The Creative Launcher

ISSN: 2455-6580
thecreativelauncher@gmail.com
Perception Publishing
India

Jain, Sulakshana
Analysis of T.S. Eliot’s ‘Tradition and the Individual Talent’: Its Implications for the Concept
of Intertextuality
The Creative Launcher, vol. 3, núm. 1, abril-, 2018, pp. 516-521
Perception Publishing

Available in: https://www.redalyc.org/articulo.oa?id=703876867057

How to cite
Complete issue
Scientific Information System
More information about this article Network of Scientific Journals from Latin America, the Caribbean, Spain and Portugal
Journal's homepage in redalyc.org Non-profit academic project, developed under the open access initiative
 www.thecreativelaucher.com Vol. III & Issue I (April- 2018) ISSN-2455-6580
The Creative Launcher
An International, Open Access, Peer Reviewed, Refereed, E- Journal in English
UGC Approved

DOI: https://doi.org/10.53032/tcl.2018.3.1.69

Analysis of T.S. Eliot’s ‘Tradition and the Individual Talent’: Its

Ms. Sulakshana Jain

Abstract
The present paper aims to analyze the concept of ‘Tradition’ and ‘Individual Talent’ propounded by
T.S. Eliot and its implications for ‘Intertextuality’. Intertextuality is widely used phenomenon which
states that every text whether spoken or written is connected with the pre existing texts. No text is an
island and it always emerges in a context or in a relationship with other texts. Though the term is
coined in different ways by different theorists, it has a concurrent relationship with Eliot’s concept of
tradition, historical sense and depersonalization of poetry.

Keywords- Text, Intertextuality, Tradition, Historical Sense, Individual Talent.

Introduction
The concept of ‘Tradition’ has a close association with renowned poet and critic, T.S. Eliot. He
asserts on the significance of tradition for the writers and readers in his famous essay, Tradition
and the Individual Talent. Eliot focuses on two important ideologies for writing and analyzing a
work of art -first is the concept of tradition and second is impersonality in poetry. Eliot has given
a new definition to the concept of tradition and explains that to follow tradition is not mere by
copying the works of old writers rather it is something which needs author’s tremendous efforts
and skills to shape a new work of art. An efficient author with a sense of tradition should have the
knowledge and consciousness about the past writers and appropriately utilize this in his own
creation. Eliot even states that awareness of not only the past writers but also about the works of
contemporary writers is significant. “ … The past should be altered by the present as much as the
present is directed by the past. And the poet who is aware of this will be aware of great
difficulties and responsibilities” (Eliot 45). Past and present are closely knit and cannot be

516
 www.thecreativelaucher.com Vol. III & Issue I (April- 2018) ISSN-2455-6580
The Creative Launcher
An International, Open Access, Peer Reviewed, Refereed, E- Journal in English
UGC Approved

separated from each other as past directs the present and present modifies the past. A mature and
skilled writer bears this responsibility of writing a new work of art by acquiring historical sense
and sense of tradition.
Eliot argues against the viewpoint of the poets of romantic period who consider that
poet’s own feelings and emotions are presented in his works. He believes that a mature poet is
one who refrain his own feelings and emotions from his work. Only those feelings and emotions
which are significant for the poetic work are given place in the poetry by a mature and skilled
poet. He writes, “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” (Eliot 52-53).
‘Intertextuality’ refers to the relationship or connectivity of a text with other texts. Julia
Kristeva first coined the term and propounded the theory that all texts or artistic creations are
intertextual in nature. Kristeva’s notion of intertextuality is based on the Bakhtinian theory which
asserts that utterances are not independent rather depends on previous utterances, the way in
which they are presented and received. To appreciate any work of art, it is very crucial for an
author to find out and analyze intertextual elements involve in it. In the present scenario, the term
Intertextuality is applicable not only to literature but also to many other fields such as painting,
films, theatre etc.
Theoretical Background
Intertextuality
The term ‘Intertextuality’ is widely accepted and appreciated for its universal
applicability. It is defined and appreciated by theorists in different ways. This concept deals with
the relationship and interaction of one text with another. The concept was first given by Kristeva
though it is believed that the concept has its origins in the works of Ferdinand de Saussure and
T.S. Eliot. According to Kristeva, The text is dynamic in nature and a literary work is not a
product of the single author but it’s a creation shaped by using intertextual figures like allusion,
quotation, parody etc. or some other borrowings from other literary texts. Kristeva writes, no text
is independent of other relating texts existing before it; “any text is an intertext – the site of an
intersection of a numberless other texts” (Abrams 285). Barthes also mentions that, “… a text is
not a line of words releasing a single theological meaning…but a multidimensional space in
which a variety of writings, none of them original, blend and clash (Barthes 149). Graham Allen
sums up the concept and writes, “no text is original and unique-in-itself; rather, it is a tissue of

