This text is relevant to better understand this part of Autognosis and, consequently, to better understand my music.
The term “tradition” can mean numerous phenomena and derives from the Latin term “traditum”, which can be defined as "that which is handed down". Thus, one of the most basic meanings of “tradition” is “transmitted or handed down from the past to the present”[1]. Anthropologist Edward Shils argues, in his book “Tradition”, that this definition of tradition makes no statement about what is passed on, whether a physical object or a social construction, and that the decisive criterion for something to be tradition is to have been “created through human actions, through thought and imagination", and to be "handed down from one generation to the next”[2].
Also according to Shils, tradition, as handed down, can include material objects, beliefs, ideas about practices, “tradition of skill”[3] and institutions and also “objects from the past” (such as buildings, landscapes, art objects[4] and “education” (as “Education is conservative of the past. To educate is to teach and to teach means to transmit something already possessed”[5]), among others[6]. That is, everything that is transmitted, not only orally but by other means of transmission. All belief patterns or ways of thinking, all technical practices and all physical artefacts are likely to be considered elements of a tradition in so far as all substantive content can be transmitted[7].
In the case of practices and institutions created by human action, it is the patterns they present that are transmitted, just as beliefs are part of these practices or institutions[8].
According to Shils, the idea of tradition began to be formed in the 18th century and was limited to the study of particular kinds of tradition such as "folklore, fairy tales, myths, and legends, oral literature, customary law, the Sitte und Tracht of peasant life, religious and secular ceremonies and rituals"[9]. Thus, the study of "tradition" was mainly focused on the traditions of less literate social strata, as it was felt that "these strata there were at work some deeper mental processes which had been lost in the course of the progress of a rationalized civilization". The elements passed on "by tradition", i.e. "orally, anonymously, and by example, from generation to generation", and which underwent minor changes, remained manifestly identical over uninterrupted periods of time[10].
Also acording to Shils, at the beginning of the 19th century research on traditional culture focused upon the observation on societies other than modern Western societies where traditional patterns dominated aspects of social life[11]. This led to "traditionality" being seen disparagingly as synonymous of 'primitive', 'heathen', 'savage', 'backward', 'pagan', 'barbarian' and 'simple', 'archaic' and 'obsolete'[12]. “Tradition” can mean, as well, a “normative model of action and belief”, sometimes regarded as “useless” and “burdensome”. Because of this, those who follow these “normative models of action and belief”, attached to institutions, practices, and beliefs are sometimes called ‘reactionaries’ or ‘conservatives’[13]. Societies classified as traditional were generally relatively small in population and territory and isolated from other societies[14].
Shils points out the defence of the idea that “high culture” has, over the centuries, flourished due to its contact with the culture of the under educated classes. But this exchange of influences also happens the other way round: the traditions of the less educated classes are also influenced by the traditions of the higher intellectual culture[15].
“Tradition” can also be the “temporal chain of symbolic constructions, a temporal sequence of sets of scientific or philosophical ideas, as styles of works of literature, as sets of moral beliefs, or as the beliefs of the members of a temporally extensive aggregate of individuals who possess particular beliefs”[16].
Any moral, religious, political or scientific tradition contains a plurality of judgements about a corresponding diversity of objects[17]. In the case of beliefs that follow a tradition, their elements are analytically distinguishable into constituent elements. No object, text, celebration or song is in itself a tradition, although it may be transmitted as such[18]. In this way, these objects, texts, songs may become traditions or at least elements of a larger tradition.
There are also other definitions of the term "tradition", more limiting in their criteria and definition, which defend a different perspective of "tradition"[19]. In these definitions, "tradition" should be something genuine, orally transmitted, where its initiators or authors are not known or, at least, are not individually identifiable by name, but as part of a collective[20].
Despite these possible definitions presented above, Shils argues that "tradition" is much more than a frequent repetition of practices, beliefs, works or institutions over generations[21]. These repetitions are the result of the presentation "of the normative consequences" and the acceptance of tradition "as normative". It is, therefore, this transmission ("normative") that links the present generations to the past generations of a society[22].
According to Shils, "tradition" can also mean a belief or way of thinking that society has held for a long period of time, such as a "socialist tradition" or a "revolutionary tradition", as if these ideas, after being created and made visible, had acquired devotees and supporters. These ways of thinking were imposed by their persuasion and were treated "as a series of solutions to problems which happened to be similar to each other because the situations to which they were oriented remained uniform over an extended period"[23].
