text mumbles, still

conclusions ... intertextualities cannot be traced. They cannot even be mapped for long, asthey are always in states of process, flux and motion. Video or computergraphics might represent/metaphorise these (inter)textual processes far moreeffectively than the comparatively limited medium of black words on paper.Undoubtedly multi-media electronic journal articles will greatly facilitatediscussions about intertextuality, especially explorations of readerlyintertextual productions that result from reading/viewing intertextually andinter-imagically across textual media.

Accompanying every debate about intertextuality, however, even thoseproduced in multi-media formats, there will always be a vast repository ofother intertextualities over which assemblers of material (inter)texts have nocontrol: the unknown myriad virtual-intertextual-collages stored within everyreader. Every reader's various notions of identity (and the ways in which thoseentities are evolving alongside the 'new technology (inter)textual revolution')will inevitably affect the assemblage of her/his intertextual realities.

And as it is said of the child in 'Imaginative Reading V', so it might be said of every reader ...



Diane Caney, 1998
© all rights reserved