"Intertextuality and the Discourse Community"

I do not believe that Porter is right in the article “Intertextuality and the Discourse Community.” I find it almost insulting to the brilliant writers and authors to claim that “books speak of books”. I think that to say that all text is unoriginal is a strong opinion that to me doesn’t seem at all valid. I believe that all types of writers are autonomous individuals. Autonomous meaning that they are responsible for what is in their text and they are free to do whatever they want with their texts. Obviously plagiarism is a serious issue in the writing world and Porter uses that as evidence, which I think is a weak and unreliable argument. Plagiarism is simply lazy writing when done purposely.  Saying that Thomas Jefferson “plagiarized” the Declaration of Independence may be true, but to use an issue that was unresolved in our country’s history as backup seems irrational.

Porter’s view challenges Murray’s view in almost every way possible. While Murray says every piece of writing comes from the author, Porter is completely saying the opposite, that every piece of writing is referring to another piece of writing and that all text is unoriginal. I agree more with Murray because as a college student, it is very obvious to see the differences in different authors writing, which would make them original. Obviously there are only so many words in the English language so similar words may be used when talking about the same topic but, sometimes its about how the content is organized and worded that makes for originality and good pure writing.