These traditions, these "imaginative productions of the popular culture", were understood by scholars to be "anonymous products of unconscious collective processes", who also saw little influence of rational discourse in the transmission and reception of these traditions[24].
One of the essential features of a tradition is the will to preserve it and to pass it on to other people or to the next generations[25]. Through the transmission of traditions we bring into the present things (which can be religious or academic beliefs or norms of conduct) created and established in the past[26]. Shils presents us with two types of past. A past that is the complex consequence of events that occurred up to the present or of actions taken that prompted other actions[27]. This, according to Shils, is the past of “institutions” such as the family, school, churches, among others, which have been followed over the years and centuries until we are part of them. It is a real past, which has already happened and which leaves residues throughout its existence. This past cannot be changed[28]. The second past is the perception of the past, more plastic and changeable “retrospectively reformed by human beings living in the present” [29].
Hobsbawm (2000) uses ‘tradition’ to describe a set of ritualised practices with a symbolic function that became part of a society or culture, which implies continuity with the past and which its cultural aspects are passed down by previous generations, or the society around, usually in the non-written form.
A tradition is something that has been created or carried out in the past but also something that is believed to have existed and been carried out in the past[30]. For this, it is indispensable for a tradition to have followers and, on the other hand, a tradition, when accepted, becomes indispensable for its followers who may be recent adherents who may have learned the tradition through contemporaries, or followers who have learned from followers of the tradition from previous generations and grown up with them. Followers of a tradition always see the tradition as representing the past in the present, but in reality it belongs as much to the present as any recent innovation[31]. Identification and affiliation with earlier followers of the tradition may coexist or exist separately from each other, and are not necessarily the same as a “present reception of a tradition”. The “sense of filiation with earlier recipients of a tradition” means a relation to “an unbroken chain of generations which have some significant quality in common”[32].
“Tradition” is thus something dynamic, transformed over time by various sources. These changes are sometimes 'unconscious' and a spontaneous/organic result of social transformation. Nevertheless, there are also transformations controlled (or carried out) by institutions or pre-defined by a narrow group of people. 'Tradition' is in this way conditioned by progress.
tradition vs fashion vs routine
Shils argues that a fashion and tradition have in common “the presentation of a pattern and its reception by other persons”. Nevertheless, what differs between a “fashion” and a tradition is the number of years that this transmission lasts. Thus, a fashion can become a tradition if it is transmitted over several generations[33]. In contrast to a tradition, a fashion can only exist for a short period of time and is not passed on to younger generations[34]. Traditions develop over longer periods of time than fashions and also last longer[35]. Because they are serious things, traditions are not changed in an uncertain or fortuitous way like fashions[36].
The difference between a tradition and a routine is that the latter does not have a significant symbolic or ritual function[37]. A routine can come to be considered a tradition if it achieves, through repetition over time, this symbolic function and fulfils the requirement of being passed on to further generations of practitioners[38]. Because they are technically rather than ideologically motivated and because they are designed to facilitate "readily definable practical operations", "routines" are not "traditions". Routines are easily changed or suppressed to meet changing practical needs and permanently allow any practice to acquire temporal and emotional resistance to any innovation by people who have become attached to it[39].
Selection of tradition
The process of tradition is also a process of selection. This process of selection is not an exclusively individual act of choice. When an individual becomes aware, in its various forms, of a tradition, this tradition has already been subjected to various choices and only a small part of its elements come to his knowledge, the result of the development of that same tradition[40].
Nevertheless, the selection of tradition can happen in different ways, such as emotional attachment, personal (or group) preference, taste, or because one feels that something has more value than another. This selection process takes place for example in the transmission of popular songs. When someone sings or teaches (in essence, transmits) a song, he or she does so because he or she likes it[41].
Invented traditions
Hobsbawm uses the term “invented tradition” to describe traditions that are “actually invented, constructed and formally instituted and those emerging in a less easily traceable manner within a brief and dateable period - a matter of a few years perhaps - and establishing themselves with great rapidity”[42].
“Invented tradition” is taken to mean a set of practices, normally governed by overtly or tacitly accepted rules and of a ritual or symbolic nature, which seek to inculcate certain values and norms of behaviour by repetition, which automatically implies continuity with the past. In fact, where possible, they normally attempt to establish continuity with a suitable historic past.
