Since the introduction of such terms as “intra-textuality” and “Poeclectics” by Mario Petrucci in 2000/2001 respectively, which terms seem to operate in contrast to “inter-textuality” in performance contexts, perspectives on performance have become rather complex particularly as these terms are operational in several disciplines of Folklore, Sociology, Communication, linguistics, Literature etc; each discipline seemingly laying a tenuous emphasis on a specific mode of application and desired goals. The application of these terms in the interpretation of performance contexts seems to mark shifts in the perception or progress towards a better or more rewarding understanding of how language operates in social contexts particularly in creative performance and their attendant enhancement techniques in Oral Literature. However, the diversity and plurality of application of the terms in different fields has sometimes tended to obscure or create complex meanings in the respective fields and instances of application rather than enhance further explication of the discipline. As a result of this diversity, I have chosen to examine the interplay of the terms ‘intertextuality” and “ethno-aesthetics” in the interpretation of performance contexts in an attempt to observe how these terms can explicate the criticism of oral literature particularly within the background of Bakor oral performance models. The result is this paper which tries to posit that in Bakor as in most other African performance contexts, “intertextuality” and “ethnoaesthetics” seem to be major determinants of the creative impulse among artists in different communities.