Intertextuality between William Blake’s

The Marriage of Heaven and Hell and

Dante Alighieri’s Divine Comedy (Inferno)
Daniela Monroy Fraustro
002092-0013
English A category 2

TECNOLÓGICO DE MONTERREY CAMPUS ESTADO DE MÉXICO

Word Count: 3831

002092- 0013 Monroy 1

Abstract
The Extended Essay has the structure of a comparative essay and is based on the research

question “In which way is intertextuality found between Dante Alighieri’s The Divine

Comedy (Inferno) and William Blake’s The Marriage of Heaven and Hell?” To answer the

question firstly I defined the term intertextuality with different worldwide known literature

critics, such as Gerard Genette and Julia Kristeva. Also, I explained that for this particular

Extended Essay I would use Kristeva’s definition. She describes the term as something

social; things like quotes (either in a textual or in a non- textual way), allusions or symbolic

meaning are intertextuality, however they should all prove that the later author read the

work of the first one. After that, I applied the definition to both works and found various

literary devices such as the use of narrator as a fictional character, allusions to Dante’s

Inferno, symbols and critiques which proved that there exists intertextuality between the

two works. In the end, I concluded that it can be seen that there exists an intertextual

relationship between the Divine Comedy (Inferno) and The Marriage of heaven and Hell

and that it can be found through different things, such as literary devices, same symbolic

meaning, allusions and different critiques.

Word count: 207

002092- 0013 Monroy 2

Content
Content...............................................................................................................................................2
INTRODUCTION..........................................................................................................................3
CHAPTER ONE:...........................................................................................................................5
What is intertextuality....................................................................................................................5
1.1. - Gerard Genette......................................................................................................................5
1.1.2 Intertextuality according to Genette (Part I)...............................................................5
1.1.2 Intertextuality according to Genette (Part II)..............................................................6
1.2. -Julia Kristeva.........................................................................................................................7
1.2.1 Julia Kristeva’s approach to intertextuality (Part I).....................................................7
1.2.2 Julia Kristeva’s approach to intertextuality (Part II)...................................................8
1.2. - Intertextuality in the Extended Essay....................................................................................9
CHAPTER TWO:........................................................................................................................10
Intertextuality between Divine Comedy (Inferno) and The Marriage of Heaven and Hell...........10
2.1. - Literary Devices as examples of intertextual relationship...................................................10
2.1.1. – Narrator as a representation of the author to explain intertextuality............................10
2.1.2. – Environment in the setting as an intertextual support..................................................11
2.1.2. – Situations which allude Dante’s work that are intertextuality......................................11
2.1.2.1 The Valley in both works..........................................................................................12
2.1.2.2 The lion in the works................................................................................................12
2.1.3. – Symbolism as intertextuality.......................................................................................13
2.2. – Using the social critique as proof of intertextuality............................................................14
2.3.1 Dante Alighieri’s critique.................................................................................................14
2.3.2 William Blake’s critique..................................................................................................15
Conclusion...................................................................................................................................17
References........................................................................................................................................19
002092- 0013 Monroy 3

INTRODUCTION

The Extended Essay will constitute of an analysis of two literary works: William Blake’s

The Marriage of Heaven and Hell and Dante Alighieri’s Divine Comedy (Inferno), and also,

it is important to emphasize the fact that the structure of the Extended Essay is that one of a

comparative essay. In the essay I will contrast if there exists intertextuality between both

works. Throughout history, there have been many authors that have given a meaning to the

term intertextuality, such as Julia Kristeva, Gerard Genette, Hans Robert Jauss or Harold

Bloom (Ryan); in the essay, I will use two of these authors (Genette and Kristeva) to

explain the meaning of the term and the characteristics that are found in both (The

Marriage of Heaven and Hell and Divine Comedy (Inferno)).

002092- 0013 Monroy 4

One of the main reasons that I am doing this research is that the impact of Dante on

English writers is very big but has been rarely analysed; writers such as Byron, Shelley,

Keats, Coleridge, Blake and Wordsworth used Dante’s work as a trigger and starting point

to produce their own material. They were affected by his style, project and achievement,

which provoked their attention and disagreement (Pite) and thus, lead to their own works

with differing approaches. For example, in Pite’s The Circle of Our Vision: Dante’s

Presence in English Romantic Poetry it is illustrated how Dante’s religion clashed with the

eighteenth-century Anglican thoughts that English writers (including Blake) had about the

afterlife. Also, as mentioned in the review of Pite’s book in the Bars Bulletin & Review no.

