reread those in whose sake I write, the "books" in whose margins and between whose lines I mark out and read a text simultaneously almost identical and entirely other' (Positions, p. 4).

36. Intertextuality and Double-Codification • Each of these texts, in common with the vast majority of what he has written, takes the form of explicit interpretation or commentary on earlier writers as well as being starred with numerous quotations without quotation marks. • In his analysis of other writers he often pays attention to the 'sources' from which they have shied away, pointing out the textual scars or blanks into which the names of missed origins can be inserted.

37. Intertextuality and Double-Codification Intertextuality and Double-Codification Text Intertext Text Palimpsest Hypotexts Hypertexts Text Rhizome

40. Ficcionalization of Post-Modern Architecture Double Coding I term Post-Modernism that paradoxical dualism, or double coding, which is hybrid name entails: the continuation of Modernism and its transcendence, Hassan’s 'postmodern' is, according to this logic, mostly Late-Modern, the continuation of Modernism in its ultra or exaggerated form. To this day I would define Post-Modernism as I did in 1978 as double coding: the combination of Modern techniques with something else (usually traditional building) in order for architecture to communicate with the public and a concerned minority, usually other architects.

41. Charles Moore Piazza d’Italia Ground Plan New Orleans 1976-1979

42. Postmodernity and Architecture Charles Moore’s Piazza d’Italia The most telling example of postmodern architecture is Charles Moore’s Piazza d’Italia in New Orleans - not because the historical forms of the classic orders were used in an almost excessive profusion, but because a fiction was created in a direct way. The Piazza (New Orleans, 1976-1979) was intended to become the center of a predominantly Italian section of New Orleans where the Italo-American Institute is located. The immediate are in fact, the entire part of the city - was in need of renovat- ion and was dominated by large modern edifices. There was nothing alluring or inviting about the area little to

43. Charles Moore Piazza d’Italia New Orleans, 1976-1979

44. Charles Moore Piazza d’Italia New Orleans 1976-1979

45. Charles Moore Piazza d’Italia Socales of Tuscan Columns New Orleans 1976-1979

46. Charles Moore Piazza d’Italia “Doric” Water Column New Orleans 1976-1979

47. Postmodernity and Architecture Charles Moore’ Piazza d’Italia make one linger. Moore created a totally building site by cutting into the space intended for a projected building (never executed). The site is circular. Groups of columns provide a backdrop for a topographic map of Italy, which juts out from the middle of a large arcade and reaches right into the center of the concentric circles of the piazza, with a fountain as the Mediterranean. (Sicily has the central position, because most of the residents of the neighborhood are Sicilian). The piazza wall was supposed to be the purely decorative part of the project building, against whose modern forms, smooth white facade, and simple square

48. Charles Moore Piazza d’Italia Showing Portrait of Charles Moore New Orleans 1976-1979

49. Postmodernity and Architecture Charles Moore’ Piazza d’Italia windows openings its breathtakingly classical decorum was to contrast sharply. All the classical orders are present: Doric, Tuscan (red and square), Ionian (inside Arch), and Corinthian (Arch, center) and Composite (sides of Arch in yellow). Together they provide the “boot” of Italy with a complete cultural background and a reminiscence of the heroic columnar orders of Italian architectural facades. However, classical greatness in evoked here with touches of humour and commented on with irony. There are collars of neon-light tubing under the capitals of the central arcade. Other

50. Postmodernity and Architecture Charles Moore’ Piazza d’Italia “columns” are actually curved sheets of steel,with rivulets of water creating effect ¯ of fluting (decoration consisting of long, rounded grooves, as in a column). The Tuscan columns next to these Doric “columns” are made steel and are “cut open” to reveal marble. Their metopes are “wetopes” with tiny fountains. (an opening hole in frieze for beam; any of the square areas, plain or decorated, between triglyphs in a Doric frieze. On this “narrative” plane, the classical columnar orders are reinterpreted through the playful divestment of their monumental dignity. Yet, at the same time, the architraves (horizontal beam