1) Imitate “David“s pose as closely as you can, and consider what and how you feel, and what that might mean
for the work of art. Then write half page in which you describe what you observed, or learned, in the process.
2) Write a 1.5 page paragone, in which you draw on the two period examples by Leonardo and Castiglione in
composing a thoughtful comparison between two majors “Ceramics” and “drawing”. You’re welcome to
structure your comparison as you see fit, but you should consider and extend the criteria used in Renaissance
discussions, and should take a definitive stance: how do the two compare, and why?
Others, however, argue that it is not the influence which is important but the individuality of one’s own work. Furthermore, Harold Bloom explores influence as being ‘labyrinthine not linear’ , by introducing it as a complex and intricate concept, one may link it to T.S Eliot’s idea of tradition and John Keats ideas on truth, beauty and the imagination. Whilst both T.S Eliot and Keats explore aspects of influence over their art, the two have extremely dissimilar perceptions of it. Tradition has gained extremely negative connotations over time, believed to entail strict boundaries and parallel conservative ideas, many immediately shy away from it. T.S Eliot found this very early on in his exploration of the idea, in his essay ‘Tradition and the Individual Talent’ he writes, ‘we pretend to find what is individual, what is the peculiar essence of the man’ . The specific use of the verb ‘pretend’ introduces a falsity into critical reading whilst additionally suggesting that many have to ‘pretend’ because there isn’t individuality in writing, just the techniques and ideas that past canons have created and honed. Alternatively, the act of pretending could be exploring the fact that these traditional aspects of literature are subtly integrated into literature, so much so that the reader does not realise what they are reading is traditional. The allusion of individuality hiding tradition is supported by his statement, ‘no poet, no artist of any art, has his complete meaning alone. His significance, his appreciation is the appreciation of his relation to the dead poets and artists’ . Evidently there is this idea that art and poetry have no exclusive owner, it is shared through many minds over may years and only becomes of value when linked to the past. This sense of falsity is further developed, ‘we endeavour to find something that can be isolated in order to be enjoyed’ . By using the inclusive ‘we’ and making individuality synonymous with isolation, Eliot is reflecting how narrow the concept of individuality versus tradition has become th>GET ANSWER