15 of the British Association for Romantic Studies: “Like Albert S. Roe (Blake’s

Illustrations to the Divine Comedy, Princeton, 1953), Pite believes that Blake shares this

criticism [conflict between XVIII Century Anglican thoughts and Dante’s religion] and that

he considers Dante to be a supporter of the Law of the Old Testament” (Braid 15). These

examples portray a

view that explains that there is definitely influence from Dante’s Divine Comedy in Blake’s

work, which is one of the principal reasons that I am doing the Extended Essay on this

particular subject.
002092- 0013 Monroy 5

Arising from the influence of Dante within Blake’s materials, and how that

influence has been reviewed very little (Pite), is that I create my research problem. The

specific thing in which it is based is: In which way is intertextuality found between Dante

Alighieri’s The Divine Comedy (Inferno) and William Blake’s The Marriage of Heaven and

Hell. This investigation subject is important to the research world because it defines clearly

by important and specialized authors the meaning of intertextuality, and applies it to

relevant and consequential works. These texts have transcended through time and changed

people’s perspective. Also, since Dante’s influence in English writers has not been under

very deep investigation (Pite), this Extended Essay will help the reader understand more

about the way Dante’s work affected Blake and how he interpreted and made use of The

Divine Comedy (Inferno) for his own publications.

CHAPTER ONE:

What is intertextuality?
1.1. - Gerard Genette

Another of the persons that has explained the term of intertextuality and who I will use as

one of the main authors in the essay is French literary theorist Gerard Genette. He is one of

the most important French theorists after Roland Barthes and is often associated by critics
002092- 0013 Monroy 6

to the structuralism movement. His work’s main thread is poetics, and with the help of

different books which reflect his interpretation he explains the meaning of intertextuality

and the poetic language function1 (Goreman, 1); works such as Paratexts: Thresholds of

Interpretation, The Architexte: An Introduction and Palimpsests: Literature in the Second

Degree, have been recognized worldwide by the critics and contribute in many things to

this Extended Essay because they explain the concept of intertextuality.

1.1.2 Intertextuality according to Genette (Part I)

As mentioned in the brief introduction of Gerard Genette, one of his books that

explains the meaning of intertextuality is The Architexte: An Introduction; in chapter XI the

prose narrative that has been followed throughout the book changes into an interview. In

this interview, Gerard Genette, explains to his interviewer the way he interprets

intertextuality:

Intertextuality in the strict […] sense—that is, the literal presence (more or less literal,

whether integral or not) of one text within another. Quotation—that is, the explicit

summoning up of a text that is both presented and distanced by quotation marks—is the

most obvious example of this type of function, which comprises many others as well (81-

82).

This quote explains the main difference that characterizes intertextuality (which is the

“more or less” literal presence of a text); that feature is the one that differentiates other

1 The poetic function of language is “[to] focus on the message for its own sake” (The Technology
Press of Massacltusetts Institute of Techtology and John Wiley & Sons, Inc. 356)
002092- 0013 Monroy 7

literature related words that should not be confused with intertextuality; for example, the

reader should be careful with words such as metatextuality 2 or hypertextuality 3.

1.1.2 Intertextuality according to Genette (Part II)

In his book Palimpsests: Literature in the Second Degree Genette extends his

definition of intertextuality; he explains it “in a more restrictive sense” that expresses

intertextuality is the co-presence between two or several texts. That means that the presence

of the text within another text has to be in an eidetic4 or typical manner; which means that it

should be in its most explicit and literal form. Examples of this include quoting (with

quotation marks, with or without specific references); plagiarism, which is a less explicit

and canonical form in an undeclared way but with literal borrowing; and allusions (a less

explicit and less literal guise); it includes enunciations whose meaning presupposes that the

reader perceives a relationship between the text an another text (1-2).

