In Thomas C. Foster’s book How to Read Literature Like a Professor, he discusses the idea that all “writing and telling come from one big story.” I have always viewed pieces of work as lacking originality. They are original in the sense that two different authors cannot write the same, exact story with the same, exact words. They are not original, however, because they all incorporate elements or ideas from other stories or writings, whether the author is aware of it or not. Foster, though, explored a different route of how all pieces of writing are connected, and I thought it was interesting because I have never considered all writing as “one big story,” as Foster does.
I do agree with Foster’s idea that all writings are formed from a single story and that in a way everything is connected. In his chapter that deals with this idea, he considers what this “one big story” is about, and at first he says nothing, but then he concludes it is about everything. It was this section of the chapter that I started to believe his argument and agree with it. I began to realize that there are millions of different pieces of work that are all intertwined by the same theme or the same plot or the same type of characters, which authors take and relate to things we, as readers, can relate to. I would say that this “one big story” that all writing comes from is a mixture of other works but life, as well, because life is something all readers and writers can relate to.
Making a piece of writing relatable to other writings or daily life enriches our reading experiences. When an author pulls ideas from other texts this creates intertextuality within their writing. Intertextuality deepens a piece of work because it shows how two different texts can be connected by a certain theme or character traits. It makes reading more enjoyable for the readers because it is like they get to play connect the dots while reading. I know when I read The Iliad this year I saw many similarities between it and The Aeneid, which made reading The Iliad much more interesting. I do see how all writing comes from one big story and how that impacts a reader's experience. As Foster would say, “everything is connected.”
Hi Riley,
ReplyDeleteI think the more we read, study, engage art, literature, and history, the more we see this "one story" as the human story. I too am amazed by all of the connections forged between The Iliad and The Aeneid. It will be fun this year, too, to see how The Odyssey fits in. But all of that is just one tiny piece really--then to read all of the tragedies--The Agamemnon, for instance and on and on. I also feel like the Archetypal lens/literary theory fits right into this. It is just staggering to consider that ideas might be encoded like "genes" into the human psyche.
Mrs. Mac
Riley and Mrs. Mac,
ReplyDeleteI agree with Foster's theory of "one big story" as Riley does, but I also tend to see it as allusions to a genre in general. Like with the Aeneid, Virgil alludes to the Iliad, but he also references other myths and epics, such as the Odyssey. But if Virgil made any other references – and I have a feeling he did – then these are lost in time. He could have alluded to other epics, and we wouldn’t know whether he did or not. As a result, we lose some enrichment. If we incorporate the human psyche as a basis of intertextuality however, then we regain the references to other texts through our emotions regarding them. When the hero triumphs in war, we think of Aeneas who miraculously defeats Turnus and of Achilles when he avenges Patroclus. When remembering the emotions associated with certain actions, we remember other stories with their plots’ events and the genres in general. Additionally, we gain emotions similar to other texts that a work may reference that we have no knowledge of.
Nick
Riley, I agree with everything you said because finding an actual original story is nearly impossible. I have noticed that many stories are connected with the same plot or theme that many other stories have, which leads to many versions of the same kind of story. Although I get annoyed with a lack of originality, each author tends to take a different spin on each story and incorporate a new element. This type of intertextuality leads to continuation of “one big story.” Each story in the world has a connection to another story because books build of one another in order to develop and become better. Riley describes how we can connect the dots within stories because each book is like a continuation of book that is similar. The idea of “one big story” is important to the continuation of stories building off one another, for new elements are created as stories progress.
ReplyDeleteRiley, the way you conveyed Foster’s message was perceptive from beginning to end. You “intertwined” Foster’s ideas within your prompt response just as a typical writer does with worldly influences that help to create their novel or the simple idea of their novel. I also agree with Foster’s idea of one big story, as I was reading this specific chapter, I actually reread it because it interested me so much. I absolutely love when writers elude to different plots of different stories. For example, the play Rosencrantz and Guildenstern Are Dead is a spin-off of the other assigned play, Hamlet. While Rosencrantz and Guildenstern are minor characters within Hamlet they are the main roles within the previously mentioned play, so you see all sides of the play from another author’s perspective. Writing is a spectacular thing, isn’t it?
ReplyDelete