Skip Navigation

Applied Linguistics 2007 28(4):579-596; doi:10.1093/applin/amm043
This Article
Right arrow Full Text
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in ISI Web of Science
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to My Personal Archive
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Pennycook, A.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
Social Bookmarking
 Add to CiteULike   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us  
What's this?

© Oxford University Press 2007

‘The Rotation Gets Thick. The Constraints Get Thin’: Creativity, Recontextualization, and Difference

Alastair Pennycook

University of Technology Sydney


   Abstract

This paper explores the implications of looking at creativity in terms of repeated sameness rather than observable difference. Drawing on insights from hip-hop culture that focus on sampling as creativity, and looking in particular at philosophies of difference that make iterability and performativity central, this paper opens up a discussion of repetition, reenactment, and recontextualization as forms of creativity. A common approach to language and creativity draws on a very particular cultural and intellectual history that posits a core of human, cultural, or linguistic similarity, with creativity as marked divergence from the core. The alternative, or at least complementary, understanding discussed in this paper takes flow and difference as the norm, pointing to the need to account for how the previous expression of others is recontextualized, and suggesting that contemporary acts of digital sampling can be seen in relation to a parallel philosophy of creativity. An understanding of this flip-side of creativity, where difference is taken as a given and sameness needs to account for itself, has major implications for some of the ways we think about writing, learning, and language variation in applied linguistics.

Accepted for publication 1 August 2007.


Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us    What's this?




Disclaimer:
Please note that abstracts for content published before 1996 were created through digital scanning and may therefore not exactly replicate the text of the original print issues. All efforts have been made to ensure accuracy, but the Publisher will not be held responsible for any remaining inaccuracies. If you require any further clarification, please contact our Customer Services Department.