This blog post constitutes a component of the bridge course on literary criticism, assigned by Professor Dr. Dilip Barad.
Introduction: The Shift from Personality to Poetry
In the history of English literary criticism, few moments are as pivotal as the publication of T.S. Eliot's The Sacred Wood in 1920, and specifically the essay "Tradition and the Individual Talent" (1922). Before Eliot, the Romantic era dominated literary thought, placing the artist's biography, personal feelings, and "genius" at the center of attention. Criticism often felt like a study of the poet rather than the poem.
T.S. Eliot, a seminal critic of the twentieth century, sought to change this. He proposed a "disinterested endeavour" of critical intelligence, moving away from emotional subjectivity toward a more objective, almost scientific analysis of art. For Eliot, the poet was not a personality to be celebrated, but a medium through which tradition and experience combined to create something new.
In this blog post, we will explore Eliot’s revolutionary concepts—Tradition, the Historical Sense, and Depersonalization—and answer the burning questions about how a writer navigates the weight of the past.
Video 1: Unit 1: 4.1 T.S. Eliot - Introduction | Contemporaries and Eliot's persona
1. Defining the Undefinable: Eliot’s Concept of 'Tradition'
When we hear the word "tradition," we often think of old habits, dead customs, or a "blind or timid adherence" to the ways of our ancestors. We imagine a writer who simply copies the style of Shakespeare or Milton. T.S. Eliot vehemently rejects this definition.
For Eliot, tradition is not a passive inheritance. You cannot simply inherit it because you are born into a certain culture or family; instead, "it must be obtained by great labour".
What Tradition Is:
Eliot defines tradition as a dynamic, living organism. It involves the "historical sense," which we will discuss shortly, and a realization that the literature of Europe—from Homer to the present day—exists simultaneously. It is not a legacy of dead writers handed down, but a structure that requires the poet to be conscious of the main current of the past.
Personal Reflection: Do I Agree?
One must agree with Eliot’s premise that art does not exist in a vacuum. The idea that a writer must work with the "bones" of history in their body is compelling because it validates the continuity of human expression. It transforms the library from a graveyard into a living conversation. However, one might disagree with the elitism implied by the "great labour" required. By suggesting tradition requires intense scholarship, Eliot risks excluding "natural" poets who lack formal education but possess profound cultural intuition. Yet, on the whole, Eliot’s view is vital: it reminds us that to be truly new, we must understand what is old.
2. The 'Historical Sense': Perceiving the Present in the Past
The engine that drives Eliot’s tradition is what he calls the Historical Sense. Without this, a writer cannot be "traditional" in the Eliotic sense. Let us break down the specific quotes that define this concept.
"The historical sense involves a perception, not only of the pastness of the past but of its presence."
Usually, we view history linearly: the past is behind us, and the present is here. Eliot argues that for a poet, this separation is an illusion. The "pastness of the past" refers to knowing that an event happened long ago (e.g., the Trojan War). However, the "presence" of the past means understanding that the emotions, myths, and literary truths of that time are still alive and active today. When a modern poet writes about war, Homer is not a dead ancestor; he is a contemporary presence in the room, influencing how the war is depicted.
"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."
Here, Eliot introduces a dual consciousness:
The Temporal: The writer must be grounded in their own time (the 20th or 21st century), understanding their current society and language.
The Timeless: The writer must simultaneously grasp the universal truths of art that do not change—what makes a poem "great" in 1600 is often what makes it "great" in 2025.
The Synthesis: The historical sense is the ability to see these two together. It is realizing that the "timeless" (universal human nature) is always expressing itself through the "temporal" (specific historical moments). This fusion is what allows a writer to join the ranks of the "traditional"—not by being old-fashioned, but by being timelessly relevant.
Video 2: Unit 4: T.S. Eliot: Tradition & Association with Individual Talent
3. The Relationship Between Tradition and Individual Talent
If tradition is the "mind of Europe," where does the individual poet fit in? Is the individual crushed by the weight of the past?
Eliot argues that the relationship is reciprocal. He states, "No poet, no artist of any art, has his complete meaning alone"9. You cannot judge a poet in isolation; you must set them among the dead for contrast and comparison.
The Monument Analogy:
Eliot visualizes tradition as an "existing monument" of literary works.
Before the new work: The monument is complete and ordered.
The new work arrives: When a "really new" work is created (Individual Talent), it is introduced to this monument.
The adjustment: The introduction of the new work modifies the whole existing order. The relations, proportions, and values of the past works are slightly readjusted to accommodate the new one.
Thus, the Individual Talent alters Tradition, just as Tradition guides the Individual Talent. The past is altered by the present as much as the present is directed by the past.
4. Sweat vs. Absorption: The Shakespeare Paradox
Eliot acknowledges that not every great poet was a scholar. He addresses this with a famous observation regarding knowledge and history.
"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."
This quote is Eliot’s way of accounting for the "natural genius" within his rigorous system of tradition.
The Tardy Must Sweat: For the majority of poets (likely including Eliot himself), acquiring the "historical sense" is an act of conscious will. It requires "sweat"—study, reading, and intellectual effort in libraries (symbolized by the British Museum) to learn the canon.
Some Can Absorb: There are rare exceptions, like Shakespeare. Shakespeare did not attend university. He used North’s translation of Plutarch’s Lives as a primary source for plays like Julius Caesar and Antony and Cleopatra.
Essential History: Eliot argues that Shakespeare had such a profound capacity for absorption that he could extract more "essential history"—the living spirit of the Roman people, the truth of human behavior—from that single book (Plutarch) than a lesser man could get from reading every volume in the British Museum.
