Tuesday, May 26, 2026

Should Tradition be Causative?

As regular readers will know, I'm very interested in tradition. OK, I'm obsessed by tradition.

Today I found myself mulling over the phrase "in the tradition of...". What does it mean, exactly?

For instance, there's often talk about Kingston-upon-Hull's tradition of poetry. Philip Larkin is the big name, along with Andrew Marvell. There's also Stevie Smith and a good few others. Anyway, a surprising number of celebrated poets are associated with Hull.

But is this really a tradition? Or is it just a coincidence? Or can a coincidence be a tradition?

Conversely, I remember someone pointing out how the Harry Potter books (and films) are very much in the tradition of Enid Blyton. But this does seem to be a tradition in a more causative sense. Rowling was a huge fan of Enid Blyton in her girlhood.

More importantly, perhaps, is anybody exercised by such questions other than me?

2 comments:

  1. at least etymologically the word tradition means handed down, which seems to imply a conscious action on the giver side. but of course language can be stretched, and maybe it makes sense to speak of someone adopting a tradition, as well (even though etymologically it makes no sense). personally i would prefer to say 'in the style of' for the Rowling/Blyton example, and to refer to a 'scene' for the Hull example ('the Hull scene' sounds cool to me).

    .Laeth

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Those are some very good points. Hand on heart, I was actually pondering the phrase "handed down" today, as well. It's very interesting, and poetic!

      Delete