517
 www.thecreativelaucher.com Vol. III & Issue I (April- 2018) ISSN-2455-6580
The Creative Launcher
An International, Open Access, Peer Reviewed, Refereed, E- Journal in English
UGC Approved

inevitable references and quotations from other texts (which) in turn conditions its meaning”
(Allen 15).
Traditional approach towards literary analysis focuses on originality in the text. Julia
Kristeva argues against the traditional ideology and writes, “A literary work is not simply the
product of a single author, but of its relationship to other texts and to the structures of language
itself” (Kristeva 66). She proposed a new theory of analyzing or understanding a text giving
importance to three factors i.e. writer, reader and the exterior texts. She presented the idea that a
text can be interpreted on two axes i.e. horizontal and vertical. Horizontal refers to the
relationship between author and reader and vertical connects the text to other texts. In this way a
text can be interpreted in different ways and hence it does not have any fixed or static meaning.
Every reading can give a new meaning to a text. As Kristeva points out, “Every text is from the
outset under the jurisdiction of other discourses which impose a universe on it” (Culler 105).
Intertextuality asserts that meaning of a text lies in its language and not in the author. Process of
analyzing a text can be accomplished successfully if the readers can interpret it in the view of
intertextual elements involve in it. Meaning of a text is derived not from the text which is created
by author but from its relation with other texts. Thus, meaning lies between the intertextual
framework in which it is created or exists. Graham Allen writes, “The act of reading […] plunges
us into a network of textual relations. To interpret a text, to discover its meaning, or meanings, is
to trace those relations. Reading thus becomes a process of moving between texts” (Allen 1).
Leitch defines the term intertextuality and writes “a text’s dependence on prior words, concepts,
connotations, codes, conventions, unconscious practices and texts. Every text is an intertext that
borrows, knowingly or not, from the immense archive of previous culture” ( 21).
Tradition and Individual Talent
Tradition and Individual Talent (1919) is a noteworthy essay by T.S. Eliot. The
ideologies and beliefs expressed in this essay are innovative, influential and significant. Eliot
writes about the historical sense, sense of tradition, position of artist in poetic process and theory
of impersonality. Eliot criticizes the way of reading in which critics’ attempt to find out the
originality or individuality of the poet. He argues that, “…we shall often find that not only the
best, but the most individual parts of his work may be those in which the dead poets, his
ancestors, assert their immortality most vigorously” (Eliot 43). Explaining about significance of
Tradition, Eliot writes that artistic works in which creator takes inspiration from the past and
write originally with the awareness about past is the best work of art. Tradition for him is not the

518
 www.thecreativelaucher.com Vol. III & Issue I (April- 2018) ISSN-2455-6580
The Creative Launcher
An International, Open Access, Peer Reviewed, Refereed, E- Journal in English
UGC Approved

mere imitation or blind adherence to the works of past generations rather it is something which
polishes the poet’s works and require rigorous efforts. He also states that tradition can be
acquired by those artists who have historical sense.
Eliot points out the art of depersonalization and asserts that a poet or artist must keep his
own personality aloof from his artistic creation. He sets an analogy between the role of catalyst in
a chemical process and that of a poet in the creation of poetry. He states that as catalyst plays a
prominent role in completing the chemical reaction but it remains unaffected. Similarly poet’s
creative mind completes the poetic process but his own state of mind must not be reflected in his
artistic creation. He writes, “… the more perfect the artist, the more completely separate in him
will be the man who suffers and the mind which creates” (Eliot 48).
Implications of Tradition and Individual Talent for Intertextuality
T.S. Eliot notes that each work is created from a pre existing tradition and it is something
from which a new work gets its definition and shape. Eliot mentions that basis of a text is
tradition, culture and old texts from which it emerges and hence a writer should have the
awareness about tradition and history. A writer is not a separate entity rather a part of existing
historical background, tradition and culture. Eliot’s concept of tradition is implied or closely
related with the concept of intertextuality. Intertextuality and sense of tradition both affirm that
all texts are related to each other and no artist can create a ‘unique’ creation. Concept of
‘Tradition’ by Eliot and modern literary term ‘Intertextuality’ is parallel or similar to each other.
Eliot’s tradition affirms that every new work has the elements or traces of culture or pre existing
tradition and in this way no work of art is unique in itself because it always posses a relation with
other texts. Similarly the relationship or interconnectedness of a text with another text or texts is
termed as Intertextuality.
Eliot’s theory of impersonality which states that poet’s own personality is not significant
for creation of a new work of art and a poet needs to depersonalize his work of art to bestow an
influencing and significant work of art. Eliot writes, “The progress of an artist is a continual self-
sacrifice, a continual extinction of personality. There remains to define this process of
depersonalization and its relation to the sense of tradition” (Eliot 47). This ideology is also
compatible with the ideology of intertextuality which asserts on the significance of absence of
author in a work of art.
Eliot further points out that new work should be read in the light of old ones and old ones
to be interpreted with the understanding of past works. He mentions that present work is well

