Summary of t. S eliot's tradition and individual talent
Answers
Answered by
3
wsTradition and the Individual Talent ▾search
Tradition and the Individual Talent Summary
T. S. Eliot
Summary
(MASTERPIECES OF AMERICAN LITERATURE)
“Tradition and the Individual Talent,” one of Eliot’s early essays, typifies his critical stance and concerns; it has been called his most influential single essay. Divided into three parts, appearing in The Egoist in September and December, 1919, the essay insists upon taking tradition into account when formulating criticism—“aesthetic, not merely historical criticism.”
Eliot opens the essay by revivifying the word “tradition” and arguing that criticism, for which the French were then noted more than the English, in his view “is as inevitable as breathing.” The first principle of criticism that he asserts is to focus not solely upon what is unique in a poet but upon what he shares with “the dead poets, his ancestors.” This sharing, when it is not the mere and unquestioning following of established poetic practice, involves the historical sense, a sense that the whole of literary Europe and of one’s own country “has a simultaneous existence and composes a simultaneous order.”
A correlative principle is that no poet or artist has his or her complete meaning in isolation but must be judged, for contrast and comparison, among the dead. As Eliot sees it, the order of art is complete before a new work of art is created, but with that new creation all the prior works forming an ideal order are modified, and the order itself is altered.
One of the essay’s memorable and enduring phrases concerns the objection that the living know so much more than the dead writers could have: Eliot counters by asserting, “Precisely, and they are that which we know.” In gaining that knowledge, the artist engages in a “continual surrender” to tradition, and his or her progress “is a continual self-sacrifice, a continual extinction of personality.” The definition of depersonalization that Eliot offers forms another of the essay’s enduring phrases: As the novelist Gustave Flaubert and the English critic Walter Pater had written before him, Eliot seeks a scientific base for his works and likens the poet’s mind to “a bit of finely filiated platinum . . . introduced into a chamber containing oxygen and sulphur dioxide.”
The poet’s mind, then, is a catalyst, as Eliot explains it in the essay’s second part. His point is that the poet’s transforming mind stores up feelings, phrases, and images until all the particles that can form a new work of art come together to do so. The poet has not so much a personality to express as a medium for the expression of complex emotion that is separable from the poet’s own emotions. Poetry, Eliot emphasizes, is not a turning loose of personal emotion but a consciously deliberate escape from it. The emotion of art, he reminds his readers in the essay’s final section, is impersonal.
MAKE ME AS BRANLIST ANSWER PLZ
FROM
LALITH PRIYADARSHAH
Tradition and the Individual Talent Summary
T. S. Eliot
Summary
(MASTERPIECES OF AMERICAN LITERATURE)
“Tradition and the Individual Talent,” one of Eliot’s early essays, typifies his critical stance and concerns; it has been called his most influential single essay. Divided into three parts, appearing in The Egoist in September and December, 1919, the essay insists upon taking tradition into account when formulating criticism—“aesthetic, not merely historical criticism.”
Eliot opens the essay by revivifying the word “tradition” and arguing that criticism, for which the French were then noted more than the English, in his view “is as inevitable as breathing.” The first principle of criticism that he asserts is to focus not solely upon what is unique in a poet but upon what he shares with “the dead poets, his ancestors.” This sharing, when it is not the mere and unquestioning following of established poetic practice, involves the historical sense, a sense that the whole of literary Europe and of one’s own country “has a simultaneous existence and composes a simultaneous order.”
A correlative principle is that no poet or artist has his or her complete meaning in isolation but must be judged, for contrast and comparison, among the dead. As Eliot sees it, the order of art is complete before a new work of art is created, but with that new creation all the prior works forming an ideal order are modified, and the order itself is altered.
One of the essay’s memorable and enduring phrases concerns the objection that the living know so much more than the dead writers could have: Eliot counters by asserting, “Precisely, and they are that which we know.” In gaining that knowledge, the artist engages in a “continual surrender” to tradition, and his or her progress “is a continual self-sacrifice, a continual extinction of personality.” The definition of depersonalization that Eliot offers forms another of the essay’s enduring phrases: As the novelist Gustave Flaubert and the English critic Walter Pater had written before him, Eliot seeks a scientific base for his works and likens the poet’s mind to “a bit of finely filiated platinum . . . introduced into a chamber containing oxygen and sulphur dioxide.”
The poet’s mind, then, is a catalyst, as Eliot explains it in the essay’s second part. His point is that the poet’s transforming mind stores up feelings, phrases, and images until all the particles that can form a new work of art come together to do so. The poet has not so much a personality to express as a medium for the expression of complex emotion that is separable from the poet’s own emotions. Poetry, Eliot emphasizes, is not a turning loose of personal emotion but a consciously deliberate escape from it. The emotion of art, he reminds his readers in the essay’s final section, is impersonal.
MAKE ME AS BRANLIST ANSWER PLZ
FROM
LALITH PRIYADARSHAH
Similar questions