The objectives of this article are two-fold: in part a presentation of Riffaterres semiotic-based analysis of poetry, and in part an examination of its problems and predicaments, using modern experimental poetry by way of example. Due to the fact that Semiotics of Poetry was introduced to the Anglo-American world at the same moment as a second wave of deconstruction was building up, Riffaterres theory was largely criticised for not adhering to new values, or ignored, despite the value of his semiotics of poetry as an analytical and pedagogical aid in the study of poetry.The problems that present themselves with respect to Riffaterres semiotics of poetry are mainly linked to his formalistic dependence on textuality, which cause him to ignore any factors other than intertextuality in the production of lyric poetry. This would suggest an appreciable limitation in the practicability of this method of gaining an overall grasp of what poetry is. In addition, I shall discuss the problems raised as a result of Riffaterres own hermeneutic practice of interpretation, thus offering a further illustration of the obstacles encountered in attempting to employ his semiotics of poetry. Finally, I shall endeavour to situate this method in a comprehensive poetic analysis, in order to demonstrate its primary practicability as a descriptive discipline

In this article, I shall try to shed some new light upon the notion of avant-garde, with the purpose of showing its different national use and heterogeneity of meaning. This pluralism is overlooked today because of the hegemony of English in academic studies, which leads one to believe that a consensus exists in the use of the term avant-garde, since so many academics write their articles and books in this language. This article, therefore, is an attempt to recuperate the notion of avant-garde to stringent use and gain a deeper insight into the aes-thetic movements of modernity and late modernity. I hope to show that, despite the fact that many writers believe that there exists only one recognition of the notion of avant-garde, the understanding of the Anglo-American centre is actually as peripheral as that of other coun-tries which are normally regarded as peripheries. Instead of retaining the logocentric dichot-omy of centre-periphery, an understanding of the heterogeneity forces us to realize that this dichotomy is of no value, since all understandings are equally peripheral when it comes to the notion of avant-garde in an international perspective