Some traditions, despite appearing or trying to show themselves as old, are often recent traditions[43]. Hobsbawm uses the term "invented tradition" to make it clear that some of the traditions we know are not so old, nor have they been developed over the years but created in order to reinforce a (political or social) position of those who follow them. Thus, these “invented traditions” may not have a long past and the reference to a "historical past" is "largely factitious"[44].
“Invented tradition” is mostly “a process of formalization and ritualization, characterized by reference to the past, if only by imposing repetition”[45]. Thus, the “invented traditions” are, as a rule, responses to new situations which are assumed to have references to old situations or which define their own past due to a “quasi-obligatory repetition” [46].
These new traditions (“invented traditions”) may often be rooted in old traditions or are created from elements present in rituals and other traditions[47]. Some invented traditions use old materials from which traditions, often defended as historical, are created[48]. This construction seeks to give a historical charge to these traditions in order to make them more relevant to their followers.
The “invented traditions” have relevant social and political functions and are often intended to manipulate their addressees[49]. Ever-changing societies have made it necessary - from the point of view of those running the institutions - to search for new methods of governing or of establishing bonds of loyalty. The creation of more "political" traditions is therefore more conscious and deliberate[50]. In the adherence to any family of traditions, there is usually no complete consensus[51]. Sometimes the essence of the followers of a particular tradition may be influenced by "Individuality, eccentricity, and attachments to other families of comprehensive traditions". A tradition, for example a civilian or a nation's tradition, even if it is not constantly relevant, can serve to control its followers so that they act loyally in their societies[52].
According to Hobsbawm, “invented traditions” created since the industrial revolution can be divided into three types according to their objectives: 1) establishment of social cohesion or belonging to groups; 2) legitimisation of institutions or relationship with authority; 3) establishment of doctrines, value systems and socialisation[53]. The creation of traditions by a larger institution can have the aim of “modernising”, educating or changing the way of being of a society.
The creation of traditions was practised both "officially and unofficially". In a distinction that presents the conveniences and not the principles of each creation, we can consider that the "official" creations were carried out by social movements or by States with political objectives and the "unofficial" ones by social groups not formally organised[54].
When does something become a tradition?
Shils states that the answer to the question "How long must a pattern go on being transmitted and received for it to he regarded as a tradition in the sense of an enduring entity?" cannot be answered fully[55]. An event or a belief, which is not repeated, that is, which is "forsaken immediately after its conception", and which has no followers after it is created cannot be considered "tradition"[56]. Therefore, if an event or a belief only survives for a short time, it does not become a tradition[57].
A tradition basically needs to be something that is repeated over a period of time and with regularity[58]. Shils says that for something to be considered a "tradition" it should last three generations and at least two transmissions[59]. Of course, this way of "measuring" the duration of something is not self-evident because the duration of a "generation" is not very precise. This definition may depend on the context in which it is inserted. Shils gives examples of a school "generation" (where a generation can last only 4 years)[60].
Changes in Tradition
According to Hobsbawm, the characteristic of "traditions" is that they do not undergo variations[61]. Shils, however, argues that traditions may change in some aspects, but not in those which are fundamental to the tradition itself.
In fact, during the transmission of a tradition, it is very likely that it will undergo some changes[62]. A tradition may change over many generations of followers from its initial form, but the elements considered essential by its supporters never change[63]. The essential elements, recognised not only by the followers of the tradition but also by an outside observer, remain, while other elements change[64]. If these essential elements remain virtually unchanged, its followers may consider the tradition to be significantly unchanged. Thus, the perception of the followers of a tradition is influenced by the "sense of filiation with a lineage of prior possessors of a tradition" which has gradually changed and therefore its variations are not considered as “significant changes”[65].
A tradition is thus “a sequence of variations on received and transmitted themes”[66]. Changes can happen in the process of transmission (due to possible new interpretations by those who receive them), but also when they are in the possession of their followers.
The connection of human societies to traditions results from the awareness that they could not survive without being part of them, due to the fact that they retain much of what they inherit[67]. Perhaps because of this, it is often not possible for members of society to imagine plausible replacements for the tradition they are part of and they generally accept what they are given from the past without questioning it[68]. In this way, traditions are indispensable.
Whoever is part of a tradition, or owns a tradition, depends on it and may be driven to change that tradition. According to Shils, traditions are changed because they “are never good enough for some of those who have received them”[69].
