Intertextuality between William Blakes The Marriage of Heaven and Hell, Dante Alighieris Divine Comedy (Hell)

002092- 0013 Monroy 19

Intertextuality between William Blakes The Marriage of Heaven and Hell and Dante Alighieris Divine Comedy (Inferno)

Daniela Monroy Fraustro 002092-0013 English A category 2TECNOLGICO DE MONTERREY CAMPUS ESTADO DE MXICO

Word Count: 3831

AbstractThe Extended Essay has the structure of a comparative essay and is based on the research question In which way is intertextuality found between Dante Alighieris The Divine Comedy (Inferno) and William Blakes 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 Kristevas 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 Dantes 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.Comment by Zian: Rephrase to increase clarity.Comment by Zian: Different critiques, or social objectives of the Works?

Word count: 207

ContentContent2INTRODUCTION3CHAPTER ONE:5What is intertextuality51.1. - Gerard Genette51.1.2Intertextuality according to Genette (Part I)51.1.2 Intertextuality according to Genette (Part II)61.2. -Julia Kristeva71.2.1 Julia Kristevas approach to intertextuality (Part I)71.2.2 Julia Kristevas approach to intertextuality (Part II)81.2. - Intertextuality in the Extended Essay9CHAPTER TWO:10Intertextuality between Divine Comedy (Inferno) and The Marriage of Heaven and Hell102.1. - Literary Devices as examples of intertextual relationship102.1.1. Narrator as a representation of the author to explain intertextuality102.1.2. Environment in the setting as an intertextual support112.1.2. Situations which allude Dantes work that are intertextuality112.1.2.1 The Valley in both works122.1.2.2 The lion in the works122.1.3. Symbolism as intertextuality132.2. Using the social critique as proof of intertextuality142.3.1 Dante Alighieris critique142.3.2 William Blakes critique15Conclusion17References19

INTRODUCTIONThe Extended Essay will constitute of an analysis of two literary works: William Blakes The Marriage of Heaven and Hell and Dante Alighieris 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)). Comment by Zian: Rephrase the thingOne 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 Dantes 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 Pites The Circle of Our Vision: Dantes Presence in English Romantic Poetry it is illustrated how Dantes religion clashed with the eighteenth-century Anglican thoughts that English writers (including Blake) had about the afterlife. Also, as mentioned in the review of Pites book in the Bars Bulletin & Review no. 15 of the British Association for Romantic Studies: Like Albert S. Roe (Blakes Illustrations to the Divine Comedy, Princeton, 1953), Pite believes that Blake shares this criticism [conflict between XVIII Century Anglican thoughts and Dantes 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 Dantes Divine Comedy in Blakes work, which is one of the principal reasons that I am doing the Extended Essay on this particular subject.Arising from the influence of Dante within Blakes 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 Alighieris The Divine Comedy (Inferno) and William Blakes 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 peoples perspective. Also, since Dantes influence in English writers has not been under very deep investigation (Pite), this Extended Essay will help the reader understand more about the way Dantes work affected Blake and how he interpreted and made use of The Divine Comedy (Inferno) for his own publications. Comment by Zian: Are you sure about this? Do a quick research to verify this is true.Comment by Zian: Be careful! Youre implying intertextuality is just specialized language

CHAPTER ONE: What is intertextuality?Comment by Zian: Question mark?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 to the structuralism movement. His works 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 function[footnoteRef:1] (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: 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)]

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 [] sensethat is, the literal presence (more or less literal, whether integral or not) of one text within another. Quotationthat is, the explicit summoning up of a text that is both presented and distanced by quotation marksis 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 literature related words that should not be confused with intertextuality; for example, the reader should be careful with words such as metatextuality [footnoteRef:2] or hypertextuality [footnoteRef:3]. [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)]

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 eidetic[footnoteRef:4] 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). [4: Relating to or denoting mental images having unusual vividness and details, as if actually visible (Oxford Dictionary)]

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 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, Smitik: 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 Kristevas 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 intersubjectivity[footnoteRef:5] (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. [5: Broadly speaking, we take intersubjectivity to refer to the variety of possible relations between people's perspective (Cornish 19)]

1.2.2 Julia Kristevas approach to intertextuality (Part II)

Another work that Julia Kristeva wrote which included the definition of the term intertextuality and which I will use for the Extended Essay is Smitik: recherches pour une smanalyse: extraits[footnoteRef:6]. The work (part of her Thesis) explains an interesting approach to the meaning of intertextuality: [6: Semiotics: Searches for a semanalysis: extracts]

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: its 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[footnoteRef:7]. (1-2) [7: Translation from French: L'intertextualit, condition de tout texte, quel qu'il soit, ne se rduit videmment pas un problme de sources ou d'influences; l'intertexte est un champ gnral de formules anonymes, dont l'origine est rarement reprable, de citations inconscientes ou automatiques, donnes sans guillemets. pistmologiquement, le concept d'intertexte est ce qui apporte la thorie du texte le volume de la socialit : c'est tout le langage antrieur et contemporain qui vient au texte, non selon la voie d'une filiation reprable, d'une imitation volontaire, mais selon celle d'une dissmination ]

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

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 Kristevas 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 writers 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 Kristevas 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.Comment by Zian: punctuationComment by Zian: Check word

CHAPTER TWO:Intertextuality between Divine Comedy (Inferno) and The Marriage of Heaven and Hell

2.1. - Literary Devices as examples of intertextual relationship2.1.1. 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 lifes 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 MacAllisters 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 Blakes 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

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 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 worksComment by Zian: This is a symbol!!Comment by Daniela:

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.Comment by Zian: Include a comment about the transcendance of this Valley? What is its meaning in both works or how does it contribute to the story? If you dont consider this to be a symbol, then it is part of the setting. Comment by Daniela: The valley of evil refers to Hell, however2.1.3.2 The lion in the worksComment by Zian: Another symbol. Eliminate the part in which you categorize them as situations and include them as symbols. Comment by Daniela:

Also, a meaningful character within Dantes 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 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)Comment by Zian: Include a conclusion. This paragraph is more descriptive tan analytic. Explain why this lion is important in both works. It isnt enough just to quote, you have to comment on the quote. Comment by Daniela: 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 lifes 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 Smitik: recherches pour une smanalyse: 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.Comment by Zian: Run-on sentence

2.3.1 Dante Alighieris 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 Comedys Understanding of Philosophy, states that [Some] Moments[footnoteRef:8] [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 Jasons 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 Jasons research, used his book with the purpose of explaining people that they could think differently, and hence, change societys view of religion. [8: For the specific situations see URL from References (Jason 68-71)]

2.3.2 William Blakes critique

The same happens in The Marriage of Heaven and Hell; Blake changes and criticizes societys 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 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 wishd 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 societys 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 peoples view and questions them, both works accomplish the same characteristic, which makes them intertextual.Comment by Zian: Grammar

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 Alighieris The Divine Comedy (Inferno) and William Blakes 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 Smitik: recherches pour une smanalyse: 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 authors work. Comment by Zian: Check phrasing, not clear and a bit repetitive. Instead of repeating, conclude, reflect and analyze. 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 Blakes 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: 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 someones 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 peoples work, opinion or life are constructed based from their surroundings.Comment by Zian: RepetitiveComment by Zian: Run-on sentenceComment by Zian: OK, but why dont you add a Little reflection about why intertextuality is important in literature? Does Blake just copy Alighieri? Is he using him as an inspiration? What is the nature of this intertextual relationship? Comment by Daniela:

ReferencesAlighieri, 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. .Cornish, Alex Gillespie and Flora. Intersubjectivity: Towards a Dialogical Analysis. Journal for the Theory of Social Behaviour 2009: 19-42. 19 February 2014. .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. .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. .. Palimpsests: Literature in the Second Degree. 1997. pdf. 27 January 2014. .. 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.Goreman, David,. Genette, Gerard. 2005. The Johns Hopkins University Press. pdf. 10 February 2014. .Haberer, Adolphe. Intertextuality in Theory and Practice. 2007. University of Lyon 2. pdf. 13 February 2014. .Jardine, Alice. Desire in Language: A Semiotic Approach to Literature and Art. 2014. 15 February 2014. .Jason, Aleksander. Teaching The Divine Comedy's Understanding of Philosophy. Vol. Pedagogy 13.1. Academic Search Premier, 2013. 31 October 2013. .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. .Kristeva, Julia. Smitik: Recherches pour une smanalyse,. Paris: Collection Points, 1969. 1-6. 19 January 2014. .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. .Pite, Ralph. The Circle of Our Vision: Dante's Presence in English Romantic Poetry. October 2011. 27 January 2014. .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. .The Technology Press of Massacltusetts Institute of Techtology and John Wiley & Sons, Inc. Style in Language. 1960. pdf. 19 February 2014.