1.2. -Julia Kristeva

One of the most important authors that has talked about the term intertextuality is

Bulgarian- French literary critic Julia Kristeva; through different books and essays she built

2 As Genette expresses it: “The transtextual relationship that links a commentary to “the text it
comments upon (without necessarily citing it.”” (Thresholds of Interpretation, xix)

3 “The superimposition of a later text on an earlier one that includes all forms of imitation,
pastiche, and parody, as well as less obvious superimpositions” (xix)

4 “Relating to or denoting mental images having unusual vividness and details, as if actually
visible” (Oxford Dictionary)
002092- 0013 Monroy 8

a thesis which explains that a text is a thing that cannot be alone, hermetic or a self- defined

cultural object. Every text is within a referral system: which includes a heterogenous and

polysemic network of references, quotations, citations and influences (Department of

English, The University of Burdwan 1). Books like A Desire in Language: A Semiotic

Approach to Literature and Art, Sèméiôtiké: Searches for semanalysis or Language: The

Unknown: An Initiation into Linguistics also state that intertextuality is the sum of

knowledge that makes it possible for the texts to have sense, which implicates that the

meaning of a text depends upon other texts (Culler 104).

1.2.1 Julia Kristeva’s approach to intertextuality (Part I)

In 1980 Julia Kristeva published her work A Desire in Language: A Semiotic

Approach to Literature and Art; which was very important and significant in the

development of the definition of intertextuality. Within the book, Kristeva explains theories

about the origin and development of the novel (Jardine); one of them is intertextuality,

which shows that there is a social relationship between texts: “intertextuality replaces the

notion of intersubjectivity5” (69). Intersubjectivity explains that social life is founded in

interactions (Cornish 19), hence, the concept of intertextuality that Kristeva proposes has to

do with the way texts connect socially. This means that by living in a society people get

influenced by other texts and when making their own works they (knowing or

unknowingly) express things that have to do with other texts.

1.2.2 Julia Kristeva’s approach to intertextuality (Part II)

5 “Broadly speaking, we take intersubjectivity to refer to the variety of possible relations between
people's perspective” (Cornish 19)
002092- 0013 Monroy 9

Another work that Julia Kristeva wrote which included the definition of the term

intertextuality and which I will use for the Extended Essay is Sèméiôtiké: recherches pour

une sémanalyse: extraits6. The work (part of her Thesis) explains an interesting approach to

the meaning of intertextuality:

The intertextuality condition of any text whatsoever, obviously does not reduce to a

problem of sources or influences; the intertext is a general field of anonymous formulas

whose origin is rarely detectable, quotes unconscious or automatic data without quotes.

Epistemologically, the concept of intertextuality is what brings the theory of the text volume

socially: it’s the past and contemporary language that comes to the text, not in the way of a

traceable linage, voluntary imitation, buy by that of a spread 7. (1-2)

This concept differs from what critic Gerard Genette explains; he emphasizes that for texts

to be intertextual, the later text should quote, either in a textual or in a non-textual way, the

other work (The Achitexte: An Introduction 81-82). Instead of that, Kristeva proposes that

the idea of intertextuality is built starting from society; this means that for texts to have an

intertextual relationship they should have a social relation, meaning that the later author

should know and hence be influenced by the first work.

1.2. - Intertextuality in the Extended Essay

6 Semiotics: Searches for a semanalysis: extracts

7 Translation from French: “L'intertextualité, condition de tout texte, quel qu'il soit, ne se réduit
évidemment pas à un problème de sources ou d'influences; l'intertexte est un champ général de
formules anonymes, dont l'origine est rarement repérable, de citations inconscientes ou
automatiques, données sans guillemets. Épistémologiquement, le concept d'intertexte est ce qui
apporte à la théorie du texte le volume de la socialité : c'est tout le langage antérieur et
contemporain qui vient au texte, non selon la voie d'une filiation repérable, d'une imitation
volontaire, mais selon celle d'une dissémination”
002092- 0013 Monroy 10

After reviewing the different approaches that various authors have of intertextuality

I will delimit the definition of the term which will be used throughout the Extended Essay.

In this work I will use Julia Kristeva’s approach of intertextuality, which explains that for

texts to have an intertextual relationship there needs to be a social connection between an

author and a text. That means that the author whose work is the latest must have read

previously the other writer’s work; this activity influences the most recent author and is

expressed in his/ her own writing. The way to express the connection between the earlier

work and the later one can be intentional or not; things like quoting in a textual or non-

textual way, like Genette explains, or allusions, are also included in Kristeva’s definition;

however the difference between them is that Julia explains that if both of the works have a

same objective and it can be proved that the later author read the work of the author who

appeared first, they could be considered as intertextual. This is the definition of

intertextuality that I will use during the Extended Essay to prove that both works have an

intertextual relationship.

