Abstract
In his article "Monomedial Hybridization in Contemporary Poetry" Jan Baetens argues that the debate on hybridization tends to overemphasize the blurring of boundaries between signs and sign types in all possible forms: combination of types within a given work (multimodal "image-texts," comics and photo-novels, sound poetry, etc.), adaptation and remediation of one sign type by another one (filmic adaptations of novels or novelizations of films, for instance), and, more generally, the simultaneous elaboration of works in various media (the phenomenon that Jenkins called "convergence" or trans-media storytelling). While all these hybridizations have become mainstream today, if we take into account Mitchell's thesis that "there are no visual media" by which he meansthat "there are no 'pure' media," it becomes possible to draw attention to a more traditional, but perhaps more challenging and disturbing practice of sign usage: the crossing of borders between literary genres and text types, which may involve also the mixture of styles, modes, traditions, audiences and introduce new forms of genre hybridization.
Recommended Citation
Baetens, Jan.
"Monomedial Hybridization in Contemporary Poetry."
CLCWeb: Comparative Literature and Culture
15.7
(2013):
<https://doi.org/10.7771/1481-4374.2389>
This text has been double-blind peer reviewed by 2+1 experts in the field.
The above text, published by Purdue University Press ©Purdue University, has been downloaded 821 times as of 03/26/24.
Included in
American Studies Commons, Comparative Literature Commons, Education Commons, European Languages and Societies Commons, Feminist, Gender, and Sexuality Studies Commons, Other Arts and Humanities Commons, Other Film and Media Studies Commons, Reading and Language Commons, Rhetoric and Composition Commons, Social and Behavioral Sciences Commons, Television Commons, Theatre and Performance Studies Commons