1. The description he gives of discourse communities is very vague for how long the text is. I'm not sure I understand the purpose of explaining a discourse community in this article. I understand what a discourse community is but not the point in this text about originality. If anything, these authors try so hard to become of these discourse communities. But to become part of the discourse communities you have to have common ideas and not step over the line of what is and isn't allowed. If that's the case and these authors aren't allowed to write about anything outside of what this discourse community believes and agrees too, then no wonder Porter says there are no original ideas. If you are being bound by other ideas, opinion and rules then you can't come up with new ideas and your creativity is smothered down to meet their standards.
2. Porter is questioning originality in every aspect. My first question for porter would be do you find yourself to be unoriginal? I do agree that authors use each others work to build their own ideas but what he is claiming is that no authors ideas are original so where did they come from, back in the stone age? I find it challenging to understand that no authors ideas have ever been original. I can understand an author questioning another's work to research his own work and then in return using it. But, I don't understand how he believes all ideas are unoriginal. In that case is he okay with saying his idea of being unoriginal is also unoriginal? Does his idea of no idea being original also extend farther than just literature? What Steve Jobs not the first person to invent the iPhone and all of the things he invented? Did Michael Jackson, the King of Pop, steal his song ideas from someone else? I also don't think its acceptable to claim Jefferson not an original writer. I'm sure he did use all of those sources of work but the piece of writing he composed will be forever known in this country.
3. I think the idea of intertextuality and plagiarism are on opposite sides of a very fine line. When Porter discusses Thomas Jefferson and the Declaration of Independence, the way he argues it sounds as if he is almost trying to convince the audience Jefferson is guilty of plagiarism. So what's the difference between intertextuality and plagiarism? How does Porter want to define the difference if he is arguing that there is a difference. If he is going to argue he needs to define the difference. I believe intertextuality is the positive influence the author takes from another work while plagiarism is a negative influence when a student, usually, takes ideas and does not recognize that they are those of the authors.
Very thorough and thoughtful questions, Taylor. +/+
ReplyDelete