CHAPTER TWO:
Intertextuality between Divine Comedy (Inferno) and The Marriage of Heaven and
Hell
002092- 0013 Monroy 11

2.1. - Literary Devices as examples of intertextual relationship

2.1.1. – Narrator as a representation of the author to explain intertextuality

Another thing that both works have in common and which makes them intertextual

is that the narrator is the author as a fictional character. For example, Dante Alighieri in the

Inferno uses the first person which is a literary device called “imagining yourself as the

main character”. “Midway in our life’s journey, I went astray/ […] How I came to it I

cannot rightly say,/ so drugged and loose with sleep had become/ when I first wandered

there […]” (28). The Divine Comedy (Inferno) is a work written in first person, however

critics, like Archibald T. MacAllister, believe that the fictional character is the author, Dante

Alighieri. For example, in MacAllister’s introduction of The Inferno he explains: “Midway

his allotted threescore years and ten, Dante comes to himself with a start and realizes that

he has strayed from the True Way” (MacAllister 27); the quote is part of an abstract of

CANTO I, hence it explains that the main character is Dante. This type of thing is also

shown within Blake’s work in the part of “A Memorable Fancy”: “As I was walking among

the fires of hell, delighted with the enjoyment of Genius […]” (Blake 118); the quote shows

that when the main character starts going into Hell, there is a change in the narration form.

At first the character is called “the just man”; those characteristics are impersonal and not

in first person, however the moment the man starts walking into Hell the narration changes

to first person. This alludes to the Inferno since the protagonist, Dante, speaks in first

person; that kind of resemblance, can be associated with an intertextual relationship

because Blake starts using the same literary device and complementing it with the use of

the first person in their narrations are connected, meaning that both works are intertextual.

2.1.2. – Environment in the setting as an intertextual support

002092- 0013 Monroy 12

A resemblance in the works is the environment and setting that is created at the beginning

of both narrations. For example, in Canto number one, “I found me in a gloomy wood,

astray/ gone from the path direct: and even to tell/ it were no easy task” (Alighieri 19), the

initial setting is very similar to that of The Marriage of Heaven and Hell: “Hungry clouds

swag on the deep. / Once meek, and in a perilous path, / the just man kept his course along”

(Blake, 114); the quotes give the feeling of a heavy atmosphere, a dark and gloomy place.

Also the intertextuality between the texts is proved by the mood of the forest: “[I] woke to

find myself/ alone in a dark wood. How shall I say/ what wood that was! I never saw so

drear, /so rank, so arduous a wilderness!” (Alighieri, 28) compared with: “The just man

kept his course along /The vale of death. /Roses are planted where thorns grow, /And on the

barren heath /Sing the honey bees” (Blake, 114). Both environments have the same dark

mood and setting, which reflects an intertextual relationship.

2.1.3. – Symbolism as intertextuality

Throughout The Marriage of Heaven and Hell and the Divine Comedy (Inferno),

there are specific situations that can be called allusions and symbols and hence be called

intertextuality. If both works turn a specific concept into a symbol and it has the same

meaning, it would be considered an intertextual relationship; the reason why that happens is

that by using the definition of intertextuality that Gerard Genette exemplifies, if both books

have the same symbol then that means that the one which was made the last alludes in a

symbolic way to the other text. Symbolism in Literature is:

When an author uses an object or reference to add deeper meaning to a story. […] An author

may repeatedly use the same object to convey deeper meaning or may use variations of the
002092- 0013 Monroy 13

same object to create an overarching mood or feeling […] [and] is often used to support a

literary theme in a subtle manner (Mork)

Based on that description is that I, in the next section will determine the existence of a

symbol or not and if there is an intertextual relationship.

2.1.3.1 The Valley in both works

A place which is a symbol in both works is what Dante calls “the valley of evil” and

Blake “The vale of death”; it can be spotted as a clear allusion because in both works the

main character explain his surroundings and the valley is a place used in both writings. For

example in the Divine Comedy (Inferno), Dante as a character starts to explain that: “But at

the far end of that valley of evil/ whose maze had sapped my very heart with fear!” (28).

