Sunday, September 26, 2010
Question about "American Literature 1820-1865"
Referencing the third paragraph of the section "The Small World of the American Writer" and the section of "The New Americanness of American Literature," what does the offer suggest the significance of tradition is and how does this relate to our understanding of "The American Literary Tradition"? You can perhaps discuss its parallel with T.S. Eliot's idea of tradition in his essay "Tradition and the Individual Talent." Also, what does the author believe to be "American" about American writing, how do these ideals contrast those of English literature and how does this affect our understanding of "The American Literary Tradition"?
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
In the beginning of the third paragraph of "The Small World of the American Writer", the author says, "None of the American writers of the period was chauvinistic enough to think that a great American literature could be written without reference to past English and European literature" (340). Based on this quote, the author believes that American literature is something that can only be obtained by tradition, and by following the ideas of the writers before him. As Robinson stated in her interview, tradition seems to be a "cultural framework" set by previous authors and societal standards. American literature, at this point, seems to be the epitome of tradition: it is "chauvinistic" to think that one author could create a good piece of literature without following the standards and examples set by previous authors. He then states that this example is set by British authors, based on the fact that American "literary heritage" is the same as Britain's. The birth of American literature sprouts from the example set before it, just as each author's writing becomes brilliant based on past authors' ideas.
ReplyDeleteT.S Eliot poses an interesting quote in his piece, “Tradition and the Individual Talent”: “Tradition is a matter of much wider significance. It cannot be inherited, and if you want it you must obtain it by great labor. This historical sense, which is a sense of the timeless as well as of the temporal and of the timeless and temporal together, is what makes a writer traditional” (Eliot). Eliot believes that tradition cannot easily be obtained, just the author of "American Literature" states that American writers were rather unsuccessful in their first attempts at brilliance. The author states, "The best of [American] writers were but second-hand Englishmen". Both Eliot and the author of "American Literature" recognize the difficulty in becoming a successful author, who fully grasps just how to write based on tradition. "American" writing, in a sense, is just a passing down of the British literature before it; as previously stated, it follows the tradition and ideals of British writing.
Emma, I think that you did an excellent job relating the ideas of the "Small World of American Writing" to that of Emerson's essay "Tradition and the Individual Talent." I think that both writers talk about tradition in their writing because of its importance in literature in general. The author writes, "Nineteenth-century American writing reveals its full meanings only in the light of European influences and parallel developments"(340). Evidently, the author believes that all American writing in that era was somewhat if not all based upon the previous writings of the British. This relationship with tradition sheds some light on the "tradition" aspect of the "American Literary Tradition." However, it is also important to notice the originality that the Americans had and achieved in their writing over time.
ReplyDeleteThe author believes that there was indeed some "elusive quality about its new literature that was American"(341). He references Cooper's novels and says that there "was a sense of the immensity of physical nature and the power of human beings to destroy nature that most European writers could experience only vicariously"(341). He also references the novel Moby Dick and how there "was a sense of the grandeur of the physical universe and man's role in it long suppressed in European consciousness"(341). This is important when trying to determine what the "American Literary Tradition" constitutes in literature. Let's try to expand on that as well as its parallels to other texts we have read in class.
The significance of tradition, by the small world of American writers, seems to be based upon the "art, religion, politics, and science" of this time (340). Writers during the 19th century were still letting the influences of their predecessors from other countries govern their works and as art, religion, politics, and science evolved in America, so did the tradition of writing. The tradition of writing became less of what was considered "a lack of originality" and more of pieces that were original because they were referencing distant events occuring in the colonies, that had not occured elsewhere in the world. It seems that the tradition of these small elite writers evolved because the events occuring in the colonies, some similar to that of other countries, but most were new and different therefore they produced new and different writing-new and different ideas.
ReplyDeleteTradition provides the solid foundation upon which all other works are created. “Tradition and the Individual Talent” by T.S. Eliot discusses the relationship between a poet’s writing and the writings that came before it. Eliot asserts that tradition is the understanding of the past in relation to the now, the recognition “not only of the pastness of the past, but of its presence” (1). Tradition has provided a basis for all new works; that rather than progression being a departure from tradition, it is the elaboration and the building upon works that have come before it. Tradition does not stifle new works; in fact, it provides an “existing order” (2) by which new works can be judged and gain meaning through. The new works alter the order a bit and become a part of this tradition, the standard against which new poetry is judged against. The order of poetry is thus constantly evolving, however they build upon what has been created in the past.
ReplyDeleteLikewise, this article emphasizes that (as Celi mentioned) each piece of great American literature was written with the "reference to past English and European literature" (340). Americans were cultured and well-read; they had access "to the latest British and continental discussions of art, religion, politics, and science" (340). Americans were kept up to date on the philosophy of the time, of the new ideas coming from overseas, and referenced these ideas in their works. American literature has clear ties to the past; however it is its ties to the present that allow its individuality.
This sense of individuality within America allowed a "distinctively new" (340) style of literature to emerge. Moby Dick, by Herman Melville, embodies this new style, and one critic points out his obsession with "the super-sensual" and with individuality (340). In fact, this exploration of the human mind combined with the new experience of living on a frontier provide American literature with a new style. Americans understood the "immensity of physical nature", they had seen the "grandeur of the physical universe", and come into contact with "individualism" (341). Living in America provided a unique sense of identity that no one in the world had; experiences which others could only imagine. As you, Celi, point out, most European writers could "experience [these concepts] only vicariously" (341), they had no concept of the world in the way that Americans, who were living out in the wild, did.
Exactly Rosie! You did an excellent job paralleling the idea of tradition with the originality that is American Literature. To further the discussion, we must ask ourselves one question: How does this relationship between tradition and originality affect our understanding of "The American Literary Tradition?"
ReplyDeleteIn the referenced passages we see an intense American pride take form. As new original works with a "special quality" came about, "evidence of originality" could be found.
ReplyDeleteThe quoted analysis from the review in the London Leader stated that "such genuine outcomings of the American intellect as can be safely called national." American writers like Poe, Hawthorne and Melville could do things with the English language than Englishmen could not.
Interestingly, what the British critics noted was "American" about American writing was the "mystic love of the supersensual" and the ability to" move a horror skilfully...and with weird imagery" that European writers could not pull off. Maybe it is just me, but the above qualities are not what I associate with American writing...
I would argue that the parallels between the idea of tradition presented by T.S. Elliot and the idea of the American literary tradition, as established by transcendentalists, are completely opposed.
ReplyDeleteElliot proposes that "No poet, no artist of any art, has his complete meaning alone." All works of art must take into consideration the pre-existing order and adapt and respond accordingly.
But Emerson suggests that man must acknowledge the ideas of previous thinkers and then break free. Man thinking must comprehend the world through his own ideas, independent of all previous knowledge.
One of the reasons that Emerson proposed this philosophy was to encourage the Americans to break away from "European influences and parallel developments". If the "best literature that emerged in the US was distinctly new" than Emerson's ideas not Elliot's would have to be the foundation for the American literary tradition.
The American Literary Tradition is suggested as one steming from the works of European writers. THe author gives prominent examples, linking together the similarities between famous American writers and famous European writers. However, the author then explains the elements which creating the American identity and its literary tradition. On top of all the influences from authors such as "Shakespeare,Milton, Burton, Sterne, De Quincey, Carlyle", the American writers implemented themes in their writing relateable to Americans, and Americans only. While European critique found American writing "to employ "weird imagery" inorder to "move a horror skillfully"" Americans "knew more than most Britons what it was to feel the trauma of rapid change" (340-341). The current problems in America fueled new passion and emotion in the writing that differentiated American writing from that of Europeans.
ReplyDeleteOn Celi's question on how this corresponds to our understanding of the American literary tradition: This paragraph argues how most american ideas, even ones considered unique, were based upon British "dicscussions of art, religion, politics, and science" (340). Authors obviously took some of their inspiration from foreign influences. However, we also discussed the other side of what makes American literary tradition American and that was the audience. This idea is not much discussed in "Introduction to Transcendetalism" but one can imagine that an American audience would be critical and demanding of differnt kinds of literature than a British audinece. Afterall,the transcendetalit movement started in America, not a foreign country, which suggest Americans embraced the change for spirituality in a way foreign people did not. The American audience at the time foud relavent "refernece to past English and European literature" as that is what they grew up on (340). However, this new work went beyond tsimple references and provided analysis of an experimental culture of many ethnicities grouped together. Americansread these works and identified them, meaning that transcendalist writing fits in with American Literary tradition, no matter where it structure orginated from.
