Complications of Intertextuality: John Fisher, Katherine Parr and ‘The Book of the Crucifix’

Abstract

The level of current interest in interpreting texts as registers of cultural change in early modern England bespeaks an increasingly shared perspective in literary studies which again seeks to take history seriously. As we literary-historical types now go about our usual business of intertextuality — analysing texts in relation other texts — we avoid dealing solely in textual formulations of our concerns. For, unless they are tethered to extralinguistic referents of context, relations among texts seemingly cannot be freed from the spectre of an indefinite regress of signifiers in play. Many of us have accordingly turned to an almost hallowed triad — race (or ethnicity), class and gender — as anchors for our work on historical texts in historical contexts. Taken over from our social science colleagues in the current vogue of interdisciplinary method-swapping, these factors look so promising because race, class and gender are powerfully material in their bases and potently ideological in their social encodings and decodings. These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

Cite this work

No public copy is stored for this record, so only the metadata is cited.

Stored only when both papers are in the corpus — 57 citations exist upstream.

Papers that cite the same references — the relational fallback while embeddings are still backfilling.