Later, when Blake writes his work The Marriage of Heaven and Hell he alludes in a clear

way to the Inferno; “The just man kept his course along/ The vale of death. / Roses are

planted where thorns grow […]” (114). The Vale of Death is not only representing Hell, By

mentioning the surroundings of the main character and comparing the Vale of Death with

the Valley of Evil it is made clear that there was an intentional allusion to Dante by Blake.

2.1.3.2 The lion in the works

Also, a meaningful character within Dante’s Inferno is, in CANTO I, the Lion.

Dante explains the encounter with the Lion as: “Yet not so much but what I shook with

dread/ at sight of a great Lion that broke upon me/ raging with hunger, its enormous head”

(29). Blake alludes to that Lion in a very clear way: “Now the sneaking serpent walks/ In

mild humility. / And the just man rages in the wilds/ Where lions roam” (114).

Intertextuality can be seen especially in the part where it is specified that the Lion roams
002092- 0013 Monroy 14

and is in the wilds because Dante describes the Lion as “raging with hunger” and is in the

wild forest; “[I] woke to find myself/ alone in a dark wood” (Alighieri, 29)

2.1.3.2 The path as a symbol explaining intertextuality

For example, the man and the path have a symbolic meaning in both texts. The

symbols used by Dante are taken up by Blake. For example, in the Inferno, Dante

expresses: “Midway in our life’s journey, I went astray/ from the straight road and woke to

find myself/ alone in a dark wood […] How I came to it I cannot righty say/ so drugged and

loose with sleep had become/ when I first wandered from the True Way” (28), whereas

Blake writes: “Once meek, and in a perilous path,/ The just man kept his course along/ The

vale of death […] Till the villain left the paths of ease,/ To walk in perilous paths, and

drive/ The just man into barren climes.” (114).The path is divided into a “straight road” or

“paths of ease” and the path that both of the main characters follow, which is the opposite

of the “True Way”. This causes the distinction of right and wrong which creates a deeper

meaning of the path, because of that it can be seen that the symbolic meaning of the path is:

all the decisions that people take in life. It can also be seen that both works have the same

symbolic meaning and hence, are in an intertextual relationship.

2.2. – Using the social critique as proof of intertextuality

Another relation to explain the intertextuality between The Marriage of Heaven and

Hell and the Divine Comedy, is the purpose of both works. Since Kristeva, in her paper

Sèméiôtiké: recherches pour une sémanalyse: extraits, explains that intertextuality between

texts can be something social; however if the aim of both works is the same (to change

social views), it could be considered that they have an intertextual relation.

002092- 0013 Monroy 15

2.3.1 Dante Alighieri’s critique

For example, the main plot of The Divine Comedy is that Dante goes through an

epic journey whose aim is to reach God, representing an allegory of the soul and how it

reaches God and Heaven. However, it has more functions; the work is also a critique to his

contemporary society (Jason 67-70). Critic Alexander Jason, in his work Teaching the

Divine Comedy’s Understanding of Philosophy, states that “[Some] Moments8 [in the

Divine Comedy] […] can be understood as chastising misdirected philosophical

contemplation as a kind of moral negligence” (69) and also that “those examples may

suggest that erring on a matter of theological speculation is not necessarily a sin” (70).

Although the Divine Comedy is a text that is considered to be very religious and in favour

of the Roman Catholic Church, in Jason’s text it is explored a possible critique to the very

same Western Church. Specifically the oppressiveness, the way they would not let people

speculate about other possibilities; everything the Church said was the right thing.

However, Dante, as shown in Jason’s research, used his book with the purpose of

explaining people that they could think differently, and hence, change society’s view of

religion.

2.3.2 William Blake’s critique

The same happens in The Marriage of Heaven and Hell; Blake changes and

criticizes society’s view of religion and the concepts it manages, especially those that have

to do with heaven and hell and what they represent. For example, Blake gives a certain

8 For the specific situations see URL from References (Jason 68-71)
002092- 0013 Monroy 16

explanation to the universe; the book explains that there is no evil without good, same as

how a person cannot be either entirely good or bad since both things reside in human beings

(Press Syndicate of the University of Cambridge 185). A quote which exemplifies that is:

“The crow wish’d every thing was black, the owl that every thing was white” (Blake 126);

those are allusions to things that can never be possible, nothing is or could be wholly good

or bad. The fragment is an allusion to what the Church wanted people to think; if they

believed in the Church, everything would be good.

