Post 4

*What harm is there, according to Porter, in imagining writing "as individual, as isolated, as heroic"? What problems does doing so cause?

Porter's writing is both intriguing and creative, yet highly debatable in my opinion. He holds a strong belief that all texts are intertextual, which means they rely on previous works to have meaning. I agree with him to this extent. One's writing is based on what they have learned or been exposed to in the past. In Porter's eyes, imagining writing as individual, isolated, or as heroic is imagining writing in a ignorant, almost uneducated perspective, at least that is how his opinion came across to me in his writing. He believes that in order for a work of writing to be successful it must be accepted by society or at least select readers. Therefore, their work cannot be inclusive.

He argues that intertextuality provides rhetoric with an important perspective, a perspective that is currently neglected according to him, and he sees this as a problem. Another aspect he points out is that the attention of authoritive figures is less significant than social context in our society. He believes the writer is simply a part of a discourse tradition, a member of a team, and a participant in a community of discourse that creates its own collective meaning. Rather we realize it or not, believing that our writings are not intertextual is nonsense. Having that prospective can cause complications in regards to plagiarism. Complications can also arise in the distrubtion of the work, connecting with the society around us, considering there would be no writings to relate their work to.