By: Sherwood Smith
That’s a good point, about how textual authority erodes and is replaced.
View ArticleBy: Asakiyume
There can be no purity (a fact I’m VERY GRATEFUL for)–every work builds on past works, directly or indirectly–at the very least works share language and metaphors, then images, common folk motifs. So...
View ArticleBy: Mary
Alfred the Great could add entire new books to works he translated. C. S. Lewis got an essay out of what Chaucer really did, reworking the story for his Troilus and Cressida. The Middle Ages had a...
View ArticleBy: Mris
“A writer of a piece tells her fans what the text means (that it is great literature), though there is no sign of any of that meaning, power, or glory when I actually read the text.” You know, a cousin...
View ArticleBy: Sherwood Smith
I have been coming more and more to the conclusion that everything in literature is in conversation with everything else–across cultures and time as well as in-the-now.
View ArticleBy: Sherwood Smith
That is an interesting thought. I wonder if Bulwer-Lytton was doing the self-reference. His introductions to the late, fancy edition of all his works (Pelham suitably bowdlerized to mitigate some of...
View ArticleBy: Gillian Polack
They weren’t always monks (by any means – there were professional scribes outside monasteries) and it was quite legitimate to do rather more than tweak a text. Some textual traditions didn’t even allow...
View ArticleBy: The Raven
In the long run, the text has to speak for itself, for the author will not be present to speak for it. That seems to me the reality around which all this discussion circles. Other than that, I have...
View ArticleClik here to view.
By: Alana Joli Abbott
I wonder if some of the textual ownership issues stem from the idea of an individual as the owner of a creative work. In the case of Arthuriana, was there ever really a core definitive text that...
View Article