Changes in traditions come from the creative power of the human being. By imagining new elements, or by trying to create a new working technique, from scratch or by correcting the previous technique, or by developing a certain present element of the tradition, the human being creates a new conjuncture for the tradition. This happens in confrontation with the potentialities lying within the traditions[70]. "Imagining, reasoning, observing, expressing" are, in this way, actions that can further develop the tradition[71]. This can happen from the centre of the tradition, from the followers of the tradition. These activities are considered by Shils as "endogenous changes"[72].
Resistance to traditions ensures the existence of a heterogeneity of cultural traditions. This heterogeneity strengthens the capacity of the traditions insofar as it can present alternatives, giving rise to "implicit and sometimes explicit criticisms of the traditions towards each other"[73]. The traditions of different social strata influence each other, although resistance exists[74].
Traditions can also be changed by higher decree (the same way they are created)[75]. These changes or development of traditions happen because there is a desire to create something better or more convenient[76]. It is common for a tradition to be changed through legislation, that is, through an action of a legitimate authority[77]. This authority establishes ideas which, after a process of modification of traditions by society, are accepted by the collective[78].
Traditions can also deteriorate, losing their followers, because their holders no longer represent them or because the followers prefer other lines of conduct. They can also be weakened or lose followers if new generations prefer and accept other traditions[79].
Types of Changes in Tradition
According to Shils, traditions can change through “endogenous factors”[80] and “exogenous factors”[81].
“Endogenous changes”, internal changes, are changes which come from the tradition itself and are carried out by people who have adopted the tradition[82]. Endogenous changes are not imposed by external factors, but are the result of the relationship of the tradition follower to the tradition and are often perceived as improvements by those who make them, although they are not always accepted as such by other tradition members or successors[83].
Each generation has the possibility of developing the tradition in relation to what was previously established. This procedure can only be carried out thanks to the previous steps in the tradition, often solving problems that could not have been anticipated[84]. The aim of this procedure is thus to improve the tradition through critical intelligence, even though it (the tradition) may be considered manifestly correct. This improvement results from seemingly minor reformulations, such as "clarifying definitions, differentiating categories or grouping them under more general categories, resolving apparent contradictions, and restoring the unity of the body of belief"[85].
The internal change of traditions can take place through the "development of the moral sensitivity" raised in their needs and which their addressees reintroduce into them. In addition to the fact that each new stage of a tradition is capable of modification through the application of a critical reason that identifies logical qualities among its integral elements, it offers its followers the possibility, if they possess "the requisite moral imagination", of being broadened or deepened[86]. Thus, all forms of modification of tradition are dependent on the exercise of imagination, which functions, at times, in a disjointed way, "to add small increments to the received patterns of action" or to reduce. Thus, Shils argues that the imagination "directly or indirectly, is the great modifier of traditions". However, imagination can lead to great changes in a short space of time, taking time for society to adapt[87].
Concerning the "exogenous factors" that can alter tradition, Shils mentions, among others, pressure from an external tradition and presents changes in the circumstances in which a tradition is carried out.
Traditions can be changed from the reactions of their followers to the characteristics of the tradition itself[88]. The evaluation of the tradition-holders may come from recent traditions or from traditions unknown in a given society (which may be well developed in other distant societies)[89]. This confrontation of a specific tradition with a new tradition is often "a consequence of demographic, political, military, or economic changes in the relations between the societies". In this way, traditions can be altered by reaction to new circumstances of action which are "products of changes recurring with the society in which they were previously practiced"[90]. Also migrations can alter traditions, due to the reception of an exterior tradition and the consequent influence on the original tradition[91].
The receptive abilities of the addressee affect the reception of the tradition[92]. If the addressee has been born and raised in a larger culture in which the tradition, a smaller one, is embedded, the assimilation of the tradition will be facilitated[93].
The circumstances in which a tradition is situated also change the tradition itself. For a tradition to survive, it must adapt to the existing circumstances[94].
Patterns of change in tradition
Shils presents some patterns of change and stability in tradition: Addition, Amalgamation, Absorption, Fusion[95].
One of the main ways in which a tradition can be changed is by "addition". This alteration can result in two ways. First, a follower of an existing tradition may acquire elements of another tradition while retaining the original tradition in other aspects. The other way is that someone learning (receiving) a tradition may, by various circumstances, add something new while still following the elements that existed before in the tradition. These changes may also be the result of peaceful relations of different collectives[96]. This process of "addition" usually results in "absorption", which leads to the fact that, in the course of time, other elements of the tradition may be affected by the incorporated elements[97].