Shakespeare didn't need the "sweat" of academic labor because his mind was a sponge for the "presence of the past." For the rest of us, however, there is only the "sweat."
Video 3: Unit 4: 4.2.1 (2): T.S. Eliot—Some can absorb knowledge
5. Honest Criticism: The Death of the Author
Moving from the poet to the critic, Eliot lays down a rule that would define the next fifty years of literary theory:
"Honest criticism and sensitive appreciation are directed not upon the poet but upon the poetry."
This is a direct attack on the biographical criticism of the 19th century.
The Old Way: Critics used to ask, "What was the poet feeling?" or "How does this poem reflect the author's unhappy marriage?" They treated the poem as a historical document of the author's life.
The Eliot Way: Eliot asserts that the poem is an autonomous object. Once it leaves the author's pen, it has its own life. "Honest criticism" looks at the structure, the language, the rhythm, and the imagery of the text itself. The poet’s personal personality is a distraction.
Impact: This shift paved the way for New Criticism, which focused entirely on the "close reading" of the text, ignoring the author's intentions or biography.
6. The Theory of Depersonalization: The Chemical Catalyst
Perhaps the most famous part of the essay is Eliot’s scientific analogy for the artistic process. He argues for Depersonalization: the idea that the poet must surrender himself as he works, undergoing a "continual extinction of personality".
To explain this, Eliot takes us into the chemistry lab.
The Catalyst Analogy:
Eliot describes a chemical reaction that creates Sulfurous Acid13.
The Ingredients: Oxygen and Sulfur Dioxide. (These represent the poet's emotions, feelings, and experiences).
The Catalyst: A filament of Platinum. (This represents the poet's mind).
The Result: Sulfurous Acid. (This represents the Poem).
How it works:
When the two gases mix in the presence of platinum, they form acid. Crucially, the platinum is necessary for the reaction, but the platinum itself is not affecting the acid, nor is it found in the acid. It remains inert, neutral, and unchanged.
The Application to Poetry:
Eliot argues the poet’s mind is the platinum. It acts as a receptacle to seize and store feelings, transforming them into a new compound (the poem). But the "man who suffers" (the human with personal emotions) and the "mind which creates" (the artist) are distinct15. The more perfect the artist, the more completely separate these two will be. The poem should not contain the "personality" of the poet, just as the acid contains no platinum.
Video 4: Unit 4: T. S. Eliot: Analogy of Chemical Reaction & Theory of Impersonalization
7. Poetry as an Escape from Emotion
Finally, Eliot creates a sharp contrast with the Romantic definition of poetry. William Wordsworth famously defined poetry as "the spontaneous overflow of powerful feelings".
Eliot counters this directly:
"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."
Not "Turning Loose": Eliot believes poetry is not a therapy session. It is not about venting or "turning loose" your personal sadness or joy.
Escape from Personality: The goal is to transmute personal emotion into art emotion. The emotion in a poem is a "new thing" resulting from the concentration of experiences. It is structural, complex, and universal.
Intensity: It is not the "greatness" or intensity of the original human emotion that matters, but the intensity of the artistic process—the pressure under which the fusion takes place.
By escaping their own personality, the poet allows the tradition to speak through them, achieving a voice that is timeless rather than merely personal.
8. Critique: Two Points of Divergence
While Eliot is a giant of criticism, we must also view him critically. Here are two major points on which one can write a critique of T.S. Eliot:
1. The Anxiety of Influence vs. The Order of Tradition
Eliot presents the relationship between the new poet and tradition as a harmonious "surrender". He suggests the new poet fits neatly into the "existing monument." However, later critics like Harold Bloom argued this is unrealistic. Bloom proposed the "Anxiety of Influence," suggesting that poets essentially fight with their predecessors. It is a struggle, not a peaceful joining. A critique can be written on how Eliot ignores the competitive, psychological struggle of creativity.
2. Eurocentrism and the Narrowness of "Tradition"
Eliot’s "Tradition" is strictly Western. When he speaks of the "mind of Europe," he refers to the canon from Homer to the present. He largely ignores other vast traditions—oral poetry, Eastern philosophy, or folklore—that do not fit the academic mold. A critique can be written on how Eliot ignores "other traditions that go into social formations", making his theory exclusive and elitist.
Video 5: Unit 3: T.S. Eliot: Tradition and Individual Talent: Summing up
Conclusion
T.S. Eliot’s Tradition and the Individual Talent is more than just a literary essay; it is a discipline. It demands that we look beyond the "spontaneous" and the "personal" to see the deep, underlying currents of history that shape all great art. By establishing the "Historical Sense" and the "Theory of Impersonality," Eliot successfully shifted the focus of criticism from the author to the text.
While we may debate the strictness of his chemical analogy or the exclusivity of his tradition, his central message remains a beacon for students of literature: The past is not dead. It is present. And to write for the future, one must first surrender to the past.
References
Barad, Dilip. (2024). Tradition and Individual Talent - T.S. Eliot. 10.13140/RG.2.2.32695.91047.
Eliot, T. S., ‘Tradition and the Individual Talent’, 1922, Print.
Jovanovich, Harcourt Brace., Critical Theory Since Plato, ed. By Adams, Hazard, Uni. Of California,
Harcourt Brace Jovanovich Publishers, 1971, 783-791, ISBN – 0-15-516142-3. Print.
Nagarajan, M. S., English Literary Criticism and Theory, An Introductory History, Orient Blackswan Private Limited, 2006, 105-116. Print.
Prasad, Birjadish., A Short History of English Poetry. Macmillan India Limited, 1971, 121-124, ISBN –033390 316 1, Print.
No comments:
Post a Comment