Another statement that he uses is: “The road of excess leads to the palace of

wisdom. / Prudence is a rich, ugly old maid courted by Incapacity.” (Blake 120). These type

of thoughts attack directly not only the Church but society’s thoughts. It tries to surprise the

reader by changing the scheme of what is good or bad. The words explain in an ironical

way that powerful persons or establishments (such as the Church) do not want people to

think, because if they do they will become wise and discover the truth. Since the statement

changes people’s view and question’s them, both works accomplish the same characteristic,

which makes them intertextual.

002092- 0013 Monroy 17

Conclusion

After reviewing and understanding the concept of intertextuality and the way it is

used by different authors I came to a conclusion which answers the research question: In

which way is intertextuality found between Dante Alighieri’s The Divine Comedy (Inferno)

and William Blake’s The Marriage of Heaven and Hell? First of all, by using different

persons who had their own specific context, the definition of the term gets enriched. For

example, Gerard Genette explains in his research The Architexte: An Introduction and his

book Palimpsests: Literature in the Second Degree that for texts to have an intertextual

relationship the more recent text should quote (in a visible or non- visible way) or allude to

the later text. Instead, Julia Kristeva proposes that intertextuality is something more; books

like A Desire in Language: A Semiotic Approach to Literature an Art and Sèméiôtiké:

recherches pour une sémanalyse: extraits explain that intertextuality is something social.

That for texts to have an intertextual relationship the last author must have known and read

the first author’s work.

The way to prove that there exists intertextuality between the Inferno and The

Marriage of Heaven and Hell are things such: situations, allusions or quotes (either in a

textual or non- textual way); in the Extended Essay, by using different devices I prove that

there exist intertextuality between both works. For example, there exist different allusions

and situations in William Blake’s work that make reference to the Inferno, things like: the

Lion, or the mentioning of the Valley of Death; and many different literary devices such as:
002092- 0013 Monroy 18

using the narrator as a fictional character who represents the own writers, or the use of

similar symbols such as the path; another thing which makes both works intertextual is the

way the two authors in their books express a social critique of their contemporary society.

All of these are different examples that make it clear to the reader that there is an

intertextual relation, because of that I conclude in my Extended Essay that there exists

intertextuality between both works and it can be found through different literary devices,

symbolism, allusions and critiques. However, the importance of finding a clear intertextual

relationship between both works is because intertextuality is a proof that people are related

with each other; intertextuality is not a copy of someone’s work, but the influence of an

author. Even though people might not be in the same context, society connects them (this is

why Kristeva explained that intertextuality is a social tem). This leads to the conclusion that

people’s work, opinion or life are constructed based from their surroundings.
002092- 0013 Monroy 19

References
Alighieri, Dante. The Inferno. Trans. John Ciardi. New York: Signet Classic, 2001. 30 March 2013.

Blake, William. “Bilingual anthology; The Marriage of Heaven and Hell.” Madrid: Alianza
Editorial, 1987. 114-143. 31 October 2013.

Braid, Antonella. “Ralph Pite, The Circle of Our Vision: Dante's Presence in English Romantic
review.” Bars Bulletin & Review 15 (1999): 14-16. 3 February 2014.
<http://www.bars.ac.uk/documents/reviewdocs/pdf/15.pdf>.

Cornish, Alex Gillespie and Flora. “Intersubjectivity: Towards a Dialogical Analysis.” Journal for
the Theory of Social Behaviour 2009: 19-42. 19 February 2014.
<https://www.academia.edu/1308520/Intersubjectivity_Towards_a_dialogical_analysis>.

Culler, Jonathan. The Pursuit of Signs: Semiotics, Literature, Deconstruciton. Cornell University
Press, 2002. 19 January 2014.

Department of English, The University of Burdwan. “Intertextual Adaptations and Literary

Discourses.” West Bengal, India, 2011. 2. National conference pdf. 13 February 2014.
<http://www.buruniv.ac.in/Notices/ENG_2011224_NOT_WEBPAGE.pdf>.

