All I really gathered from these two articles on intertextuality was the notion that no work is original anymore. So, in honor of the time-honored tradition, I will shape this post by "borrowing" one of my classmate's ideas. I feel this is the best way to demonstrate this principle. Oh, and I'm feeling really lazy. On this subject, RhetoRickMightSay might say "It's more than halfway through the semester and I finally think something is getting through my thick skull: the question is not What counts as writing? but What doesn't count as writing? Johnson-Eilola talks at length about Web Logs (blogs), and particularly on pages 216 and 217 about one called "Plastic", and as I was reading that section, I just got overwhelmed with the enormity of the different kinds of writing all going on all over this website, and how--as he says--none of it fits within the traditional rules of citation and authorship.
It seems like, when talking about writing or teaching writing, so many people focus most on issues of plagiarism, proper citation, and all that jazz. (Like the most important thing about writing is scaring people into being afraid to have any ideas based on other writers' ideas because that might be plagiarism...grrrrr--but I digress.) So, I'm wondering, if much of the writing going on in our world today doesn't even have the ability to fit into the very broad category of author and citation--if there are not even clear traditional roles in the field of writing (like editors and publishers), as we experience it today, how important are the ideas that are being harped upon that all have to do with those roles?
And yet I have to go back to what Johnson-Eilola says in the beginning, "exploring contradictions as necessary conditions of existence" (200). I can't say I grasp all of what he says throughout his article, so maybe he says this and I just can't grasp it yet, but I'm stuck on the question of how to make money as an author in a world where one doesn't just write old-fashioned, paper-and-bound books? I know he's talking about people being charged a lot of money to use tiny parts of texts, but we're talking about websites here--and I don't mean like Google. To bring it closer to home, I'm a blogger. I've written at least as much as a good-sized book in my posts. Do I make money off it? No. But without being a shameless advertisement whore, I don't know how (I can't bear the idea of whatever the Adsense Google app is that is supposed to earn me income off my blog--it just seems like so much salesmanship on writing that wasn't meant to be that; like putting coupons in a research book...). But Web Logs are such a media of the now--what I write wouldn't even go in a book--how do I further my writing career, not just my writing hobby? Looking forward to this conversation in class so I can understand more what J-E was talking about in terms of the money aspect of this.
Returning to my original question, What doesn't count as writing? I am toying with a kinda radical thought (to me): writing is every kind of human interaction we use, aside from face-to-face interaction. Ya think? And if that is true (I'm not sure that it is, but it's seeming plausible), then we don't use rhetoric in our writing at all: writing is rhetoric. If rhetoric is basic human interaction at its core (that is, we can't interact without using it), and writing is every kind of interaction we do other than in person, writing has to be rhetoric.
My head is spinning a little at those thoughts. I'd love to hear your thoughts for or against this craziness."
HOORAY FOR INTERTEXUALITY!
Yes, truly lazy indeed, Eli. But an interesting way to make the point. I especially like your title. And my head is spinning too, at your shameless act. But isn't imitation the ultimate compliment? Get's sticky when money enters the picture though. Who gets paid? In this case, you got paid by not having to come up with an original blog entry. But I guess Angie got paid in terms of the compliment and further exposure. We did, after all, read her blog TWICE!
ReplyDeleteHey Eli, this was the laugh I needed today--thanks! Not laughing at you by the way...Just read a comment on my blog post that I got plagiarized and I thought, "Oh, how interesting! I have good enough writing to be plagiarized? I did not know these things!" :-)
ReplyDeleteBut I don't see it as plagiarism in the first place, since you said they were my words, and I tend to get annoyed at people that get all up in arms about plagiarism anyway. After all, as you point out, when is it sharing ideas, extending thoughts and building knowledge and when is it plagiarism? How do we know the difference?
I'm considering myself cited for the first time ever--and that is cool! However, I do feel kinda cheated, just because I enjoy reading your posts so much. Yours is one I always be sure to read, and I came here looking forward to hearing your thoughts, not mine. I'd still like to hear what you have to say (even though, yes, I *get* the feeling lazy thing--I am too these days).