TRADITION and THE INDIVIDUAL TALENT by T. S. Eliot

Right from the title, the intelligent reader is able to suppose that the extract is going to deal with argumentations made by Eliot concerning traditional literature; moreover, the title suggests the criticism of the essay and Eliot’s attitude towards the literary topic.

STRUCTURE: the essay consists of an argumentative text. For this reason, it is written in prose, without the use of typical techniques of poetry (rhyme scheme, stanzas or scenes, imagery...).

First of all, the reader notices the frequent use of quotations, underlining the concept of intertextuality that is very strong in Eliot’s poetry and prose.

The of works and references to previous poets reinforces the content of the essay, they make it rich and, in particular, individual

The modernist poet starts stating that readers reveal to be satisfied in considering the difference between a poet and his predecessors: Eliot refers to Victorian poets. People try to find something that makes unique and individual a work, in order to be appreciated; if it displays features distinguishing from others’, the reader enjoys it more. Novelty delights us and difference conveys innovation.

However, if we do not base on such prejudices, we will notice that the best and the most individual works are those including the presence of elements that derive from the “dead poets”, previous talented writers. Experience and knowledge of tradition enhance literary production. Thus Eliot incorporates all the other, previous greatest writers. There is no reference to immature works, but the “maturity” makes poetry rich and significant. But the poet shall not merely adopt the style of them who came before him: in this way tradition is meant to lose significance and the “blind or timid adherence” renders old and repetitive the work--> “Novelty is better that repetition”. In the same way, tradition shall not being considered like repetition, but it acquires a “wider” meaning. Tradition cannot be inherited, but it is to be acquired through hard labour and efforts. It implies the historical sense: it consists of the account of history TIME. If one intends to become a real poet, he/she is supposed to suffer in order to achieve tradition and the historical sense.

Past permeates present: history is important, indeed literature includes all previous literary production. The historical sense involves perception, that is the writer’s awareness that past lives inside present. Therefore, the poet shall not write only referring to his generation, but he cannot be limited (concept of universality). The aspect of ORDER is one of the main topic of the essay: order is sought as historical principle. The need of order is due to FAIR of losing the sense of history. It is a continuous QUEST. Eliot displays a simultaneous conception of time: all times are included in our time. Traditional becomes synonym of ‘innovative’ and the great poet is he/she who owns the ability to combine tradition and novelty. Meaning is never unique and “alone”, but it always presents a comparison; significance is given by DIFFERENCE, the contrast reveals the very meaning.

Eliot’s historical criticism is also an aesthetic principle: relations and proportions are elements creating order and harmony. “For order to persist” means that if the poet wants the order not to be altered, what is needed is the combination of the new and the old, novelty and tradition. This is exactly the poet’s responsibility: he/she is meant to apply the conformity between the two different forms.