This chapter explores the role of intertextuality in jazz. I argue that major variants of intertextuality– in particular, post-structuralism and Bloom’s “anxiety of influence”– miss what is most important to jazz: the way jazz has served as a vehicle for both the transmission of tradition and a dialogue within it and with other genres. I suggest that Bakhtin’s dialogism illuminates those neglected intertextual features and show how jazz musicians intertextually “re-accent” or “signify” in their use of quotations, licks, style, and repertory. Players quote, use licks, affirm and cross genre boundaries, and improvise over standards in order both to contribute to a tradition and alter it by expressing their individuality. In Jason Moran’s recent work engaging with Thelonious Monk and Fats Waller, he uses stylistic, generic, and repertory-based intertextuality to make the case for jazz as a far reaching but ultimately unified continuum. He thus connects with a larger tradition, but at the same time through recontextualization and re-accenting uses those utterances for self-expression and pushes against cultural– and, by implication, social and political– boundaries. Thus intertextual jazz performances simultaneously express the musicians themselves and engage with the larger whole(s) of which they are a part.

This chapter explores the multiple intertextual reference points that Salman Rushdie deploys in his work. While giving a sense of the range of influences in his work, an analysis of Rushdie’s use of intertextuality gives further insights into Rushdie’s artistic process but also the wider context of his own reading and cultural emersion in popular culture. Perhaps best captured in the idea of the ‘sea of stories’, Rushdie’s version of intertextuality finds links to his notions of hybridity encapsulated in both his characters and the production of his texts. This enables him to produce a wide network of transnational cultural reference points and to connect with multiple audience constituencies through a careful process of modulation of these. The chapter also explores the wider discursive notion of intertextuality as pioneered by poststructuralist theorists such as Roland Barthes and Julia Kristeva, in turn extending the work of Mikhail Bakhtin, which enables a contextualized analysis of the numerous vocalities located in his texts, exposing ideological power structures that Rushdie’s novels subvert and disrupt.

The Shakespeare North Playhouse comprises a re-creation of Whitehall’s sixteenth and seventeenth century Cockpit in Court, enfolded in a modern building and performance garden housing community and educational activities. This chapter outlines the overall aims and the educational philosophy of the Shakespeare North project during its long phase of development (2004–21), as it worked towards the Playhouse’s realisation in 2022.

The chapter begins with a description of, and a meditation on, the implications of Shakespeare North’s location in the Liverpool City Region borough of Knowsley, a particularly deprived area of England. Summarising the historical background to Shakespeare North’s commemoration of the early modern performance culture of Knowsley, it suggests that viewing theatre history from the perspective of the regional might provide a fresh perspective on configurations of region, metropolis and nation both historically and in a modern context. From this, the chapter argues that connectivity and the dialogic might be central to all of Shakespeare North’s activities, especially the educational.

Following deliberation on enablements and difficulties involved in creating the playhouse as a heritage-based, urban-regeneration initiative through the interactions of diverse partnership organisations, the chapter finally suggests how the dialogic might inform Shakespeare North’s community education activities and experiments.

The article introduces to some basic theories on intertextuality and emphasizes the hermeneutical power of the “inter,” the need of a theory of signs and texts and the intermedial bodily conditions of any intertextual interpretation. It provides a short guide for intertextual interpretation.

Temporality and spatiality are important features for understanding Routine Dynamics from a process perspective. In this chapter I present Mikhail Bakhtin’s concept of the chronotope as a method for understanding how different configurations of time and space influence the (re)creation of routines. I show the overlap between Dialogism and Routine Dynamics through Bakhtin’s concept of the utterance in dialogue as being both the patterning and performing of action. I then explain the concept of the chronotope before using an empirical example to illustrate it as a tool for analysing time and space configurations, showing how they influence action patterns. I juxtapose this analysis against recent studies in Routine Dynamics that have used the role of talk to understand routine change and show what we might see differently through the lens of the chronotope.

Like a broad array of core notions in human and social sciences, identity is reformulated with regard to a general anti-Cartesianism. This leads to shifting reified entities to processes and results in a fundamental opening to dynamic plurality and to contextualizing any phenomenon. This shift can be read as a theoretical and as a societal shift in dominant industrialized countries, but it can also be used as a critique of traditional Western individualism that colonizes through psychological science what is otherwise done through markets and symbolic meanings of things, actions, and persons. In this reading, the term “identity” crystallizes the ideology of individualism. Thus, this chapter uses a nonindividualistic, performative-dialogic approach emphasizing the concrete experience of “languaging.” It broaches two issues emerging through processuality: How can we theorize continuity and coherence within change? How do we articulate the social and the individual to each other? Dialogism framing language and self builds the ground for developing identity as a process occurring in a field of mediated activities generated and shaped by language activities deployed onto that field. This process displays a call-and-reply dynamic of crossing and blending voices. An example illustrates this dynamic, highlighting identity as being called by voices of different types. Finally, the two issues are offered an answer by deconstructing the assumptions of sameness and homogeneity and shifting towards heterogeneity, plurality, and dialogicality that are contained by centripetal and centrifugal forces: identity is an interim, even fragile, stage that continues through the dynamic of call-and-reply of speaking voices.

Bakhtin's work continually develops, but on the basis of a few enduring concerns. The first of these is the belief that the fate of Europe depends on a new conception of historical life as an 'ethical reality', which is structured by the prospect of a messianic future. The second is the claim that this ethical reality depends on a crucial distinction between I and other. Finally, Bakhtin believes that this relationship is embodied in the form of literary works and their language, which transforms our everyday experience of the world into language and narrative that embodies 'historical becoming', the form history takes when it is ethical. Bakhtin's linguistic turn in the late 1920s focuses on how a new novelistic style infuses social language with this historical sense: double-voiced discourse recreates language as what Bakhtin calls 'social heteroglossia', which teems with historical becoming. But double-voiced discourse is always reliant on new kinds of narrative form, which probe and shape the'languages' of the novel. Bakhtin's work from the late 1930s onwards is a sustaned effort to describe and specify the narrative forms that convey historical becoming.

Chapter 2 – Sense-making analysis – discusses the study’s theoretical and methodological foundations from the perspective of dialogical communication theory and the literature on sense-making resources. The chapter discusses the roles of narratives, framing, categorization and metaphors in sense-making. The book’s different empirical materials are described: peer reviewed research literature, policy documents, international media texts and focus group interviews.