Trushali Dodiya's Blog: Tradition and the Individual Talent

Thinking Activity

Tradition and the Individual Talent

This blog is written as a part of a thinking activity assigned by Dr. Dilip Barad sir, Department of English, MKBU on T. S. Eliot's essay Tradition and the Individual Talent. In this blog I am going to answer some of the questions given by sir with my point of views.

'Tradition and the Individual Talent' s an essay written by a poet and literary critic T. S. Eliot. This essay was first published in The Egoist in 1919 and later on in Eliot's first book of criticism, "The Sacred Wood" (1920). The essay is also available in Eliot's "Selected Prose" and "Selected Essays". Tradition and the Individual Talent" is the well known works that Eliot produced in his critical capacity. It formulates Eliot's influential conception of the relationship between the poet and preceding literary traditions.

1. How would you like to explain Eliot's concept of Tradition? Do you agree with it?

According to Eliot, tradition is that part of living culture inherited from the past functioning in the formulation of the present. It means a sense of continuity from the past. While talking about the concept of tradition there always lies a kind of tension of being between traditional and modern. So to understand Eliot's concept after edition it is important to know in which way he is talking about the tradition because whenever one hears a word tradition, one always thinks it of being traditional. Here he brings a word historical sense which involves a perception not only of the pastness of the past but of its presence. It means to write not nearly with the present time but also with the whole of the Literature. It is like connecting the dots or building the bridge between history and the present time.

He also justify that there is imitation of the past but that imitation should not be slavish. Hence there should be something like novelty in it which he describes in the individual talent.

For me it is very much difficult to either agree or disagree with the opinion of Eliot of tradition. At one point he says that that should be a sense of continuity of the past which he implies by the historical sense. Here he tries to criticise the romantic writer for cutting off thread from the tradition and initiated to write in a new way. But one can not say that there must be the historical sense of a poet to create something new. If we may believe in this idea, the new school of Romantic writers may fall in this test of the historical sense as they have individual talent on a large scale. So at this particular point one may disagree with it. But his description of the historical sense and the idea of the individual talent breaks the rigidity of the tradition as it believes not only in imitating the past but newness or Novelty in it. Here he perhaps wants to put a step further not only to be fitted in the box of the tradition.

2. What do you understand by Historical Sense?

"The historical sense involves a perception, not only of the pastness of the past, but of its presence"

According to idiot tradition is that part of living culture inherited from the past and functioning in the formation of the present. India represents that historical sense is the idea of the presence of the past. So our past always influences our present in each and every aspect. This concept becomes essential for depersonalization. He further says that,

This historical sense, which is a sense of the timeless as well as of the temporal and of the timeless and of the temporal together, is what makes a writer traditional.

So this historical sense is timeless- has no bound and temporal(secular) also and the combination of both makes the writer traditional.

3. What is the relationship between “tradition” and “the individual talent,” according to the poet T. S. Eliot?

While talking about the tradition, Eliot gives the word 'individual talent' to differentiate the talent of a poet. First he describes how historical sense is required but to give the perfect shape to that historical sense in a modern perspective the individual talent becomes much more important which can't be neglected. Only historical sense is not enough to write any literary work. For that the one and only requirement is to be creative.

4. Explain: "Some can absorb knowledge, the more tardy must sweat for it. Shakespeare acquired more essential history from Plutarch than most men could from the whole British Museum".

Eliot uses the line "some can absorb knowledge the more tardi must sweat for it." Initially he says that to become creative is not easy as it is said that,

"Great epoch of creativity doesn't come often."

So to be a creator of literary art one must need wide reading. The writer should have vast reading and wide knowledge of every field of the past as well as of the present. But later on he says that some can absorb knowledge. So it can be possible that those who are not well read can write fruitfully as Shakespeare did. So he didn't go to university. In a nutshell idiot provides both the ways major as well as exceptional but why Reading has graped more space than absorbance.

5. Explain: "Honest criticism and sensitive appreciation is directed not upon the poet but upon the poetry"

In his essay Tradition and the Individual Talent T. S. Eliot says that

"Honest criticism and sensitive appreciation is directed not upon the poet but upon the poetry"

In this perspective we observe that many a times or we can say most of the times a critic always tries to criticise literary art by its artist not by the art itself. For example, If we choose a particular writer or a poet and his or her writing and put the poet or writer at the centre while doing observation or making critique on the literary art it is not the right way to do criticism or appreciation. Because we are considering a poet not his poetry, it will not give the real charm of the poetry itself. So to make an honest criticism or sensitive appreciation it is important to be directed upon a poetry not upon a poet.

6. How would you like to explain Eliot's theory of depersonalization? You can explain with the help of chemical reaction in presence of catalyst agent, Platinum.

As per my understanding Eliot's theory of depersonalization makes a poet aloof from the poetry. For that he gives an example of the chemical reaction in making sulphuric acid. So let's try to understand the equation.

Catalyst

SO₃ + H₂O —---------> H₂SO₄

Platinum

So in the process of making Sulphuric acid, shreds of platinum play a vital role. Without using platinum this chemical reaction will not happen. So like this as Eliot says that while creating poetry(literary art) the poet plays the role of Catalyst like platinum. The way catalyst agent Platinum is not found in H2SO4, similarly, the poet should not be present in the poetry.

7. Explain: " Poetry is not a turning loose of emotion, but an escape from emotion; it is not the expression of personality, but an escape from personality."

It means the personal emotions or experiences and the poet's life should not be reflected in the poetry. But we can find the same thing in Eliot's work, where he presents not directly his own experiences and relationships. So it is very much difficult for a poet to be aloof from his work. Though the theory of depersonalization gives universality means where personal experiences and emotions should neglected.

8. Write two points on which one can write critique on 'T.S. Eliot as a critic'.

After observing this essay I came to the conclusion that there are some points which one can consider while thinking about T. S. Eliot as a critic, he sometimes confuses us about what he actually wants to say. Like,

How the ideas of T. S. Eliot in Tradition and Individual Talent' are applicable in Modern literature?
Elaboration of the ideas of T. S. Eliot and can this be found in his own work?
Do T. S. Eliot is faithful to his own concepts of creative work and critical analysis?

Go through this videos to have better understanding of all this concept of T. S. Eliot.

The Concept of Tradition: