T.S. Eliot on History and Art

Every work of art speaks to every other work of art. The introduction of a single piece of art alters the valence of every previous work. James Joyce published Ulysses in 1922, and now Homer's Odyssey appears to be a precursor to Ulysses just as Ulysses arrives in homage to The Odyssey.

Interestingly, historical events work the same way. The French Revolution of 1789 takes on a new meaning when 1914 breaks out in a war of empire against empire rather than a rising up of people against kings. The First World War of 1914 kills the dream of the French Revolution.

T.S. Eliot thinks this interplay between the past and the present, especially the present's ability to reshape the past, is relevant to artistic endeavors because artists can never pretend the work they create is not in dialogue with and therefore in competition with everything that came before. For an artist to hone his or her own skills, he or she has to be aware of the tradition of the artform he or she has an interest in. Perhaps the artist does not have to have an encyclopedic knowledge of his or her genre, but it wouldn't hurt.

According to Eliot, some artists are going to be able to unconsciously absorb the history of their craft better than others and some will need to work at it. Some artists will be born with raw talent that somehow naturally speaks to the traditions of art, and some artists (most) will be born into the world clueless and will need a deep dive into the history of the subject. Most importantly, no single artist stands above a tradition.

In fact, Eliot believes that what mature artists come to realize is that at that moment when they have steeped themselves in the history of their craft, the act of creation will come about with such attention to the work that there will be an effacement of personality.