“Addition” is, together with the content of traditions, the process that allows a tradition to be defined and recognised[98]. Admitting that the adherence to a tradition is part of the structure of a society, we can assume that a tradition expands or contracts through the adherence of society to that tradition[99]. The expansion and contraction of a tradition can happen simultaneously with constant and, others, altered contents, these changes in adherence being a change in the scale and composition of the tradition[100].
Traditions, especially the "traditions of belief", shape the definition a community has of itself[101]. Cultural traditions allow a given community to construct its identity beyond questions of "race", occupation, income or location, through beliefs, which are also traditions.
"Amalgamation" occurs by the renunciation or transformation of elements previously regarded as an essential part of one of the traditions and by the replacement of these elements by similar elements[102]. The confrontation of traditions within a society inevitably goes beyond addition[103]. When contact is permanent and continued, the dominant set of traditions pervades more deeply and in more spheres[104]. This process does not end in 'absorption' or 'fusion', and the aversion felt by the advocates of each of these traditions for each other need not diminish while they become more similar[105].
Another pattern of tradition change is "absorption", which is the incorporation of a new tradition by a collective of traditions[106]. This leads to the renunciation of existing traditions. Such renunciation is unlikely to be complete within one or several generations.
Traditions can also result from a fusion, where two or more separate traditions come together, resulting in a synthesis where elements from both traditions are embraced[107].
There may also be conflicting traditions that result, at times, in additions, amalgamations, and fusions. The conflicting parties of followers experience these associations, even while resisting them. And at the same time that some of the followers of hitherto separate traditions find themselves in conflict with each other, other followers experience the associations. The conflict is often generated by the perception that the coming together is in fact underway, and is sustained on the one hand by the desire to avoid new associations and on the other by the desire to promote the new tradition[108]. However, the defeated tradition does not necessarily give up any of its elements, although, in order to survive, some of its elements are accentuated in order to distinguish and separate itself from the triumphant traditions[109].
Some particular elements of a certain tradition, present in a given area of life, can also be disseminated in another tradition from another area[110]. Religious traditions can be an example of this, often having their elements incorporated into profane traditions[111]. In any large society, there are traditions that coexist, sometimes in conflict, and which attract elements from each other[112].
Another possible alteration is the "disaggregation" of a tradition[113]. Through this process of alteration, particular elements of a given broader tradition can become detached from it, becoming a relatively independent tradition. New traditions resulting from "disaggregation" may nevertheless retain many elements present in the tradition that preceded it[114].
The very adoption of a new tradition, replacing an old tradition, is a change in tradition. The result of tradition replacement can be a fusion or "amalgamation"[115].
Changes to a tradition do not always come about through the acquisition of new characteristics or elements from other traditions, rational thinking or provoked adaptations. Traditions can be altered through faulty transmission of the tradition, or through the indifference of those who observe it. It can also be altered ('attenuated') through deliberate intent authority or through a lack of care to uphold it[116]. The weakening of a tradition ("attenuation") is the reduction of a belief, the loss of competence in the performance of activities, the diminution of the degree of precision and detail of knowledge of the relevant subject matter, and the diminution of interest in certain objects[117]. This form of attenuation can be a change in the substance of a tradition, in another aspect and a decrease in adherence to it[118].
In the migration of traditions from one society to another occurs the process of "rejection, acceptance, and amalgamation"[119].
Revival or re-emergence of traditions
Traditions can be recovered as long as there are living people who know the past of the tradition. They can also be recovered if there is an anthropological description, "as long as a sense of identity with this vague, largely forgotten past still exists"[120]. The revival of a tradition (of a practice or belief) can arise from a renewed desire for it without there being a continuity[121].
Despite this possibility, this is not what normally happens. The recoveries of traditions, is carried out by people who derive from those who followed the tradition in the past and who have received some of the elements of the tradition they seek to recover or just their memories[122].
There is sometimes an attempt to reconstruct native traditions, searching for the condition of the tradition prior to the appearance of new traditions that might influence it. The amalgamation of traditions is often rejected by those who argue that there was previously a purer form of a particular tradition[123].
For all these reasons, every attempt at a reappearance of a tradition implies a change in it[124].