Page 327 - DENG502_PROSE

Unit 30: Eliot-Tradition And Individual Talent...

It is remarkable that these apparently disparate modes of thinking are disciplined by values. The Notes
relation between the new work of art and the tradition is another very complex idea enshrined in
the essay. It is, however, true that the complete meaning of the poet is realized through his
relationship with the tradition but the importance of individual talent cannot be set aside in a
discussion on the Eliot’s poetics. It is again noteworthy that the tradition and individual talent are
not at a sharp contrast with each other but they are mutually complimentary. Eliot conceives
tradition and individual talent as unifiable and show that the two have an equally important role
to play in poetic creation. The views of Jean Michael Rabate capture our attention. He commenting
on the function of historical sense in the caste of an individual talent says : This requires that the
“bones” belong to the individual who recomposes simultaneity at every moment without losing a combination
of the timeless and the merely temporal. Individual talent is needed to acquire the sense of tradition.
7
Eliot lays good emphasis on the idea of interactivity between the tradition and individual talent.
If the individual talent needs to acquire tradition, then the individual talent in turn modifies
tradition. Eliot ratifies the dynamic nature of tradition. The existing monument form an ideal order
among themselves, which is modified by the introduction of the new (the really new) work of art among
them. The existing order is complete before the new work arrives; for order to persist after the supervention
of novelty, the whole existing order must be, if ever so slightly, altered; and so the relations, proportions,
values of each work of art towards the whole are readjusted; and this in conformity between the old and the
new.The above quoted lines make clear the cyclic interdependence between tradition and individual
talent. Shusterman’s view again oblige inclusion, ‘Old and new elements’, he points out, ‘derive
their meaning from their reciprocal relations of contrast and coherence, in a larger whole of
tradition which they themselves constitute as parts’. It is evident from the views of Shusterman
that tradition is not anything fixed or static but it is something dynamic and everchanging. Every
new participation in the tradition results into restructuring of the same tradition with different
emphasis. It is constantly growing and changing and becoming different from what it has been
earlier. The past directs the present and is modified by the present. This is an apt revelation of the
traditional capabilities of a poet. The past helps us understand the present and the present throws
light on the past. The new work of art is judged by the standards set by the past. It is in the light
of the past alone that an individual talent can be. This is the way Eliot subtly reconciles the
tradition and the individual talent. Eliot’s views on tradition paves way for the theorization of the
impersonality in art and poetry. Divergent views about Eliot’s theory of objectivity have been
discussed but it is observed that critics tend to generalize the theory to a common experience. It is
noticeable that the impersonality that Eliot discusses in his criticism does not imply a mechanical
objectivity of a hoarding painter, but, it owes its genesis to the personality that emerges out of the
creative personality of the poet. It is understandable that Eliot denies an outright and blind
adherence to some peculiar faiths and belief but an emancipation from what is very personal on
peculiar. He says : ...... the poet has not a personality to express but a particular medium, which is
only a medium and not a personality, in which impressions and experience combine in a peculiar
and unexpected ways. Impressions and experiences which are important for the man may take no
place in the poetry, and those important in the poetry may play quite a negligible part in the man,
the personality.It is clear from the above quotation that Eliot lays heavy stress on the two different
aspect of a creator what he is as an individual and at the same time what he is as a creator; It is an
easy inference from the above equation that Eliot’s to his critical theories discards the emotion of
strictly personal significance and centers his ideals on the transformation of what is personal but
something of universal significance.The above quoted excerpts from “Tradition and Individual
Talent” put forth a belligerently anti romantic view of poetry which lays emphasis on poetry and
discards the very idea of the personality of the poet. It is obligatory to remember Aristotle as this
point of time who, against all odds takes ‘plot’ to be the ‘soul of the tragedy’ and claims that ‘there
11
can be tragedy than a character but not without a plot’. Eliot in these lines discovers a new
possibility of a universal meaning, which free from the whims and eccentricities of the poet and

LOVELY PROFESSIONAL UNIVERSITY 321