Intertextuality Vs. Adaptation


Intertextuality is referring to the original piece whereas adaptation is a recreation of the piece.
While adaptation focuses on the creation of something new based off of something well known, intertextuality tends to use an element or symbol from another work in order to draw a clearer meaning for the new creation.
I think intertextuality is more about crossovers between different works. Intertextuality allows for two worlds to remain their own but simultaneously come together as one. Flashbacks, character crossovers, etc. would fall under the intertextuality. An adaptation is a work that has been inspired by another work. Adaptation doesn’t allow two worlds to come together and maintain alone simultaneously. Adaption calls for a new world completely to be made that was based on another world. Examples of adaptations are movies being made into Broadway shows, books being made into movies, etc.
Intertextuality is simply referencing a preexisting work in another unrelated new work in order to achieve connections and understanding in the new work by comparing the two. Adaptation is keeping the core characters/story in a preexisting work in order to retell the story or tell the story in a different way
Intertexuality allows one to identify connections between works of different mediums, while adaptations takes the work from one medium and re-works/re-creates it so that the principle is the same, but certain aspects are different.
Intertextuality is a literary device used by authors to draw on text from other works to retell or tell a new story. Adaptation is a method used across different mediums to accomplish the same, the concept of adaptation allow more artistic freedom/liberty when retelling/telling the story.
An adaptation is meant to tell roughly the same story and meaning while intertextuality presents a new perspective of the story and likely a different meaning.
Intertextuality is when a story shares aspects with another and therefore intertwines itself with it. This includes symbols, emotions, ect. Adaptation is when a story follows parts of the plot of another, as well as character similarities.
I feel that intertextuality differentiates with adaptation because it just deals with the text only
Intertextuality is a way in which we can perceive adaptations. Intertextuality is the literal feeling that we get from our familiarity with an adaptation’s source material. Adaptation refers to the retelling of different works that come to together to make a story. Intertextuality is a relationship, while adaptation is more material, the translation derived ideas that have been translated to mediums such as film, television, and novels.
Intertextuality is the inclusion of different texts in a work, but an adaptation is the remaking of an original text.
The difference between the two is that adaptation is taking a book’s plot and using the same characters and ideas to create a movie or film. Whereas, intertextuality is taking a book’s or film’s ideas, altering them, and making something completely new out of it. There is definitely a connection between the two, but it is not using the complete plot and/or characters.
Intertextuality is the bridge connecting two different texts while adaptation is the idea of having various stories based on a shared theme or idea.
Intertextuality has to do with recognizable and nostalgic things (people, places, quotes, items, images) from related texts. Adaptation is the remodeling and reworking of a text to convey something that the original or prior work did not. Adaptations may and are likely to include intertextuality but don’t necessarily need to do so if the author of the adaptation does not view this as necessary.
I think that intertextuality is a connection between different pieces of literature such as the same character appearing in multiple connected movies while adaptation is a recreation of a piece of literature maintaining only a few key aspects. Intertextuality is meant to connect two works of literature while adaptations put new spins on other pieces of literature or characters.
Intertextuality is like sampling from a song in paying homage (interpolation) to something subtle while an adaptation can be a totally similar reworking with the original strip (cover).
The main difference between these two terms is that intertextuality does not have to necessarily encompass a whole work. An adaptation is usually derived from some origin of work and builds from that, however, intertexuality can be a relationship between different works and an introduction of other symbols from outside sources (tied back into an overall work).
Intertextuality involves references from other works that may not play a large part in the main story. More specifically, it is one work interacting with an aspect from another, similar to an allusion, adding more meaning to events with the connection to other known media and the associated connotations and emotions. However, intertextuality is different from adaptation because an adaptation expresses and acknowledges the influence of another work in a much more encompassing way. Using intertextuality as a literary device is a way for authors/creators/etc to influence the audience and bring them to think a certain way about an event or character due to what it is being compared to. Adaptations are a more direct homage to something, yet being a unique work, aren’t necessarily relying on an audience’s experience with the original.
I think that adaptation is a form of intertextuality. Intertextuality is how texts and films are connected or related to each other. This can come in many forms, with one of those forms being an adaptation. Intertextuality can be shown through allusions, quotations, and objects in a piece of work or text. However, adaptations look at the story as a whole.
I think that intertextuality is the overlap of concepts between two works that aren’t meant to be directly related, while an adaptation is almost like an evolution of the same concepts framed in different ways.
I think intertextuality is all about referencing something that is very well known so the audience can feel like they truly understand what is going on. A film doesn’t need to be an adaptation to have aspects of intertextuality. For example, a film can reference another popular film but that doesn’t mean that the films are related. In the intertextuality video there was a reference to the film “Fantastic Beasts and Where to Find Them” as Mr. Scamander was making his suitcase appear “muggle worthy.” Since the Harry Potter series was so popular and the film has the same magical aspect to it, the audience most likely knows that “muggles” are normal human people. Thus, there is a reference to concepts mentioned in the Harry Potter series but “Fantastic Beasts and Where to Find Them” is not an adaptation of the Harry Potter films as they are completely different.
As the text states, adaptation is a form of intertextuality. The main difference between the two is time. Intertextuality is the mere interaction of texts, while adaptations are composed of an extended intertextual conversation. Intertexts are usually short references to other media forms while adaptations are usually longer texts that seek to change an entire story into a different form.
I think that intertextuality is when a work is completely original with pieces of other texts tied in at certain times, whereas an adaptation’s base is something that has already been told or created.  Intertextuality is also often a mod podge of many different existing stories and plot lines and an adaptation is usually based only on one. This question is very very hard to answer and I have been staring at my computer for about 30 minutes trying to differentiate between the two.
I think that the difference between intertextuality and adaptation is that intertextuality is more applicable for comparing works that have very little in common while adaptation refers to works that have been modified and updated but have a common source of origin.
Intertextuality is alluding to another story for the sake of generating a response (such as stirring up emotion, creating humor, or creating a sense of familiarity). An adaptation is re-telling another story. In order to be an adaptation, there needs to be at least a few corresponding plot points (although they may be only vaguely related).
I think that intertextuality is the use of a text to create an image, to make you think of something else, or to give you the feeling you felt during a separate occurrence with said text.  An adaptation, on the other hand, contains a story from another location which may bring up the original text in mind but it creates new images and feelings around the story.
I think intertextuality calls on people to have emotional responses to something or someone that they are familiar with, while adaptations seek to rework or retell the story in a new frame or format. There is, though, some overlap (for example, Disney’s Beauty and the Beast).
Intertextuality is an element of adaptation; an adaptation uses intertextuality to stay relevant and elicit an emotional response in the reader/viewer.
Intertextuality shapes the meaning of a text by another text, but an adaptation can change more than just the text.
Intertextuality seems to be the use of an object, theme, or symbol that is used from an original piece of work in a new piece as a way to create a sense of emotion. An adaptation may have intertextuality within it, but it serves a greater purpose of telling the same story in a different way.
Intertextuality focuses more on symbolism and the viewer’s emotional response to the symbol, while adaptations focus on showing/telling a known story/novel in another way regardless of emotional response.