ReplyDeleteI agree with Mike that “Tradition and the Individual Talent” and “American Literature” are completely opposing. While Irving is trying to say that “a great American Literature could be written without reference to past English and European literature” (Irving 340), but Eliot says, “the historical sense compels a man to write not merely with his own generation in his bones, but with a feeling that the whole of the literature of Europe from Homer and within it the whole of the literature of his own country has a simultaneous existence and composes a simultaneous order” (Eliot). These are two very different ideas. If these two ideas could be combined together they would be stronger. American literature is very different from that of English and European literature, but there still will always be that foundation used in the writing from Americans. These foundations combined with new ideas will make the writing much better. “Americans had access to the latest British and continental discussions of art, religion, politics, and science” (Irving 340). Eliot says that they should use these sources to their advantage because it is history that can be used to make American writing stronger.
ReplyDeleteAn interesting connection between American Literature (Irving), and T.S. Eliots's "Tradition and the Individual Talent" is the idea of originality. When writing my "why writers write" essay over the summer i discussed that in Eliot's Essay, he writes in order to "use the ordinary ones(emotions) and in working them up into poetry, to express feeling which are not in actual emotions at all. And emotions which he has never experienced will serve his turn as well as those familiar to him" (Eliot 2). Eliot writes not to create new emotions, but to use emotions through poetry to express new feelings. Similarly in Irving's essay, although the American Literature is not entirely original, it too uses influences from other cultures, that are then adapted to American culture, and subsequently create a categorization of "American Literature".
ReplyDeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteMike and Molly, my point in asking how the two pieces, "Tradition and the Individual Talent" and "American Literature," parallel to each other wasn't only to find similarities in the two pieces, but to also find differences. I think you two make a good argument about the contrasting ideals of the author of "Tradition and the Individual Talent" and T.S. Eliot, however, I was trying to draw more on the fact that the idea of tradition was brought up in both the pieces. What exactly does tradition constitute for Eliot and vice versa, and how does this effect our understanding of the tradition of the "American Literary Tradition?" Is it tradition to always respect the thoughts of those who have come before, like the scholars of England, or is it tradition of America in specific to stray away from those same conformities. Just a idea for discussion :)
ReplyDeleteWell I haven't gotten a chance to read everyone else's comments however, in regards to your new question, I would argue that the American Literary Tradition encompasses both aspects. On one side, everything America is is built on its past. Our government of democracy, our concepts of freedom of speech religion etc are all formed due what the founders of this country created. In the section titled "the Heroism of American Writers", the point that writers of the 19th century must strive to make "their writing into classics from with later generations...would date eras in their lives" (349). This furthers my point that even in this era, writers are striving to make their works remembered by "much generations later". In other words, they wish for their influence to reach generations after they are gone. They wish to contribute to the tradition of being American.
ReplyDeleteHowever on the other side, I think that the American Literary Tradition is also comprised of aspects that stray away from the conventional traditions that have already been well know. My example of the founding of this country also applies here. If the founding fathers had not broken free for the current tradition of the time, which was a sovereignty, into the creating of a democracy, we might not have the rights that every citizen of the us might have today. Also, Melville talks of how "it is better to fail in originality, than to succeed in imitation" in order to warn against continuing along the lines of the same tradition. In this way, it keeps tradition always changing. In this way the American Literary Tradition becomes dynamic, always changing and evolving to become somthing new. It absorbs the contributions that all writers make and becomes a hybrid of everything.
Addressing your last question, the author drops only a few hints as to what he considers "American" about American writing and he certainly never comes out and says it. The author tends to take other's opinions on what "American" writing is or talks about specific authors and their style. At the top of page 340 we see a quote and explanation of how Hawthorne viewed American literature. Then on page 341 almost and entire paragraph is dedicated to referencing different American authors and how their unique style brought something new to the landscape of our country's literature. Never do we get a clear idea of what the author's opinion is. "The eccentricity of Americans, especially in rural areas..." and "In Amherst, Emily Dickinson out-Thoreaued Thoreau" (342), show that while the author never shares a view on the country as a whole, he will define certain areas. "Many of the writers of this period came together casually for dining and drinking..." (336), this is how I believe the author wants us to understand his idea of "American" writing, different styles from our large country to make up a style that is not all the same but comes om many different voices and directions.
ReplyDelete