Fillola, Antonio Mendoza. Literatura Comparada e Intertextualidad. Madrid: La Muralla, 1994. 31

October 2013.

Genette, Gerard. Narrative Discourse Revisited. Trans. Jane E. Lewin. Cornell University, 1990. 20
February 2014. <http://books.google.com.mx/books?
id=RBK2NOMAbasC&printsec=frontcover&hl=es#v=onepage&q&f=false>.

—. “Palimpsests: Literature in the Second Degree.” 1997. pdf. 27 January 2014.

<http://books.google.es/books?
id=KbYzNp94C9oC&printsec=frontcover&hl=es#v=onepage&q&f=false>.

—. Paratexts: Thresholds of Interpretation. Trans. Jane E. Lewin. New York: Cambridge University
Press, 1997. 8 February 2014.

—. The Achitexte: An Introduction. Trans. Jane E.Lewin. Vol. 31 of Quantum books. Los Angeles:
University of California Press, 1992. 17 February 2014.
002092- 0013 Monroy 20

Goreman, David,. “Genette, Gerard.” 2005. The Johns Hopkins University Press. pdf. 10 February
2014. <http://www.davidlavery.net/Courses/Narratology/JHGTC/genette.pdf>.

Haberer, Adolphe. “Intertextuality in Theory and Practice.” 2007. University of Lyon 2. pdf. 13
February 2014. <http://www.leidykla.eu/fileadmin/Literatura/49-5/str6.pdf>.

Jardine, Alice. Desire in Language: A Semiotic Approach to Literature and Art. 2014. 15 February
2014. <http://rll-faculty.fas.harvard.edu/alicejardine/publications/desire-language-semiotic-
approach-literature-and-art>.

Jason, Aleksander. Teaching The Divine Comedy's Understanding of Philosophy. Vol. Pedagogy
13.1. Academic Search Premier, 2013. 31 October 2013.
<http://content.ebscohost.com/pdf27_28/pdf/2013/L1U/01Jan13/84686339.pdf?
T=P&P=AN&K=84686339&S=R&D=a9h&EbscoContent=dGJyMNXb4kSeqLQ4xNvgO
LCmr0yep7JSs6u4S7CWxWXS&ContentCustomer=dGJyMPGrs0myr7NRuePfgeyx44Dt6
fIA>.

Kirsteva, Julia. The Kristeva Reader. Ed. Toril Moi. Columbia University Press, 1986. essay. 28
November 2013.

Kristeva, Julia. “A Desire in Language: A Semiotic Approach to Literature and Art.” Ed. Leon S.
Roudiez. Columbia University Press, 1980. 211-225. pdf. 19 February 2014.
<http://www.criticalsecret.net/IMG/pdf/noc_kristeva-4.pdf>.

Kristeva, Julia. “Sèméiôtikè: Recherches pour une sémanalyse,.” Paris: Collection Points, 1969. 1-
6. 19 January 2014. <http://laurentmaheux.free.fr/Archives/Master/intertextualite.pdf>.

MacAllister, Archibald T. “Historical introduction.” Blake, William. The inferno. New York:
Signetic Classic, 2001. 13-27. 13 March 2013.

Mork, Rachel. What is symbolism in literature. 2014.

http://www.life123.com/parenting/education/children-reading/what-is-symbolism-in-
literature.shtml. 26 February 2014.

Oxford Dictionary. Oxford University Press. 2014. 19 February 2014.

<http://www.oxforddictionaries.com/definition/english/eidetic?q=eidetically#eidetic__4>.

Pite, Ralph. The Circle of Our Vision: Dante's Presence in English Romantic Poetry. October 2011.
27 January 2014.
<http://www.oxfordscholarship.com/view/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780198112945.001.0001/ac
prof-9780198112945>.

Press Syndicate of the University of Cambridge. The Cambridge Companion to William Blake. Ed.
Morris Eaves. Cambridge University Press, 2003. 30 October 2013.

Ryan, Judith. Comparative Literature 245: Intertextality. 2012. 17 February 2014.

<http://scholar.harvard.edu/jryan/classes/comparative-literature-245-intertextuality-0>.
002092- 0013 Monroy 21

The Technology Press of Massacltusetts Institute of Techtology and John Wiley & Sons, Inc. Style
in Language. 1960. pdf. 19 February 2014.