Unlimited Semiosis, Intertexuality and Ex-Centricity in Umberto Eco’s the Name of the Rose
Dicle Erbay
AKE 612/712
Assist. Prof. Dr. Bilge Mutluay
UNLIMITED SEMIOSIS, INTERTEXUALITY AND EX-CENTRICITY
IN
UMBERTO ECO’S THE NAME OF THE ROSE
The title of The Name of the Rose suggests many interpretations about the thick book at first glance. Umberto Eco talks about this first impression and why he chose this title for his book in his expository article he published in Alphabeta called “Postille” (after). He says that the idea for the title was coincidental and he liked it at the first thought because the rose is such a meaningful and symbolic object that it actually lost its original meaning- having almost no meaning. After giving many references of the rose (The War of the Roses, The Rosencrantz Cult, Gertrude Stein's poem Sacred Emily), Eco explains that a potential reader would be baffled by such a title as it both meant everything and nothing at the same time. It would be impossible for him/her to reach up to a quick conclusion; in fact, that conclusion is never to come. The title of a book, he concludes, should stumble up ideas, not put them in order. This explanation actually is a small prototype of the entire book in terms of its meaning and “conclusion”. The Name of the Rose is a book that has a multiplicity of meanings, an unlimited intertextuality, and an important theme of ex-centricity. However even this explicit announcement made for the title does not satisfy some result-obsessed people who continually ask Eco why he has chosen that title upon which he answers in his article “Reading My Readers”: “Because Pinocchio and Snow White were already copyrighted” (Eco 819). He seems to have become overwhelmed but his answer is not that silly either. He continues: “My simplistic answer concealed the fact that authors do not speak in the void and are determined- and even censured- by previous texts”. Even such debate over the title only captures the importance of intertextuality for both Eco and his book. In this
AKE 612/712
Assist. Prof. Dr. Bilge Mutluay
UNLIMITED SEMIOSIS, INTERTEXUALITY AND EX-CENTRICITY
IN
UMBERTO ECO’S THE NAME OF THE ROSE
The title of The Name of the Rose suggests many interpretations about the thick book at first glance. Umberto Eco talks about this first impression and why he chose this title for his book in his expository article he published in Alphabeta called “Postille” (after). He says that the idea for the title was coincidental and he liked it at the first thought because the rose is such a meaningful and symbolic object that it actually lost its original meaning- having almost no meaning. After giving many references of the rose (The War of the Roses, The Rosencrantz Cult, Gertrude Stein's poem Sacred Emily), Eco explains that a potential reader would be baffled by such a title as it both meant everything and nothing at the same time. It would be impossible for him/her to reach up to a quick conclusion; in fact, that conclusion is never to come. The title of a book, he concludes, should stumble up ideas, not put them in order. This explanation actually is a small prototype of the entire book in terms of its meaning and “conclusion”. The Name of the Rose is a book that has a multiplicity of meanings, an unlimited intertextuality, and an important theme of ex-centricity. However even this explicit announcement made for the title does not satisfy some result-obsessed people who continually ask Eco why he has chosen that title upon which he answers in his article “Reading My Readers”: “Because Pinocchio and Snow White were already copyrighted” (Eco 819). He seems to have become overwhelmed but his answer is not that silly either. He continues: “My simplistic answer concealed the fact that authors do not speak in the void and are determined- and even censured- by previous texts”. Even such debate over the title only captures the importance of intertextuality for both Eco and his book. In this