519
 www.thecreativelaucher.com Vol. III & Issue I (April- 2018) ISSN-2455-6580
The Creative Launcher
An International, Open Access, Peer Reviewed, Refereed, E- Journal in English
UGC Approved

interpreted through past works and past works can be modified and reinterpreted through present
works. This type of reading of one text through other needs multiple readings for appropriate
interpretation and this ideology of Eliot is similar to the ideology of intertextuality which also
directs multiple reading of the text. Intertextuality states that a text does not have a fixed or
absolute meaning and meaning of a text cannot be derived from single reading. Meaning of text
lies in intertextual elements involved in the process of creating or interpreting a text and to find
out those elements multiple reading is must.
Eliot claims that art must not be read in vacuum rather it must be interpreted in the
context of pre existing trends. He writes, “In a peculiar sense he will be aware also that he must
inevitably be judged by the standards of the past” (Eliot 45). Theory of intertextuality similarly
states that no text exists in vacuum or isolation and a new text is a part of pre existing or
contemporary literary texts. A text is always created in a particular context and that context is a
part of historical, social, political or literary aspects which influenced the mind of reader. Thus, as
Eliot’s idea of sense of tradition and historical sense influences the process of producing or
analyzing text similarly contextual references associated with a text influences the emerging text,
its creation and interpretation.
Conclusion
Though the term Intertextuality is a post modernist concept and first coined by Julia
Kristeva, its study and appreciation reveals that it is a universal phenomena and formerly known
as Influence. It is believed that whatever is read or observed by a writer has its influence on his
writings and in this way a new text is always inspired or influenced by pre existing texts. Creation
of new work of art or a text is not possible in vacuum and it always emerges in relation to other
texts or contextual references. This connection and interdependence of texts is Intertextuality. In
the Art of Fiction, David Lodge refers to the inevitability of intertextuality and writes, “That all
texts are woven from the tissues of other texts, whether their authors know it or not” (98-99).
The concept has a wider significance and close association with Eliot’s concept of Tradition and
Individual talent. Eliot’s concept of Tradition and the concept of Intertextuality both have given
importance to the works of past writers and consider the awareness of past works and existing
literary canon for both writer and reader. Intertextuality regards that no text can be created in
isolation and it is always created with reference to a previous text or context. In the same way
Eliot affirms that no text is unique in itself. He states that a text cannot be created or appreciated
alone rather one requires sense of tradition and historical sense to create and appreciate a text. On

520
 www.thecreativelaucher.com Vol. III & Issue I (April- 2018) ISSN-2455-6580
The Creative Launcher
An International, Open Access, Peer Reviewed, Refereed, E- Journal in English
UGC Approved

the basis of detailed analysis of Eliot’s essay, Tradition and the Individual Talent it is very
obvious that Eliot’s theory of tradition, historical sense and depersonalization in poetry laid the
foundation of Intertextuality. Different theorists have given different definitions and explanation
of the concept of intertextuality but views of Eliot are concurrent to intertextuality. Presently the
concept is applicable to many other fields apart from literature but it has its roots in the works of
Eliot and Saussure.

References
1. Abrams, M.H. A Glossary of Literary Terms. 8th ed. Delhi: Akash Press. 2005.
2. Allen, Graham. Intertextuality, London: Routledge, 2000.
3. Barthes, Ronald. Image Music Text, Trans. Stephen Heath, London: Fontana Press, 1977.
4. Culler, Jonathan. On Deconstruction: Theory and Criticism after Structuralism. London:
Routledge & Kegan Paul. 1983.
5. Eliot, Thomas Stearns. The Sacred Wood: Essays on Poetry and Criticism. London: Methuen
& Co. Ltd. 1920. (42-53) Print.
6. Kristeva, Julia. ‘Word, Dialogue, and Novel’ Desire in Language: A Semiotic Approach to
Literature and Art. Ed. Leon S. Roudiez. Trans. Thomas Gora et al. New York: Columbia
University Press, 1980.
7. Leitch, V. B., Et al. (Eds.). The Norton Anthology of Theory and Criticism, London: W. W.
Norton and Company, 2001.
8. Lodge, David. The Art of Fiction. London: Seeker & Warburg, 1992. Print

521